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

Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

lunduke.locals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 349 posts

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#231

Post by VancouverMan »

macspoofing wrote: post #47
phpisthebest wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No absolutely not... That would be the worst thing for the web. Blink is objectively bad in the first place, and we need more than just chromiumum skins in the market. I wish they would finish and move to Servo. I wish Brave or some of the other Chromium Skins would become Firefox based. Everyone consolidating down to Blink and Chromium is about the worst thing that could happen to anyone that desires an open Web

>I wish Brave or some of the other Chromium Skins would become Firefox based. This hurts because Firefox should have been that embedded framework powering browsers like Brave and electron apps. But that would have required them to invest in R&D to match performance but also to make their rendering engine easily embeddable (with a corresponding investment in documentation and outreach).

> This hurts because Firefox should have been that embedded framework powering browsers like Brave and electron apps.

Years ago, Gecko had at least some support for being embedded within native applications.

This was apparently discontinued around 2011, though:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110403052816/http://www.h-onli...

https://web.archive.org/web/20210723183100/https://groups.go...

At that time, there were a number of browsers with native UIs that used Gecko, and software to help embed Gecko in other apps, such as:

Camino: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camino_(web_browser)

K-Meleon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-Meleon

Galeon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galeon

gtkmozembed: https://web.archive.org/web/20110505053545/http://www.mozill...

JavaXPCOM: https://web.archive.org/web/20100626110814/https://developer...

There was also XULRunner, too:

https://web.archive.org/web/20161201115812/https://developer...

Mozilla and Gecko had a staggering amount of potential back then, but it was squandered away, unfortunately.

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#232

Post by HackerThemAll »

Barrin92 wrote: post #158

I think the narrative provided in the article is actually reasonable. Firefox is practically dead, but even worse with Firefox almost all of Mozilla's income stream is literally just a Google handout . The article states that revenue from services is up from 50 to 70 million. Still only about 10% of what they make from Firefox, but at least that's independent revenue, going up , directly from consumers. Can someone p…

If Firefox is dead then we're left with only two options: Google browser or Apple browser. I'm comfortable with none of them. Google has become a de facto monopoly with Microsoft Edge, Opera, Brave, Vivaldi, Chromium et al pretending it hasn't, and the rest of the market is Apple browser, and I'm not an Apple user and never will be. We should keep Firefox at all costs as a true alternative respecting user choices, such as not mandating manifest v3 and allowing users to control web browsing entirely.

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#234

Post by surajrmal »

ykonstant wrote: post #17

(×_×) We need a modular, open source browser engine desperately; one not beholden to Google or any other for profit entity. The Servo people are trying, but the task is enormous. I don't know what can be done (｡•́︿•̀｡)

The open source solution to Windows is not a os that runs windows applications. It's an OS which has it's own user space and application ecosystem. Sometimes I wonder why folks don't take the same tact with other platforms like the web. Alternatively, if you look at mobile, no one is seriously pursuing alternatives to Android. They just make Android based distros and no one seems to complain. What makes the web different?

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#235

Post by 1attice »

This just saying, "Bob's rent skyrockets, while his grocery purchasing plummets." No sht Bob is having a hard time buying groceries.

CEOs are important -- not intrinsically, but to survival. Their actions are important. Their decisions are important. Their attention is important. And there's a lot of competition for good ones. If you get a bad one, it's an existential crisis, and the good ones can always go elsewhere for more money.

Want to help nonprofits and small corps? Support the passage of laws limiting CEO pay.

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#236

Post by fabrice_d »

nine_k wrote: post #215
fabrice_d wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a Baker fan at all, but no such initiative was cut under her leadership, because none existed. Electron won not because chromium was more embeddable, it won because it made it easy to pull hundred of MB of nodejs dependencies. Everything else you could do already before with XulRunner...

> it made it easy to pull hundred of MB of nodejs dependencies That's exactly what "more embeddable" is. It made itself easier to turn into Node.js, Electron, etc. I don't think it was a pure coincidence.

XulRunner existed before Electron. Node.js used v8, but could have use SpiderMonkey instead (this is what Gnome did). These were choices, not situations where using Mozilla tech was impossible. In the end that cemented Google stronghold on the web.

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#237

Post by lupusreal »

janice1999 wrote: post #146
agilob wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year it was IoT

Before that it was a mobile OS that failed to gain traction.

At least that was plausibly related to browser development, vis-à-vis ChromeOS. With "AI services" they're totally dropping the pretext of caring about Firefox.

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#239

Post by lern_too_spel »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #98
chrisco255 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brendan's personal political donations were his own business unless he made it some organizational goal or priority for Mozilla, which he never did.

> Brendan's personal political donations were his own business Eh, a CEO is a quasi-public figure. Those weren't his personal business entirely. (Consider a gay employee at Mozilla or partner.) That said, the solution was chastisement and a public apology. Not termination.

Brendan refused to apologize for the donation or even to acknowledge that it was wrong. Instead, he doubled down on it, saying in comments posted to this very forum that the gays kept asking for more and more rights, and he wasn't OK with that. It wasn't part of the previous bargain. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15966490

Given that he refused to apologize, and that the pesky freedom of association exists, which can lead to problems for Mozilla like the Montgomery Bus Boycott did for the public transit system in Montgomery, it was overall positive for Mozilla that Eich resigned. That doesn't mean that Mitchell is a good CEO. It just means that things would have been worse.

Re: Mozilla 2023 annual report: CEO pay skyrockets, Firefox market share nosedives

#240

Post by lupusreal »

ksjskskskkk wrote: post #230
fabrice_d wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In concrete terms, what would this fork change compared to current Firefox? Just shouting "privacy-first alternative" is pretty vague. Also, good luck getting enough sustainable funding for that kind of project from the EU. Most of EU funding for OSS project is spread out to lots of projects, with relatively small amounts - Gnome got $1M recently and celebrated as a "big" milestone. I'm not saying that this is bad, b…

for one: not giving in to every google whim. recent examples: address bar becomes search bar. referrer header always sent cross domain with full url. webextensions3. hundreds of apis that only benefit ad "viewability" detectors. removal of websocket permission (like you have for notification etc). etc soon: adding Floc

> for one: not giving in to every google whim.

Yes, particularly they could enable an adblocker by default. Defaults matter and telling people that simply switching to [forked] Firefox to avoid ads would make for a compelling reason for normies to switch. And maybe they'd even stop hemorrhaging users to Brave, which already has this.

Post reply on HN