top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 271 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Mozilla chose to waste most of it.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 206 points 2 years ago (21 children)

    Right? I don't need AI BS. I just want a solid browser.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I kinda get why they (and other companies) have to try AI at the moment though.

    It’s not what people claim it is, but it could end up being an essential tool for the modern world, and if they don’t invest in it early their business might end up getting left behind.

    We’ve certainly seen companies fall because they’ve not tried to stay on the cutting edge before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    We’ve certainly seen companies fall because they’ve not tried to stay on the cutting edge before

    Best example I can think of is Kodak and digital cameras. They invented it then sat on it until it was too late because they didn't want to cut into their film scam.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Sears. They got wrecked by the internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Sears had a massive mail order catalog. Easy to switch that to Internet, right? But they decided to focus on stores.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    It’s quite unbelievable that it was literally right there. The logistics were like 60% solved for them already, the remaining 40% was just making sure the online content remained linked with inventory and fulfillment, and expanding that capacity.

    “We think online shopping will be just a fad” - the unimaginable hubris…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (19 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 245 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    Maybe that's not bad for firefox.

    Maybe less money means less ridiculous side projects and just focus on delivering a good browser.

    Algo the lack of google as financial support means they'll rely more on donations, which would mean that they really need to focus on offering a good browser.

    I'll gladly donate to firefox if I would see they are really focusing on it.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 170 points 2 years ago (8 children)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 80 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (8 children)

    Mozilla (not Google) got rid of the side projects, increased the CEO's salary, and laid off a bunch of employees during the pandemic. It basically got rid of the innovation that could have made Firefox a faster, more secure, and pleasant experience. Rust and Rust-based Servo, as a replacement for Gecko, were two of those side projects. These are the things Mozilla needs to invest in.

    Also, I think Mozilla needs to ask the user upon install what the default search engine should be from a list of search engines including Google, Duck Duck Go, Bing, and Yahoo. Maybe the order of those could be arranged based on how much they're able to finagle from the search engines.

    The real monopoly is their control over Chrome. That's what they should be forced to split from the company that owns the search engine. Development and design of Chrome should not and cannot be done by the company that runs the search engine and gets its revenue from ads.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (12 replies)
    [–] 158 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Maybe they can stop paying their CEO 7 million per year

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 138 points 2 years ago (7 children)
    • Mozilla will take money from Microsoft
    • Firefox gets Office 365, Exchange, and Azure AD integration
    • Netflix partners with Microsoft for advanced HD and DRM
    • Microsoft and Mozilla partner to deliver Microsoft-enhanced Firefox for Windows
    • ActiveX 2.0
  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 97 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Mozilla chose a stupid business model. 🤷

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 138 points 2 years ago* (10 children)

    They’ve undoubtedly been preparing for this day in some capacity. If they didn’t and collapse then yes they chose a stupid business model. But until that happens I think this is a premature statement.

    It is shocking to me how many people on Lemmy hate Firefox, which is basically the only real non-chromium alternative that most people can use with minimal compromises. So many people hate Google here yet y’all seem to hate the only viable competitor even more. It’s bizarre to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 108 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    It is shocking to me how many people on Lemmy hate Firefox

    Although some people are Google fanbois or reactionary dumbasses, I think most of what you're misinterpreting as "Firefox hate" is actually love for Firefox and hate for what Mozilla has done to it.

    Most Firefox-critics' feelings towards it are more like this:

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Consider that many of the same people think of Arch as a viable daily driver distro for the everyman. Some folks are more accepting of jank than others.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 72 points 2 years ago

    Meh. It's just Monopoly money /j

  • source
  • [–] 48 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I hope Mozilla put most of that Google money into index funds or something. At least it didn't go into paying the developers.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 35 points 2 years ago (23 children)

    Oh for fun! I don't want Mozilla to go down, Firefox is one of the few non-Chromium web browsers; I'm glad that Google is pronounced as a monopoly, as it is true. However, for every good thing, there is a terrible curse that shows how much our system needs to be changed. It will be so heartening to not have Apple using Google Search by default, as the results are fucking shit. They could survive the lack of Investor Daddy's cash.

  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • load more comments (23 replies)
    [–] 31 points 2 years ago

    If tech giants such as Google cannot be broken up, then their services should be required to be compatible and all data exportable to competitors. See the EFFʼs “Competitive Compatibility” concept. Buy a movie off Google's YouTube but Google misbehaves? It must be exportable to a market competitor that you do support. Don't like how Google handles your email? You should be able to switch your email address to a competitor just like you can change phone companies without losing your phone number.

    Basically, if the US Federal government cannot discipline monopolies by breaking them up directly, they should break up the moats and walled gardens the monopolies built to keep customers locked in to maintain their monopolies. See Chokepoint Capitalism by Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow.

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    In my utopia, Google would be forced to continue to pay out the current annual contract sum, at a decreasing percentage every year, for some number of years, to all affected companies, giving them the opportunity to divest and pivot.

    The root problem doesn't get fixed if the company with enough money to be a monopolist still has the money when this is "resolved."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 23 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Firefox; being open source as it is; is not in danger.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›