You mean like how iOS was reliant on google for its default search?
seems like iOs is using Bing now.
Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
61–70 of 100 posts
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google isn't backing them with $300M/year because Mozilla is pumping out good open source software. They are doing it to maintain their dominance in search and keep Bing, DDG, Blekko at bay. For example, they have a similar deal with the closed source(till recently) Opera browser. I wish Mozilla would stick to its principles and switch the default to a privacy conscious search engine like DuckDuckGo and give it a muc…
> I wish Mozilla would stick to its principles and switch the default to a privacy conscious search engine like DuckDuckGo Which of Mozilla's principles (rather than yours ) would this be "sticking with"?
privacy? isnt the point of persona?
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does the percent of income matter? Whether its 1% or 100% Microsoft had zero problem paying to take Google's place as the default search.
The contrast between Mozilla and Apple is that one needs the money and the other one doesn't, and that makes all the difference. Apple can pick and choose their deals. If Apple decided to give Microsoft the search box for free to spite Google they could do it in a second. Mozilla is completely dependent on monetizing the search box. I think at $100 million per year, Microsoft was interested in bidding for Mozilla's s…
Mozilla being reliant on the search box and being reliant on Google are two different conversations.
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#64I'm so sick of this argument about Mozilla. It is like saying a Principal Engineer at Microsoft relies on Microsof because it provides 90% of his income. Last time Mozilla's contract was up for negotiation, they caused bidding war that increased their value over the previous contract...it wasn't Google's generosity. You are a fool if you think Mozilla is beholden to Google.
What if 90% of a politician's campaign funds came from one source?
It doesn't have to be overt, I doubt Mozilla makes many decisions by asking themselves, "will this make Google happy or unhappy?"
But consider that Mozilla knows what Microsoft and Yahoo's top bids were. Their ability to switch from one funder to another is dependent on how high those bids were.
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#65I'm so sick of this argument about Mozilla. It is like saying a Principal Engineer at Microsoft relies on Microsof because it provides 90% of his income. Last time Mozilla's contract was up for negotiation, they caused bidding war that increased their value over the previous contract...it wasn't Google's generosity. You are a fool if you think Mozilla is beholden to Google.
I think a better argument is that Mozilla needs to diversify its revenue sources. Chrome is taking away marketshare from Firefox thanks to advertising and paying a lot to be bundled with Java, Flash, Acrobat etc. updates or just being shipped as default by the PC OEMs. It makes sense for Google because then they needn't pay out so much to Mozilla. For many non tech folks where I had replaced IE with Firefox, I now se…
When I installed Flash Player on a Windows laptop recently, I was surprised to see a download bundle featuring Chrome. I thought it was the other way around: install Chrome and you get Flash whether you want it or not.
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#66I'm so sick of this argument about Mozilla. It is like saying a Principal Engineer at Microsoft relies on Microsof because it provides 90% of his income. Last time Mozilla's contract was up for negotiation, they caused bidding war that increased their value over the previous contract...it wasn't Google's generosity. You are a fool if you think Mozilla is beholden to Google.
What if 90% of a politician's campaign funds came from one source? It doesn't have to be overt, I doubt Mozilla makes many decisions by asking themselves, "will this make Google happy or unhappy?" But consider that Mozilla knows what Microsoft and Yahoo's top bids were. Their ability to switch from one funder to another is dependent on how high those bids were.
That is not the same situation. With a politician, one source can contribute X, and another source can contribute Y, and both of their contributions influence the politician. In other words, if the politician loses a source of donations equal to 90% of his or her donations, there is probably nothing that would replace that donation. The only supply is percentage of the politician's time so to speak, which might effect how much someone is willing to donate in the absence of another donation, but probably not in the way the politician would like.
With Mozilla, the supply is one item, the default search engine for the search bar, something which has high demand. That means if Google were to become less interested in paying for the search bar, Bing would be waiting at the gates to do so. They could lose money if that were to happen, given that Google was the highest bidder, but that in no way makes them beholden to Google.
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a better argument is that Mozilla needs to diversify its revenue sources. Chrome is taking away marketshare from Firefox thanks to advertising and paying a lot to be bundled with Java, Flash, Acrobat etc. updates or just being shipped as default by the PC OEMs. It makes sense for Google because then they needn't pay out so much to Mozilla. For many non tech folks where I had replaced IE with Firefox, I now se…
On a purely market basis, 400k buys talent comparable to a senior manager / director of the Chrome or Safari team of ~100 people, not a VP or CEO of a company with $100m annual revenue. $400k is what one-trick ponies like doctors and lawyers and traditional industry local small business owners earn.
Bwahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!! Perhaps you are accurate with the first half of the first sentence, but unless your definition of VP doesn't match what medium/large corporations actually consider to be VPs (in technical areas), you are completely wrong.
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two points: Mozilla is pumping out mostly user facing open source software, which will probably attract less money than, say, Red Hat. Also, it's not that no company except Google is backing them. It's that they get a huge amount of money from their search box - currently paid by Google. Microsoft might well be happy to become the default and pay just as much.
Microsoft wasn't interested in paying anything near that much, nor was Yahoo, that's why talks collapsed during the negotiations. Google does consider the search engine placement valuable but it is probably also funding Mozilla as a hedge against anti-trust lawsuits.
Also, with Yahoo's search results now coming from Bing, this does mean that the biggest potential sources of funding are all linked to companies who compete directly with Mozilla's biggest product - Google and Microsoft have their own browsers. It's certainly not an ideal position for Mozilla.
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a better argument is that Mozilla needs to diversify its revenue sources. Chrome is taking away marketshare from Firefox thanks to advertising and paying a lot to be bundled with Java, Flash, Acrobat etc. updates or just being shipped as default by the PC OEMs. It makes sense for Google because then they needn't pay out so much to Mozilla. For many non tech folks where I had replaced IE with Firefox, I now se…
On a purely market basis, 400k buys talent comparable to a senior manager / director of the Chrome or Safari team of ~100 people, not a VP or CEO of a company with $100m annual revenue. $400k is what one-trick ponies like doctors and lawyers and traditional industry local small business owners earn.
> $400k is what one-trick ponies like doctors and lawyers and traditional industry local small business owners earn.
Or a little under twice that of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom ( pop. 60 million ), when summing his MP and Government jobs.
The combined ministerial and parliamentary salary of the Prime Minister is £142,500 at April 2013
I'm fairly confident in saying that David Cameron puts in considerably more effort than the CEO of Mozilla. I really don't see how anyone can justify $400k for such a job.
Re: Mozilla’s reliance on Google is increasing: 90% of 2012 revenue
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think a better argument is that Mozilla needs to diversify its revenue sources. Chrome is taking away marketshare from Firefox thanks to advertising and paying a lot to be bundled with Java, Flash, Acrobat etc. updates or just being shipped as default by the PC OEMs. It makes sense for Google because then they needn't pay out so much to Mozilla. For many non tech folks where I had replaced IE with Firefox, I now se…
> For many non tech folks where I had replaced IE with Firefox, I now see them using Chrome, and when I asked if they installed it, they usually have no idea how it got on their computer. Chrome probably got there the same way Firefox got there - a well meaning individual (you, in the case of Firefox) installed it and told them to use it because it is "better".
[deleted]