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

Post by Riverheart » Thu, Dec 28, 2023, 6:38 PM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #79

Riverheart wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly these kinds of posts are tiresome and unhelpful. Yes, Mozilla is different now, yes the CEO makes too much money but if more people used their browser more they might invest more in it in instead of seeing it as a money sink to satisfy people who can’t be satisfied. Seriously, Mozilla cant win. A large voice of people constantly scold Mozilla for anything it does. We’ve heard from Firefox devs on how this ba…

Two things can be true at once: Firefox is a great browser that needs greater market share, and the CEO pay is out-of-whack. The solution is to use the browser but a) not give money to the foundation, and b) complain and expect change.

Post by runjake » Thu, Dec 28, 2023, 6:39 PM UTC

PedroBatista wrote: post #14

This Mozilla "situation" comes up here from time to time, unfortunately as a long time Firefox user all I have to say is: Mitchell Baker and their clique will only leave when Mozilla is completely dead and even by that time she'll retire and will make a wonderful post about her "legacy" in opensource and the Web. I will not go further because it will turn into an all-bashing post, but Mozilla ( as you like to think o…

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Dec 28, 2023, 6:39 PM UTC

chiefalchemist wrote: post #59

anonymousab wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They likely view the idea off competing with Chrome - a key chess piece of the company keeping Mozilla around merely as a pet to ward of regulators - as impossible if not counterproductive to their mid-term survival at this point. Which is to say, at some point they might become annoying enough for Google to not want to pay them anymore, and then Mozilla would cease to exist shortly thereafter. So with that in mind,…

Right. What would be lost if they used Chromium as well? Sure, there would be a lack of competition but at this point the browser is the fuel of the internet. We don't have multiple different type of gasoline, or home heating oil. The browser - sans Google Chrome's "spyware" - is a commodity. I'd rather see Mozilla focus on privacy, etc. My dream is for them to add a privacy-centric email product, a robust enough off…

Post by evasb » Thu, Dec 28, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #55

nine_k wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the situation is simple. They are rendering one service that their users value, and it is making Firefox. They should ask (not require) payment for that service. Yes, what they should do is basically to run a Patreon subscription, clearly marked "For the continued development of Firefox". At a very accessible level of $3 / mo on average , and merely 5M subscribers over the world, they'd have $15M monthly, or…

>They should ask (not require) payment for that service. Sure - let them squeeze out the last drop of their one and only cash cow before it becomes utterly irrelevant - instead of investing in it and making it a core pillar of their strategy. >See how Wikimedia Foundation is basically flush with cash, Mozilla was (is?) flush with cash. Browser market share and corresponding user eyeballs are immensely valuable. That…

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Dec 28, 2023, 6:42 PM UTC

duped wrote: post #8

j16sdiz wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the article,"Transitioning Mozilla away from Firefox." is the current organisation goal. She have done her job great. why was it a goal, I have bo idea

Not affiliated with Mozilla in any way, but their mission isn't to create a browser. It's to "ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all." (1) Given that Firefox has kinda lost the browser war it seems obvious that they should be focusing efforts on other things that further that mission besides dumping money into a browser a tiny slice of people want to use. (1) https://www.mozilla.o…