6 ms·

Mozilla brings in almost $700 million per year, they have more than enough money to sponsor MZLA/Thunderbird development.

shakna 7mo ago
Mozilla tried to kill Thunderbird in 2020. They've been talking about not sponsoring it all since 2015. They might have the money, but they don't really seem to want anything to do with the project.
- OhioMan2943 7mo ago
  Mozilla doesn't have the willpower or vision to do anything with anything.
  - mb_thd 7mo ago
    Don't be so harsh on them. (\s) They show lots of willpower and some sort of vision when talking about AI in Firefox.
    - antisol 7mo ago
      Don't forget telemetry! The makers of the "privacy-focused browser" were super strong-willed about that, too.
      - hackingonempty 7mo ago
        It is important that they know exactly how many users are permanently switching to Chrome.
        antisol 7mo ago
        omg best thing I've read all day. Thanks for the good long out-loud laugh <3
  - Diti 7mo ago
    I like those two comments giving context on what has happened 10 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46118243 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46118243 (parent and child comment).
- antisol 7mo ago
  Good! I hope they do "kill it off" so that someone who isn't totally incompetent can fork it and take it over.
  - Vinnl 7mo ago
    That's basically how you could describe what happened. Those competent people are using Mozilla's infrastructure and trademarks, but otherwise running on donations.
    - antisol 7mo ago
      Then how come everything they've done in the last 10 years has been garbage?
      - bguebert 7mo ago
        calling it garbage seems kinda harsh, but I think they are moving more to using a javascript rendering method instead of xul. I remember reading about it a while back. I don't really like it either and one of the first updates from back then broke a lot of UI that had been working ok. I am not really sure what the problems are with working with xul though, but I think firefox moved off it a long time ago too. I feel like thunderbird's user base is more the type to want to use thunderbird because it runs like a local first desktop style app as an alternative to using a web interface to their email. At least that's what I like about it.
        antisol 7mo ago
        > they are moving more to using a javascript rendering method instead of xul Yeah, that's what I said: garbage. > I am not really sure what the problems are with working with xul though I'm sure they'll yell "for teh securitah!" in a bunch of vague fearmongering, just like they did with firefox. But the #1 and #2 problems are that it's not shiny and new and the CADT brigade[1] only knows javascript. > I think firefox moved off it a long time ago too I wouldn't call it "a long time ago", but I guess that depends on your perspective. And that's the moment when firefox became garbage - just another chrome-alike, except slower and more resource-hungry. It had been getting worse for a decade prior to that, but dropping xul and breaking a ton of my extensions and customisability was the (large) straw that broke the camel's back. Sound familiar yet? > I feel like thunderbird's user base is more the type to want to use thunderbird because it runs like a local first desktop style app as an alternative to using a web interface to their email. At least that's what I like about it. Exactly. Which is why moving their UI to a worse, javascript-powered, uncustomisable, web-alike trash UI is a bad thing. And a big part of why everything they've done in the last ~10 years has been garbage. And why I'll almost certainly be switching to something that isn't thunderbird next time I'm forced to upgrade it. (forgive my tone, nothing against you, I just get emotional when morons take an excellent piece of software I've been using for decades and turn it into broken, unusable trash) [1] https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html
reddalo 7mo ago
Mozilla is so sad. They have a lot of money and they could fund the development of both Firefox and Thunderbird. Yet, they decide to waste almost $7 million per year to pay a CEO and God knows what else.
- Skywalker13 7mo ago
  like all Big Tech
  - account42 7mo ago
    Except this "big tech" larper is supposedly fully owned by a nonprofit.
- glenstein 7mo ago
  Here we go again. I don't love the CEO pay but it's like 1% of their annual revenue and typical for positions like that, and Mozilla constantly suffers from these kinds of double sided, quantum accusations. Depending on which random HN thread you're in, the accusation is that (a) they're running out of money and urgently need to innovate to grow their revenue streams but also (b) they've got so much money and their spending of it is simply more evidence of how wasteful they are. Which is it this time? >and God knows what else. They publish their financial reports. It's mostly.... the browser. They actually spend more in total and in inflation adjusted terms directly on the browser than ever in their history as a company. Unless they're just faking all those reports? Need more than vibes here.
  - hackingonempty 7mo ago
    > urgently need to innovate to grow their revenue streams No, people are saying that Firefox needs to diversify their revenue streams because almost all of their revenue comes from their main competitor who (likely) only keeps Firefox alive to keep regulators from forcing them to divest their browser. The situation has gotten more dire since the regulators got fired last year.
    - 7mo ago
Fervicus 7mo ago
What do they do with all that money? According to wikipedia, they had about 750 employees. That's a lot of employees for the amount of useful products they have.
- smarnach 7mo ago
  How did you come to the conclusion that 750 people is a lot to build a web browser? The Chrome-adjacent teams at Google are about 4,000 people, and that doesn't even include all the people at Google providing infrastructure (e.g. servers, workplace, HR, legal etc.). Comparing Firefox to Chromium-based browsers doesn't make much sense since these browsers don't develop their own web engine.
  - criticalfault 7mo ago
    take the reference of ladybird. in a couple of years they built the engine from scratch. it's going to soon enter Alpha. how many people from ladybird built that engine? about 10? all while everyone has said that modern web makes this task impossible
    - squidbeak 7mo ago
      > it's going to soon enter Alpha Perhaps other browser makers want to move faster than Ladybird.
      - criticalfault 7mo ago
        that's fine. point is that Mozilla is wasting money and having 4000 people working on chrome may not be the correct benchmark.
        glenstein 7mo ago
        Wait why is that fine? The whole point was that ladybird is yet to enter alpha which is the very reason why it's not the correct benchmark. And you said the Chrome comparison isn't the correct one but... didn't follow it up with an actual reason.
ekianjo 7mo ago
They need a lot of money to pay their useless execs, so 700 million must be barely enough to keep things running
- glenstein 7mo ago
  They publish their 990s so you can look this stuff up if you're actually curious. It's mostly the browser.
markstos 7mo ago
That's apparently mostly from Google to be the default search engine in Firefox. Diversifying their income streams is a good move. The MZLA company that makes Thunderbird is also working on improving self-funding by launching a Thunderbird-branded webmail service.

