7 ms·

Which donor? Only Google and Microsoft make up 90% of Mozilla income. So a 10% guy is that powerful? Epstein? Mozilla turned too political in the last 10 years.

Which donor? Only Google and Microsoft make up 90% of Mozilla income. So a 10% guy is that powerful? Epstein? Mozilla turned too political in the last 10 years. I dont bother with that ki d of company. Anyway, Brave is damn good compare to sluggish Mozilla especially their older gecko. Their newer quantum also terrible when compared to Brave, Arc, or even a niche Floorp or Thorium. VPN? I go with Proton or setup my own. As for app? Dolphin and Opera works way better. Mozilla is a relic. They turn themselves one.

_fnkp 2y ago
It does not matter which donor.. MF does not have many new sources of money coming around so they need to keep every penny they get coming. Even if Google and Microsoft were 99% of their income they can still do not have the luxury of losing that extra 1%, loosing the CEO is still a better option then loosing 1% of their income. And unless you were donating anything closer then that 1% to MF then you and your opinion are irrelevant for their situation. You may belive they are political all you want, it will not change the fact that they could not afford to loose that donor. As for the other browsers, they are a joke, Brave, Dolphin and Opera are all just chrome with a different skin, might as well be using chrome then. No thank you. Any browser that use webkit is ultimately bound by google decision on what they want to do with their engine, just like when google make manifest v3 the only one available next june and break most, if not all, ad blockers. It will affect all those browsers eventually. Now if any of those browsers want to keep manifest v2 to keep ad blockers working they will have to put the manpower to do it themselves and have to fight Google every step of the way because Google will surely start breaking things they need for the effort, the amount of work will only grow over time until they give up.
- BrendanEich 2y ago
  Google's not removing the internals for webRequest, as far as we can tell they have internal and "enterprise" needs.

_fnkp 2y ago

It does not matter which donor.. MF does not have many new sources of money coming around so they need to keep every penny they get coming. Even if Google and Microsoft were 99% of their income they can still do not have the luxury of losing that extra 1%, loosing the CEO is still a better option then loosing 1% of their income. And unless you were donating anything closer then that 1% to MF then you and your opinion are irrelevant for their situation. You may belive they are political all you want, it will not change the fact that they could not afford to loose that donor. As for the other browsers, they are a joke, Brave, Dolphin and Opera are all just chrome with a different skin, might as well be using chrome then. No thank you. Any browser that use webkit is ultimately bound by google decision on what they want to do with their engine, just like when google make manifest v3 the only one available next june and break most, if not all, ad blockers. It will affect all those browsers eventually. Now if any of those browsers want to keep manifest v2 to keep ad blockers working they will have to put the manpower to do it themselves and have to fight Google every step of the way because Google will surely start breaking things they need for the effort, the amount of work will only grow over time until they give up.

BrendanEich 2y ago
Google's not removing the internals for webRequest, as far as we can tell they have internal and "enterprise" needs.