Hacker News Reader

Comment by dig1 | Hacker News Reader

This is a sad story. From a desire to have a genuinely open-source browser (with proper open development) present almost everywhere, we now have Firefox present on fewer and fewer platforms. I think, in the end, it will be "officially supported" only on Windows and macOS.

I understand that web browser is a complex business, but TBH, I don't want VR, Pocket, and tons of half-baked junk in my browser. Google poured millions of dollars into Mozilla (which is cheaper than battling with anti-trust commission), and yet, most of their projects failed. I think they need to rethink their management and strategy before everything goes to the ground.

View on HN

I'm generally worried for the future of Firefox, but this particular decision doesn't really sound all that significant to me.

I don't really think it's reasonable for Firefox to officially support every single proprietary platform out there, especially when it must have had a tiny number of users. I'd rather Firefox focused on improving the browser where it matters than supporting some niche proprietary environment.

> most of their projects failed. I think they need to rethink their management and strategy before everything goes to the ground.

Lots of projects fail. It's the nature of R&D. You should see the number of products Google has shut down.

Besides, the project that Mozilla gets the most flack for? Firefox OS. Turned out to be a great idea? Why? Because Apple and Google anti competitively bundle their own browsers with their own mobile OSes.

Yes, sadly Firefox OS failed. But the future (now, present) of web is mobile: Mozilla had to try.

Not to mention a fork of Firefox OS is probably the 3rd most used mobile operating system now: https://www.kaiostech.com/

Firefox OS didn't fail: it is now known as KaiOS and is present on vast, vast quantities of "smart feature" phones in places like India. I recall Mozilla specifically talking about how to approach the next billion people to come online. It is admittedly a nuanced reading, but I think they succeeded on those terms. Still, the experience is very different to the one on Firefox OS as-was in 2015 or so.

Apologies for no citations, but I recall a talk from 2014 or so at Mozfest in London and not much else. I've also owned a KaiOS phone - the Nokia 8110 and can say aside from a lack of apps it is great.

Firefox on Amazon devices uses the Android Webview. Fire Sticks have specs that are comparable to several year old phones when they were released. This makes them poor targets for general use computing.

> Google poured millions of dollars into Mozilla (...), and yet, most of their projects failed.

Perhaps it's actually working as intended.

Don’t blame Google for that. It’s Mozilla management failure.

> Don’t blame Google for that. It’s Mozilla management failure.

Is there any reading material online supporting this position? I would tend to agree but my opinion is fairly uninformed.

https://calpaterson.com/mozilla.html

Thank you.

I have often thought that leading a shining beacon like Mozilla should and would be done by a previously successful executive who doesn't need the money and would like a challenge. Compensation would be $1/year, everlasting respect, and a true legacy to leave behind. But that's just my vision of panacea I suppose.

I respect Mitchell Baker's history at Mozilla but is it time for a change?

reference: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/leadership/

edit: changed phrasing and tone

She's only been CEO for roughly a year now, and your hope that someone would do that work for free is unrealistic.

Yeah.. > that's just my vision of panacea I suppose.

Sorry, it does seem far harsher than I intended it, I'll change it. People often have extremely idealistic views of Mozilla that puts then in a position where they can do no right, and I'll end up debating that idealism while ignoring what was said.

No worries. I understand that his is complex topic and I am coming to it with little knowledge.

The reason I thought she had been CEO for years is that I saw in the official bio that she was a co-founder and CEO. I didn't realize the timeline. I should probably learn a lot more prior to making statements like I had previously about change.

I also do have the baggage of an anti-administrative bloat bias/agenda which I am may be applying here inappropriately.

I was just really disapointed with some of the teams that were removed like Security. I know that money has to come from somewhere and seeing exec compensation go up at the same time was a hard pill to swallow.

>. I know that money has to come from somewhere and seeing exec compensation go up at the same time was a hard pill to swallow.

The last year we have executive salaries from is 2018, while those cuts were in 2020. I suspect executive compensation also fell sharply, I know the number of executives is lower.

I also hope that they wear a black costume and fight crime at night.

But all we get are police and skilled people who want to be paid what they're worth.

Usage was down, revenue went way way up, and executive salaries reflected that. As revenue has dropped, I doubt executive salaries have stayed at the same level.

It's insane how much flak they get for the CEO making a million dollars more after signing a deal that got them hundreds of millions more dollars a year.

> It's insane how much flak they get for the CEO making a million dollars more after signing a deal that got them hundreds of millions more dollars a year.

I think the derision comes from the fact that this is theoretically a non-profit org.

The executives are employees of the Mozilla Corporation, not the nonprofit.

If the board had paid the same amount and gotten half the return from a service or consultant, they would be praised for it. But an employee! Good forbid!

I'm a senior engineering manager at Mozilla. Are you saying that because Mozilla is a non-profit I should just accept to take a salary that is mediocre or below industry standard?

What if we apply that to engineering too? Marketing, operations, SREs ..

How do you think that would work out for Mozilla? Do you think we would have any impact if the place was run like that? Do you think we would have much talent on board?

In the interest of clarity and humility, I carry the baggage of having a very large anti-executive/administration/overhead bias.

I was trying to speak for general sentiment before, which was dumb of me.

Let me attempt to clarify my personal thinking: if for example there was a Patreon where I could give money to Mozilla engineering salaries directly, I would proudly pay $10/month. I would be willing to wager that many others would as well.

If orgs want good feels and a write off, sure 501c Mozilla donations, but let’s go beyond all that.

How about a Mozilla Security Patreon?

How about a Mozilla Rust Pateron?

My point is that there is so much good will and money, just on HN, for Mozilla engineering... can we come up with ways to fund engineering directly?

I realize there needs to be a CEO, etc, but there should also be a funding structure to pay you and your peers more, directly.

Edit: I am just using Patreon as an example of direct creator funding, other mechanisms may be more applicable.

> It's insane how much flak they get for the CEO making a million dollars more after signing a deal that got them hundreds of millions more dollars a year.

What are you talking about? Hundreds of millions more per year? Their revenue [1] grew by 40m (520m to 562m) during the year they doubled their top exec salary. It fell by 90m the next year, earning them a loss for the first time.

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation#Finanzierun... German Wikipedia has a nice table.

The deal was made in 2015, and I assume that the executives do not negotiate their salary every year.

Looking at the financials, it's pretty obvious that there was no huge deal that brought in additional hundreds of millions, not even once, and definitely not every year.

I should have said over a hundred million more a year or hundreds of millions more. It was my mistake to say both as the deal only increased revenue by $140 million over predeal revenue in the best year.

I'm guessing the management failure was engineered from the start. Follow the money.

So blame Yahoo, the ones paying them during the "management failure?"

Mozilla is competing with the world's biggest advertisement company who can advertise their competition 24/7 and is also competing with the biggest phone company in America who has banned their product and forced their customers to use the phone company's product.

This all might have something to do with it.

Agreed. Google just wrote the check.

If only it was so simple that you need great (product) management to have a successful product.

Mozilla tries hard and like every other startup or company out there, many ideas or products fail or turn out to not be profitable.

There is no magic here. If there was then all startups and all ideas would work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com