shakna 7mo ago

Mozilla tried to kill Thunderbird in 2020. They've been talking about not sponsoring it all since 2015. They might have the money, but they don't really seem to want anything to do with the project.

OhioMan2943 7mo ago
Mozilla doesn't have the willpower or vision to do anything with anything.
- mb_thd 7mo ago
  Don't be so harsh on them. (\s) They show lots of willpower and some sort of vision when talking about AI in Firefox.
  - antisol 7mo ago
    Don't forget telemetry! The makers of the "privacy-focused browser" were super strong-willed about that, too.
    - hackingonempty 7mo ago
      It is important that they know exactly how many users are permanently switching to Chrome.
      - antisol 7mo ago
        omg best thing I've read all day. Thanks for the good long out-loud laugh <3
- Diti 7mo ago
  I like those two comments giving context on what has happened 10 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46118243 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46118243 (parent and child comment).
antisol 7mo ago
Good! I hope they do "kill it off" so that someone who isn't totally incompetent can fork it and take it over.
- Vinnl 7mo ago
  That's basically how you could describe what happened. Those competent people are using Mozilla's infrastructure and trademarks, but otherwise running on donations.
  - antisol 7mo ago
    Then how come everything they've done in the last 10 years has been garbage?
    - bguebert 7mo ago
      calling it garbage seems kinda harsh, but I think they are moving more to using a javascript rendering method instead of xul. I remember reading about it a while back. I don't really like it either and one of the first updates from back then broke a lot of UI that had been working ok. I am not really sure what the problems are with working with xul though, but I think firefox moved off it a long time ago too. I feel like thunderbird's user base is more the type to want to use thunderbird because it runs like a local first desktop style app as an alternative to using a web interface to their email. At least that's what I like about it.
      - antisol 7mo ago
        > they are moving more to using a javascript rendering method instead of xul Yeah, that's what I said: garbage. > I am not really sure what the problems are with working with xul though I'm sure they'll yell "for teh securitah!" in a bunch of vague fearmongering, just like they did with firefox. But the #1 and #2 problems are that it's not shiny and new and the CADT brigade[1] only knows javascript. > I think firefox moved off it a long time ago too I wouldn't call it "a long time ago", but I guess that depends on your perspective. And that's the moment when firefox became garbage - just another chrome-alike, except slower and more resource-hungry. It had been getting worse for a decade prior to that, but dropping xul and breaking a ton of my extensions and customisability was the (large) straw that broke the camel's back. Sound familiar yet? > I feel like thunderbird's user base is more the type to want to use thunderbird because it runs like a local first desktop style app as an alternative to using a web interface to their email. At least that's what I like about it. Exactly. Which is why moving their UI to a worse, javascript-powered, uncustomisable, web-alike trash UI is a bad thing. And a big part of why everything they've done in the last ~10 years has been garbage. And why I'll almost certainly be switching to something that isn't thunderbird next time I'm forced to upgrade it. (forgive my tone, nothing against you, I just get emotional when morons take an excellent piece of software I've been using for decades and turn it into broken, unusable trash) [1] https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html

