Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thank you, Chris

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 229 posts

Re: Thank you, Chris

#31

Post by glhaynes »

huhtenberg wrote: post #15
spiderfarmer wrote: post #4

Chris was great from what I have seen, but I think Mozilla needs a CEO that knows how to increase market share.

Mozilla is now openly peeing in Google's punch all the while being dependent on piles of money they take from it. At some point Google will get tired of this and will withdraw from the agreement. They won't be the default search provider, but that will play to their advantage - Firefox out-of-the-box user experience will take a sharp nose dive. Say all you want about DDG and alternatives, but they still can't hold a…

I'd guess the intersection of people who will even consider using Firefox, have search engine needs that won't be satisfied by DuckDuckGo, and won't be able to change their search engine is vanishingly small, so I'm not that concerned about the user experience hit. But, yeah, the dip in funding would be brutal in that scenario.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#32

Post by giancarlostoro »

RandomBacon wrote: post #18
fooqux wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hard part will be doing it while not running afoul of the ethical standard that they have set for themselves, and so many of us hold them to. It's easy to increase market share if you're willing to play dirty and have lots of money to throw around. When you have neither... well, I'd hate to be the new CEO.

They need a killer feature. Firefox used to be the only better alternative to IE. Then Chrome came along and it used to be the best at tabs and resources. Then Brave came along with automatic ad-blocking. Firefox needs to match the competition and surpass it. What would the next killer feature be?

> Then Brave came along with automatic ad-blocking.

I don't think I will ever use Brave due to how it "blocks ads" I think the industry should be doing the job of Brave which is to ensure ads aren't infested with bad code. No ad server should serve arbitrary JS that hasn't been tested and secured. If it costs money to ensure this then they should charge more for ads. If an ad infests machines, the ad company should be liable, and they should really go after the person who paid for the ad too.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#33

Post by The_rationalist »

jcranmer wrote: post #25
The_rationalist wrote: post #23

I made a proposal for making mozilla sustainable: https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/24026 I would like to hear feedback.

How about not duplicating your post simply because the first one got downvoted?

Well to my defense, people seemed trigerred by my first sentence and then overlooked the proposal, that was my understanding. Thus I reposted without the sentence to gather a more useful feedback than dislikes.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#34

Post by hutzlibu »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #4

Chris was great from what I have seen, but I think Mozilla needs a CEO that knows how to increase market share.

Well, how to increase market share for a browser?

Simple, offer a better browser.

Now the technical core of firefox seems now very solid(if they keep the extensions api stable), with long term decisions like rust and quantum paying off.. But the problem seems to be, that many websites are developed and tested in chrome only, sometimes with chrome-only features.. so it does not help only implementing nonstandard feature after nonstandard feature. They need to get the developers back and that can only work with a massive investment in the firefox dev tools as they are far, far behind chrome devtools. I sympathise with firefox and mozilla a lot, but even for me, it would require a huge improvement to even consider changing back. I am annoyed enough from the occasional firefox debugging. No wonder more and more developers simply skip firefox due to low marketshare and save the effort.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#35

Post by coldpie »

huhtenberg wrote: post #15
spiderfarmer wrote: post #4

Chris was great from what I have seen, but I think Mozilla needs a CEO that knows how to increase market share.

Mozilla is now openly peeing in Google's punch all the while being dependent on piles of money they take from it. At some point Google will get tired of this and will withdraw from the agreement. They won't be the default search provider, but that will play to their advantage - Firefox out-of-the-box user experience will take a sharp nose dive. Say all you want about DDG and alternatives, but they still can't hold a…

I'd be happy to support Mozilla financially, but I'm too lazy to go figure out how to do it. Link me to a Patreon, or shove some subscription model more prominently in my face, Mozilla.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#36

Post by The_rationalist »

The_rationalist wrote: post #17
The_rationalist wrote: post #9

Is he jumping out of the ship before it sinks? I made a proposal for making mozilla sustainable: https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/24026 BTW does anyone know why 2018 is the first year from Mozilla where finance results were not published? Is there anyway to know how much less money they make than in 2017 (500 millions$)

Downvoting is nice, explaining why is better. I guess you have made more effort than me and thus have better proposals for making mozilla sustainable? Where can I read them? Oh or you actually downvoted only because of the first sentence Is he jumping out of the ship before it sinks? Because it made you feel bad despite being statistically factual and not an opinion?

Again no explanation, this is childish.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#37

Post by The_rationalist »

bzbarsky wrote: post #24
The_rationalist wrote: post #9

Is he jumping out of the ship before it sinks? I made a proposal for making mozilla sustainable: https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/24026 BTW does anyone know why 2018 is the first year from Mozilla where finance results were not published? Is there anyway to know how much less money they make than in 2017 (500 millions$)

Audited financials for year X are typically published sometime late in year X+1. You can't start the process until year X ends (or more likely until after the relevant tax filing deadlines in all the countries involved have passed, so certainly not until mid-April and possibly later), and it typically takes months to do the audit. So for example, if you look at https://assets.mozilla.net/annualreport/2017/mozilla-fdn…

Thank you for this useful clarification!

Re: Thank you, Chris

#38

Post by lostmsu »

modzu wrote: post #20
tapoxi wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but feel that a lot of Brave's userbase are pushing it because they have a financial investment in BAT from the ICO. Brave certainly doesn't help with the monoculture threat either, its just Chrome.

i duno. the other day i used a friend's computer without an adblocker and searched google for "AWS". i could not see a link to amazon AWS on the results page. it was under 5 ads for azure, gcp, and some other crap. i mean, i use an adblocker on my own devices and had no idea it had gotten that crazy. it was horrifying. the non tech-savvy people are clicking god knows what and fueling a massive industry of identity th…

But that adblocking there is not uBlock is it? It is not controllable by me and can be turned to "acceptable ads" any day. If it only let mobile to use extensions like FF does.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#39

Post by RandomBacon »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #32
RandomBacon wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They need a killer feature. Firefox used to be the only better alternative to IE. Then Chrome came along and it used to be the best at tabs and resources. Then Brave came along with automatic ad-blocking. Firefox needs to match the competition and surpass it. What would the next killer feature be?

> Then Brave came along with automatic ad-blocking. I don't think I will ever use Brave due to how it "blocks ads" I think the industry should be doing the job of Brave which is to ensure ads aren't infested with bad code. No ad server should serve arbitrary JS that hasn't been tested and secured. If it costs money to ensure this then they should charge more for ads. If an ad infests machines, the ad company should b…

I will never use Brave because they're replacing ads with their own and making money doing it. uBlock Origin on FF is better and not scummy like Brave.

People shouldn't break the law, but until that never happens, I will do what I can to protect myself.

Re: Thank you, Chris

#40

Post by tomhoward »

The_rationalist wrote: post #36
The_rationalist wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvoting is nice, explaining why is better. I guess you have made more effort than me and thus have better proposals for making mozilla sustainable? Where can I read them? Oh or you actually downvoted only because of the first sentence Is he jumping out of the ship before it sinks? Because it made you feel bad despite being statistically factual and not an opinion?

Again no explanation, this is childish.

HN's guidelines have been developed over 10+ years and give good guidance as to what kinds of comments are well-received here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN