3 ms·

> Only one is too large to be developed elsewhere. Do a company's products need to be only products that only they can produce? I mean, almost nothing fits thi

> Only one is too large to be developed elsewhere. Do a company's products need to be only products that only they can produce? I mean, almost nothing fits this bill, not even things like office suites. You're ruling out stuff like milk, glass, tires, text editors, etc. > Only one provides a meaningful challenge to the hegemony of webkit. Like, if your argument is that they have a super important product and should only focus on that, then OK. That's an interesting discussion that maybe I agree with (maybe not though). > The rest might as well be seen as make work programs for product managers. This is pretty dismissive, but also probably true for at least 30% of all tech products (which are also make work programs for software engineers, management, etc). I don't know why you're singling out Mozilla here, Google has a division of people making blimps so they don't go work for competitors.

aragilar 3y ago
Of those on the list, most are a wrapper around an existing service: * Mozilla Monitor: wrapper around https://haveibeenpwned.com/ https://haveibeenpwned.com/ * Mozilla VPN: wrapper around https://mullvad.net/ https://mullvad.net/ (and had security issues: https://www.techradar.com/news/security-audit-finds-major-issue-in-mozilla-vpn https://www.techradar.com/news/security-audit-finds-major-is...) * Mozilla Relay: "Partnership" with Twilio (I'm not able to get access to it, so not sure how much Mozilla adds here) and I thought Fastmail (could be wrong). * Pocket: controversial purchase (and still not open source as promised) * Firefox Focus: another browser (is it needed, or is it just a reskin?)
- camgunz 3y ago
  (You need blank lines between your list lines -- I wish this weren't true on HN but it is) I think there's value in Mozilla using its (admittedly dwindling) mindshare to push services that make browsing the web more private and more secure. Maybe you disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that they're products. And arguably, the "focus on Firefox" crowd should be pleased by this: it means Mozilla didn't "waste" resources on making their own VPN service, etc. N.B. Firefox Focus is an Android/iOS mobile app that wraps the browsers on those platforms and essentially just blocks trackers. There's some other stuff but that's the gist.
  - aragilar 3y ago
    Alternate idea: Mozilla (Org, not Corp, so avoids the issue of focus) certifies services as meeting some privacy and security criteria, and so can avoid the need to spend engineer/manager time wrapping existing services in their own branding (thinking of HIBP and Mullvad here), and also get a bit of free advertising (the "oh, privacy-focused services work in Firefox, what do services that don't do"). I'd argue if they split off Thunderbird (for which there is no good alternative) because of focus issues, they should not wrap projects that others maintain. P.S. thanks for the formatting advice
    - camgunz 3y ago
      Yeah I wonder if there could be like an endorsement type thing. Mozilla certifies a product or service and promotes it, the owners of that product/service give them money, etc. They'd have to walk a careful line though: people hate any kind of advertising in Firefox (Mozilla VPN had a big ad that everyone hated and got pulled; the Mr Robot debacle). That kind of limits your options. Fair point about Thunderbird haha; I'm so annoyed that they did that.

aragilar 3y ago

Of those on the list, most are a wrapper around an existing service: * Mozilla Monitor: wrapper around https://haveibeenpwned.com/ https://haveibeenpwned.com/ * Mozilla VPN: wrapper around https://mullvad.net/ https://mullvad.net/ (and had security issues: https://www.techradar.com/news/security-audit-finds-major-issue-in-mozilla-vpn https://www.techradar.com/news/security-audit-finds-major-is...) * Mozilla Relay: "Partnership" with Twilio (I'm not able to get access to it, so not sure how much Mozilla adds here) and I thought Fastmail (could be wrong). * Pocket: controversial purchase (and still not open source as promised) * Firefox Focus: another browser (is it needed, or is it just a reskin?)

camgunz 3y ago
(You need blank lines between your list lines -- I wish this weren't true on HN but it is) I think there's value in Mozilla using its (admittedly dwindling) mindshare to push services that make browsing the web more private and more secure. Maybe you disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that they're products. And arguably, the "focus on Firefox" crowd should be pleased by this: it means Mozilla didn't "waste" resources on making their own VPN service, etc. N.B. Firefox Focus is an Android/iOS mobile app that wraps the browsers on those platforms and essentially just blocks trackers. There's some other stuff but that's the gist.
- aragilar 3y ago
  Alternate idea: Mozilla (Org, not Corp, so avoids the issue of focus) certifies services as meeting some privacy and security criteria, and so can avoid the need to spend engineer/manager time wrapping existing services in their own branding (thinking of HIBP and Mullvad here), and also get a bit of free advertising (the "oh, privacy-focused services work in Firefox, what do services that don't do"). I'd argue if they split off Thunderbird (for which there is no good alternative) because of focus issues, they should not wrap projects that others maintain. P.S. thanks for the formatting advice
  - camgunz 3y ago
    Yeah I wonder if there could be like an endorsement type thing. Mozilla certifies a product or service and promotes it, the owners of that product/service give them money, etc. They'd have to walk a careful line though: people hate any kind of advertising in Firefox (Mozilla VPN had a big ad that everyone hated and got pulled; the Mr Robot debacle). That kind of limits your options. Fair point about Thunderbird haha; I'm so annoyed that they did that.