Baker’s testimony shows that Mozilla depends so much on its deal with Google for revenue that “the biggest loser of a DOJ win in the Google case would be Mozilla.”
Is this the same CEO who fired the entire documentation team and then gave herself a raise?
The CEO short-term logic makes sense: Yahoo search = Lower cost = Higher profit margin = Happy shareholders = Happy CEO
But she forgot that: Yahoo search = Shit
And then it happened
Google is starting to yahoo itself. The search is optimized to drive purchases and not actually finding what you want. That and delisting of some sites in the search results. Try finding a direct link to Trump’s social media in a private window on Google vs on duckduckgo. Did he just break that gag order? Google doesn’t want you to know!
As a FF user: Mozilla has such a small market share now, they should experiment with search. Maybe don’t make another “deal” with another ad based search engine, but invent your own decentralized search or mozilla search or whatever.
While I’d prefer the do that also, I think the issue is that Google pays them so much, they couldn’t afford to exist without it.
It’s pretty much their only revenue stream, considering they give all the software away and don’t have ads in the browser.
I mean, they could. They have been cutting costs in the wrong areas, though - those harder to replace if exgoogled. There’s plenty of unnecessary fat in Mozilla as an organization. They have been doing lots of expensive (in terms of developer and testing resources) unneeded crap (apparently to support the appearance of relevancy, which is different from relevancy itself), they also don’t need that many management people.
Let’s please remember how Mozilla started. Yes, a browser back then and a browser now are two completely different things, but the imbalance in resources has always been there. It’s just that now they are spreading resources where they shouldn’t, to imitate Chrome in things secondary to a browser itself. They don’t have the resources for that even with Google, and of course they won’t otherwise.
Also supporting something like XULRunner or in general olden times Gecko would help, so that people could use FF’s engine like they still do with Chromium and Webkit. That would increase the amount of people contributing in various ways.
That’s how I see it, my humble opinion and all that.
You’re absolutely right. I agree with everything you said. The whole situation is really frustrating as users.
The only reason that would work is if they used user search data to sell to advertisers or show ads themselves. That’s how Google search makes money, but it’s antithetical to everything Mozilla is trying to market themselves as: a privacy oriented browser.
I’d pay for a yearly subscription to a privacy focused search by Mozilla.
Most people wouldn’t, which is the issue.
No you won’t. I mean maybe you, personally, will, but the majority of people won’t. People don’t want to pay for YouTube without ads, for fox sake.
Mozilla needs sticky viable income streams. Privacy focused search might be something they can sell to other businesses as a service. I would much rather see Mozilla become the next Red Hat than fade away forever.
The problem is that no one wants to pay money and no one cares about privacy. Privacy in general is a brand new concept which only started its existence about two centuries ago in Catholic countries and still doesn’t exist in many parts of the world. Privacy is a foreign concept for humans and paying for it is just silly.
That’s the core of the trial though, right? That through these deals and other things Google does to stay dominant, they stifle the market for competition. Ie Edge, Chrome, and every other Chromium-based browser pushes Google to the end users and FF pushes some unfamiliar search platform, then there’s an uphill, arguably unfair, battle for it to gain enough market share to be sustainable.
Another interesting comment Mozilla’s takeaway from the experiment was that Firefox "users made it clear that they look for and want and expect Google.”
Most internet users:
Most people tbf
Thanks for reminding me about Kagi 😁
Yea nobodys going to buy it. Stop shilling
Yahoo was a massive failed effort, but it hardly even compares to that haircut.
Google is def an L.
Yahoo a bigger L for sure.
But the biggest L is making fun of other peoples appearances.Why don’t you post a picture of yourself so we can make shitty comments about you?
The haircut literally looks like an L
I get where you’re coming from, but an intentional, statement haircut that you could easily change feels like it’s ok to make a statement about, while I never would about someone’s weight, height, etc.
If I posted a picture of myself and the hair was what people roasted me for, I’d be happy lol.
-
You’re wrong.
-
Still waiting for that picture. I’m making a list of horrible things to say that will stick with you and drive your insecurities for the rest of your life.
What an absolute cringe take. Thank you valiant knight for defending that nice lady’s hair. God speed.
Please quote back to me where I defended anyone’s hair.
Lol alright. Gimme your worst.
Are you actually so dumb?
Let me repeat myself: don’t make fun of how people look
0K
-
Dude, blame your barber/stylist, grow it out, and get over it.
I don’t know who the fuck you’re talking to. I shave my head.
And seem to be real sensitive about it.
Yeah I think talking shit about how people look is not cool. Crucify me.
Happily
Nah just gonna laugh at this specific reaction a little bit.
I’m 99.99% with you on the sentiment, right up to particularly egregious (and not culturally or ethnically significant) haircuts. On that one, I may continue to do like only half of this woman’s hair, and throw a little shade.
Chill
Where’s Jeeves when we need him? I’d ask him but…
whats wrong with her hair
Is! Yahoo! still! a! thing!?!
We all know somebody who never stopped using their embarrassing email address from the 2000s. It’s all their fault
I was shocked to see it on some resumes recently. And these are for tech positions.
Yeah… And what about the 60 millions users lost since 2019? Will Mozilla find someone else to blame?
Amazing that people would run away over that. People really are Luddites.
Luddites didn’t oppose the technology itself, but the distribution of the profits it brought and were fighting for workers’ rights.
so moz can do browser, mailclient, translate, sync and so much more but they cant do their own search …to…keep their small market share…and…goole pays well?
