8 ms·

So was it really necessary to lay-off the servo and wasm and security teams?

by gmb2k1 6y ago

mrweasel 6y ago
Yes, they need the money to build stuff that will provide them with a steady stream of income from other sources, like online collaborative code editors, a VPN solution, a new diesel powered truck, a Firefox branded amusement park and an adult streaming service. I love you Mozilla, but please stop. Find a way to make money on what you do best: Firefox.
- stevehawk 6y ago
  I know would pay for Firefox if it helped keep them afloat. I doubt I'm alone. But, I also doubt there's enough of us to keep them afloat.
  - gmb2k1 6y ago
    Actually, I would too, if that money is guaranteed to be used only for Firefox development. And only that. Not to pocket, not to an inept C-Suite, not to their political activism. Not to any experiments outside of the core browser. But that's not even possible. You can only donate to the Mozilla Foundation, which uses the money for whatever they like.
    - manquer 6y ago
      there is always patreon, you could contribute to external developers who contribute to mainline , if they make enough money on patreon they could do it full time.
  - stjohnswarts 6y ago
    It won't because people that currently use firefox would definitely switch over to chrome/chrome-based browsers then.
- TheCraiggers 6y ago
  How? Their three main competitors: Chrome, Edge (if that even counts, being Chromium based), and Safari are completely free AND installed by default on their respective operating system(s). "Not being installed by default" is already a very high hurdle for mainstream acceptance. If you tack on some sort of cost, I can't see that working well for adoption. Personally, I think they're on the right track with the VPN service. VPN services are already something people are used to paying for, and one of the biggest issues with VPN services are trying to figure out who you can trust out of all the nameless shell companies out there. Mozilla is a trusted brand.
  - mrweasel 6y ago
    I have no idea, but I'm also not head of Mozilla. If they can't make money on Firefox in the future, why even bother to build and maintain it. Then they just become a VPN resell who for some unknown reason keeps building a browser. That doesn't make any sense business wise. If the management of Mozilla can't find a way to profit from Firefox, other than leaching on the goodwill and branding, then I don't think they're sufficiently competent to full fill their roles.
  - gmb2k1 6y ago
    What I don't get about the VPN thing is, that they're just a reseller of mullvad VPN. So, even if I trust Mozilla, that isn't of any help, if I don't trust mullvad. And if I do trust mullvad, why wouldn't I buy access from them directly? The only reason to get the Mozilla VPN is, to help them to a little commission for ideological reasons.
    - dorchadas 6y ago
      I don't think the VPN is targeted to people like you or me, who know about them already and know how to research and trust them. It's targeted towards a more "everyday" user, which might not think to go to Mullvad to buy it, or necessarily worry about the privacy implications (personally, I've heard good things about Mullvad and switched over after PIA sold), and just like the ease of integration through buying it with Firefox.
- DangerousPie 6y ago
  How do you suggest they do that? As far as I can see, to make money from Firefox they need to either charge for the browser, start selling user data, or integrate 3rd party products. The first isn't commercially viable, the second fundamentally clashes with their principles and the third they have tried but gotten a lot of backlash and little success.
  - mrweasel 6y ago