reddalo 7mo ago

Mozilla is so sad. They have a lot of money and they could fund the development of both Firefox and Thunderbird. Yet, they decide to waste almost $7 million per year to pay a CEO and God knows what else.

Skywalker13 7mo ago
like all Big Tech
- account42 7mo ago
  Except this "big tech" larper is supposedly fully owned by a nonprofit.
glenstein 7mo ago
Here we go again. I don't love the CEO pay but it's like 1% of their annual revenue and typical for positions like that, and Mozilla constantly suffers from these kinds of double sided, quantum accusations. Depending on which random HN thread you're in, the accusation is that (a) they're running out of money and urgently need to innovate to grow their revenue streams but also (b) they've got so much money and their spending of it is simply more evidence of how wasteful they are. Which is it this time? >and God knows what else. They publish their financial reports. It's mostly.... the browser. They actually spend more in total and in inflation adjusted terms directly on the browser than ever in their history as a company. Unless they're just faking all those reports? Need more than vibes here.
- hackingonempty 7mo ago
  > urgently need to innovate to grow their revenue streams No, people are saying that Firefox needs to diversify their revenue streams because almost all of their revenue comes from their main competitor who (likely) only keeps Firefox alive to keep regulators from forcing them to divest their browser. The situation has gotten more dire since the regulators got fired last year.
  - 7mo ago

Fervicus 7mo ago

What do they do with all that money? According to wikipedia, they had about 750 employees. That's a lot of employees for the amount of useful products they have.

smarnach 7mo ago
How did you come to the conclusion that 750 people is a lot to build a web browser? The Chrome-adjacent teams at Google are about 4,000 people, and that doesn't even include all the people at Google providing infrastructure (e.g. servers, workplace, HR, legal etc.). Comparing Firefox to Chromium-based browsers doesn't make much sense since these browsers don't develop their own web engine.
- criticalfault 7mo ago
  take the reference of ladybird. in a couple of years they built the engine from scratch. it's going to soon enter Alpha. how many people from ladybird built that engine? about 10? all while everyone has said that modern web makes this task impossible
  - squidbeak 7mo ago
    > it's going to soon enter Alpha Perhaps other browser makers want to move faster than Ladybird.
    - criticalfault 7mo ago
      that's fine. point is that Mozilla is wasting money and having 4000 people working on chrome may not be the correct benchmark.
      - glenstein 7mo ago
        Wait why is that fine? The whole point was that ladybird is yet to enter alpha which is the very reason why it's not the correct benchmark. And you said the Chrome comparison isn't the correct one but... didn't follow it up with an actual reason.

ekianjo 7mo ago

They need a lot of money to pay their useless execs, so 700 million must be barely enough to keep things running

glenstein 7mo ago
They publish their 990s so you can look this stuff up if you're actually curious. It's mostly the browser.

markstos 7mo ago

That's apparently mostly from Google to be the default search engine in Firefox. Diversifying their income streams is a good move. The MZLA company that makes Thunderbird is also working on improving self-funding by launching a Thunderbird-branded webmail service.