Hacker News Reader

Comment by skyfaller | Hacker News Reader

Although I understand your sentiment, there was a big uproar (rightly so) when Mozilla cut a lot of stuff that wasn't directly related to Firefox, such as MDN web docs or the experimental Servo browser engine. Building a healthy and innovative ecosystem requires not developing tunnel vision. Having a future requires investing in the future as well as the present.

Some would no doubt consider incubating their own programming language, Rust, to be a distraction, but it's a clear benefit to programming / computer safety that they did, and presumably makes Firefox more fun to work on since programmers famously enjoy Rust.

Focus is good, but like most good things it's best in moderation, otherwise you reach diminishing returns while sacrificing everything else that matters.

View on HN

> there was a big uproar (rightly so) when Mozilla cut a lot of stuff that wasn't directly related to Firefox, such as MDN web docs or the experimental Servo browser engine.

MDN is a documentation site for the technologies supported by Firefox. Servo is a browser engine that's been used as a development target for efforts to rewrite major components of Firefox. These are both directly related to Firefox, as were other things that were cut.

From my vantage I don't recall the outrage whether things being cut were / weren't related to Firefox, but rather that major cuts were being made at the bottom (to features / programmes / staff) while Mozilla management were exorbitantly remunerated and receiving large bonuses/raises at the same time. Despite the severe decline in Firefox seen under their tenure.

I guess "directly related" is more controversial than I thought. I would call these indirectly supporting Firefox, and in line with Mozilla's mission.

Building public documentation for free doesn't directly help Firefox's market share, improve the browser, fix bugs, or financially get them out from under Google's thumb. Nor does building an experimental browser engine that they do not intend to use. They may help with these things, but it requires a few steps to explain how.

> or financially get them out from under Google's thumb

Ultimately, the seeming disinterest in this as one of their goals is the primary issue I have. My feelings on whether they should be investing more or less money into other initiatives are secondary.

I'm opinionated here so perhaps viewing things through that biased lens but that sentiment seemed echoed in the uproar around the cuts.

The open, standards-compliant documentation wasn't just nice for devs, but it promoted web standards that are meant to foster an open, better-functioning internet that's better for users and Firefox's market share.

The Servo engine could have been a big step forward. It's exploratory, sure, but so is VC funding "ethical" for-profits.

the experimental Servo browser engine

How is building a new browser engine not supporting Firefox?

> Although I understand your sentiment, there was a big uproar (rightly so) when Mozilla cut a lot of stuff that wasn't directly related to Firefox, such as MDN web docs or the experimental Servo browser engine. Building a healthy and innovative ecosystem requires not developing tunnel vision. Having a future requires investing in the future as well as the present.

Funny how under that goal Firefox has gone from 30% of the market to 3%:

https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share

Mozilla today is a net negative for the web. We would be better with them dying in a fire so something new can take their place and actually be something that people want to use.

> We would be better with them dying in a fire so something new can take their place and actually be something that people want to use.

Or at least we might get an antitrust suit that forces google to unload Chrome.

Executive pay at Mozilla seems inversely proportional to the browser's market share... That's how performance is rewarded at the corporation, the less Firefox is used, the bigger her salary is...

Do you think there's some great "next Mozilla" that isn't taking on off due to the current Mozilla still existing?

I don't think that's the case. I don't think they have to be die for something else to take their place.

Yes, Mozilla is just good enough to not force the people who can make a web browser start because it has decades worth of inertia behind it. They remove functionality every release but there's always a work around that's ok enough to get you past it. I haven't been excited for an update from them in a decade.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com