    I have no idea how that would work. Two ideas: * Let us pay for Firefox development. I'm not sure how much that would bring in. * Partnerships with news sites. You pay Mozilla, they keep 30% and use the rest to pay the news sites to not paywall Firefox. Currently Firefox is basically funded by Google, how does that not clash with their principles? It's okay for take money from a company that directly profit from collection user data, just don't collect the data yourself?
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    I mean, they currently make ~$450 million per year from Firefox due to their search deals (mainly Google but others in other countries). In the past I think they had Bing bidding for the deal as well. No reason for that to not continue if they maintain Firefox marketshare.
    - olejorgenb 6y ago
      Exactly. While it's not ideal to be dependent on a competitor like that it has been a very robust stream on income: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Affiliations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Affiliatio... $300M+ for 8 years (and now 3 more years)
      - marcinzm 6y ago
        Had Mozilla invested 75% of it rather than spending 75% they would have probably had a guaranteed $100 million/year from their investments alone for the next century.
- calcifer 6y ago
  > Find a way to make money on what you do best: Firefox. They tried. Pocket and cliqz were attempts at that. Tell me if I'm wrong, but I feel like you weren't supportive of those efforts either.
- roca 6y ago
  Here we see Mozilla's dilemma: half the Internet calling for Mozilla to focus on Firefox, the other half calling for Mozilla to diversity away from Firefox (which is implicitly what people are calling for when they call for Mozilla to diversify revenue).
- zerocrates 6y ago
  Well, they already make nearly all their money on Firefox, hundreds of millions of dollars a year worth.
pjmlp 6y ago
Well a conspiracy theorist could assert that downsizing their development teams was part of the deal. :)
tannhaeuser 6y ago
You probably won't like what I'm saying: WASM and Rust are completely irrelevant for the vast majority of people. It's only HN and a couple other places where folks are obsessed with it. Far more important is having a browser that can decipher that laughable piece of shit we're calling the web, and have unleashed upon the world. It would be cool if we could focus on fixing it.
- chmln 6y ago
  That makes no sense. People might not know about WASM or Rust, but people like fast browsers. Rust is what powers Servo, which in turn made performance of Firefox somewhat acceptable. Gutting both teams is extremely short-sighted.
  - cmrdporcupine 6y ago
    I wasn't under the impression that Servo was completed or deployed fully in released Firefox. I believe only the CSS engine is?
    - paulrouget 6y ago
      And WebRender. And there were plans for more…
- himinlomax 6y ago
  > You probably won't like what I'm saying: WASM and Rust are completely irrelevant for the vast majority of people Gears and valves are completely irrelevant to the vast majority of car users.
dredmorbius 6y ago
Were the layoffs a consideration for the new funding deal?
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  They clearly knew they were in the 11th hour for a big layoff before they would catch even more flack -after- the google deal because everyone would reading the news would also read the part about them still fire employee after a guaranteed 3 years of funding.
  - dredmorbius 6y ago
    Sorry, what?
sp332 6y ago
I'm not saying it was a good move, but they didn't let go all of the security people like that one tweet kinda implied. https://twitter.com/arroway53c/status/1293867434374569985 https://twitter.com/arroway53c/status/1293867434374569985 https://twitter.com/jvehent/status/1293511397649854464 https://twitter.com/jvehent/status/1293511397649854464

