You mean the guy who then did the Brave browser, which inserted referral codes and installed VPN services without users' consent, and wants you to earn monopoly money for watching ads? Yeah, he surely would've been the savior of Firefox.
It was a good bet. But it did not work out. No leader is infallible.
https://web.archive.org/web/20231216111510/https://gerda.tec... https://archive.luxferre.top/gerdaos
That's what I understood from their postmortem post:
"Engineering — Have a clear separation between “chrome” and web content rather than try to force the web to do things it isn’t suited to. Create device APIs using REST & WebSockets on the server side of the web stack rather than privileged JavaScript DOM APIs on the client side. Create a community curated directory of web apps on the web rather than an app store of submitted packaged apps."
https://medium.com/@bfrancis/the-story-of-firefox-os-cb5bf79...
* Focus on employee wellness, including mental wellbeing
* Support for making the internet free, open and accessible to all
* History of working for non-profits and traditionally neglected sectors
* Stated opposition to current influence of money and big tech in politics
Without getting into the politics of Eich's firing, It simply looked like people there just didn't care about the browser there anymore.
If they did, the people who were vocal enough to get a CEO fired would obviously have raised a voice against the dropping marketshare (aka their own bottomline), money squandered on various non browser projects (pocket), all these PR nightmares (mr robot, recent layoffs ) etc ...
Needless to say when i say people, i mean at least the vocal ones in power and obviously not everyone.
Worse, you are making stuff up in claiming that volunteers in substantial numbers "propped up" Mozilla. The Google money was still good enough to pay all essential personnel.
If not, you can perhaps see why people didn't want Eich's bigotry around their project.
I think a closer analogy is no boss or CEO will likely have political views that match my own and I tolerate that and will work for such people.
When the CEO is donating to causes which directly discriminate against you - would you apply to work there?