So was it really necessary to lay-off the servo and wasm and security teams?

by gmb2k1 6y ago

So was it really necessary to lay-off the servo and wasm and security teams?

Yes, they need the money to build stuff that will provide them with a steady stream of income from other sources, like online collaborative code editors, a VPN solution, a new diesel powered truck, a Firefox branded amusement park and an adult streaming service. I love you Mozilla, but please stop. Find a way to make money on what you do best: Firefox.

stevehawk 6y ago
I know would pay for Firefox if it helped keep them afloat. I doubt I'm alone. But, I also doubt there's enough of us to keep them afloat.
- gmb2k1 6y ago
  Actually, I would too, if that money is guaranteed to be used only for Firefox development. And only that. Not to pocket, not to an inept C-Suite, not to their political activism. Not to any experiments outside of the core browser. But that's not even possible. You can only donate to the Mozilla Foundation, which uses the money for whatever they like.
  - manquer 6y ago
    there is always patreon, you could contribute to external developers who contribute to mainline , if they make enough money on patreon they could do it full time.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  It won't because people that currently use firefox would definitely switch over to chrome/chrome-based browsers then.
TheCraiggers 6y ago
How? Their three main competitors: Chrome, Edge (if that even counts, being Chromium based), and Safari are completely free AND installed by default on their respective operating system(s). "Not being installed by default" is already a very high hurdle for mainstream acceptance. If you tack on some sort of cost, I can't see that working well for adoption. Personally, I think they're on the right track with the VPN service. VPN services are already something people are used to paying for, and one of the biggest issues with VPN services are trying to figure out who you can trust out of all the nameless shell companies out there. Mozilla is a trusted brand.
- mrweasel 6y ago
  I have no idea, but I'm also not head of Mozilla. If they can't make money on Firefox in the future, why even bother to build and maintain it. Then they just become a VPN resell who for some unknown reason keeps building a browser. That doesn't make any sense business wise. If the management of Mozilla can't find a way to profit from Firefox, other than leaching on the goodwill and branding, then I don't think they're sufficiently competent to full fill their roles.
- gmb2k1 6y ago
  What I don't get about the VPN thing is, that they're just a reseller of mullvad VPN. So, even if I trust Mozilla, that isn't of any help, if I don't trust mullvad. And if I do trust mullvad, why wouldn't I buy access from them directly? The only reason to get the Mozilla VPN is, to help them to a little commission for ideological reasons.
  - dorchadas 6y ago
    I don't think the VPN is targeted to people like you or me, who know about them already and know how to research and trust them. It's targeted towards a more "everyday" user, which might not think to go to Mullvad to buy it, or necessarily worry about the privacy implications (personally, I've heard good things about Mullvad and switched over after PIA sold), and just like the ease of integration through buying it with Firefox.
DangerousPie 6y ago
How do you suggest they do that? As far as I can see, to make money from Firefox they need to either charge for the browser, start selling user data, or integrate 3rd party products. The first isn't commercially viable, the second fundamentally clashes with their principles and the third they have tried but gotten a lot of backlash and little success.
- mrweasel 6y ago
  I have no idea how that would work. Two ideas: * Let us pay for Firefox development. I'm not sure how much that would bring in. * Partnerships with news sites. You pay Mozilla, they keep 30% and use the rest to pay the news sites to not paywall Firefox. Currently Firefox is basically funded by Google, how does that not clash with their principles? It's okay for take money from a company that directly profit from collection user data, just don't collect the data yourself?
- marcinzm 6y ago
  I mean, they currently make ~$450 million per year from Firefox due to their search deals (mainly Google but others in other countries). In the past I think they had Bing bidding for the deal as well. No reason for that to not continue if they maintain Firefox marketshare.
  - olejorgenb 6y ago
    Exactly. While it's not ideal to be dependent on a competitor like that it has been a very robust stream on income: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Affiliations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation#Affiliatio... $300M+ for 8 years (and now 3 more years)
    - marcinzm 6y ago
      Had Mozilla invested 75% of it rather than spending 75% they would have probably had a guaranteed $100 million/year from their investments alone for the next century.
calcifer 6y ago
> Find a way to make money on what you do best: Firefox. They tried. Pocket and cliqz were attempts at that. Tell me if I'm wrong, but I feel like you weren't supportive of those efforts either.
roca 6y ago
Here we see Mozilla's dilemma: half the Internet calling for Mozilla to focus on Firefox, the other half calling for Mozilla to diversity away from Firefox (which is implicitly what people are calling for when they call for Mozilla to diversify revenue).
zerocrates 6y ago
Well, they already make nearly all their money on Firefox, hundreds of millions of dollars a year worth.

pjmlp 6y ago

Well a conspiracy theorist could assert that downsizing their development teams was part of the deal. :)

tannhaeuser 6y ago

You probably won't like what I'm saying: WASM and Rust are completely irrelevant for the vast majority of people. It's only HN and a couple other places where folks are obsessed with it. Far more important is having a browser that can decipher that laughable piece of shit we're calling the web, and have unleashed upon the world. It would be cool if we could focus on fixing it.

chmln 6y ago
That makes no sense. People might not know about WASM or Rust, but people like fast browsers. Rust is what powers Servo, which in turn made performance of Firefox somewhat acceptable. Gutting both teams is extremely short-sighted.
- cmrdporcupine 6y ago
  I wasn't under the impression that Servo was completed or deployed fully in released Firefox. I believe only the CSS engine is?
  - paulrouget 6y ago
    And WebRender. And there were plans for more…
himinlomax 6y ago
> You probably won't like what I'm saying: WASM and Rust are completely irrelevant for the vast majority of people Gears and valves are completely irrelevant to the vast majority of car users.

dredmorbius 6y ago

Were the layoffs a consideration for the new funding deal?

stjohnswarts 6y ago
They clearly knew they were in the 11th hour for a big layoff before they would catch even more flack -after- the google deal because everyone would reading the news would also read the part about them still fire employee after a guaranteed 3 years of funding.
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  Sorry, what?

sp332 6y ago

I'm not saying it was a good move, but they didn't let go all of the security people like that one tweet kinda implied. https://twitter.com/arroway53c/status/1293867434374569985 https://twitter.com/arroway53c/status/1293867434374569985 https://twitter.com/jvehent/status/1293511397649854464 https://twitter.com/jvehent/status/1293511397649854464