back to article Mozilla Foundation crumbles as third of staff cast off

The Mozilla Foundation is laying off about a third of its staff. The non-profit org, which oversees the corporation that develops the Firefox web browser, insists it will continue its advocacy mission, though its approach may change. "The Mozilla Foundation is reorganizing teams to increase agility and impact as we accelerate …

  1. Michael Hoffmann Silver badge
    Unhappy

    How can they be struggling so badly when their competition are ad- and spyware riddled disaster areas?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Um, one of these has revenue?

      1. Natewrench

        Relevancy it wouldn't surprise me heck if Mozilla just merge chromium and gecko together to make an amalgam browser.

        1. Alumoi Silver badge

          What do you mean? Adopt the Chromium engine and keep the Gecko skin? Oh, wait, they already fucked up the UI..., erm, sorry, they Chromified the UI.

          1. bombastic bob Silver badge
            Megaphone

            Your first instinct was the correct one

            If Mozilla were to fall apart, maybe we (developers) can TAKE OVER the project and do a retro UI and "feature freeze" and just keep it up with the CONSTANTLY moving DOM/CSS standards, fix bugs, and make "lean and mean" performance enhancements.

            Too many too frequent releases, and "up"grading is HIGHLY OVERRATED!!!!!

            Seriously, the ad/script/etc. blocking, add-on, and privacy features are WAY superior to chrome!!! OR is that why they're being (quite possibly) DRIVEN! OUT! OF! BUSINESS!!!???

            1. sabroni Silver badge
              Thumb Up

              Mr bombastic

              THERE is NOTHING better THAN seeing THAT username AND knowing THAT you ARE about TO read A random CAPSLOCK rant FROM the MASTER OF CAPSLOCK RANTS!!!!!

              bob, you are the best, I CAN'T TOUCH your capslock mastery!

              (now with added!!! exclamation!!! MARKS!!!!!)

              1. regiducks

                Re: Mr bombastic

                When yo need that extra ooomph, add a couple of exclamation marks, and to show you're really excited, just use ones. Like so !!!11

                Isn't that just a typo?

                These go to 11.

            2. collinsl Silver badge

              > “Multiple exclamation marks,' he went on, shaking his head, 'are a sure sign of a diseased mind.”

              - Sir Terry Pratchett, Eric

    2. Headley_Grange Silver badge

      Because the only people who care about ads and spyware are here reading the Reg. The other 99.99% of the population either don't know or don't care.

      1. PCScreenOnly

        pi-hole

        Indeed, run that home to block ads as wlel as dodgy sites and the rest of the house moan like fsck as they click on the ads provided by the search engines and tell me the internet is broken

        1. Rich 2 Silver badge

          Re: pi-hole

          I’ve just put a Pi-Hole on my network. Is great!! (and a real eye-opener about how much crap it stops - I’ve not really noticed until now because my laptop has all sorts of filtering on it anyway …but I digress)

          It would be even greater if I didn’t get constant grief from other family members because their websites keep breaking :-(

          1. Korev Silver badge
            Big Brother

            Re: pi-hole

            > and a real eye-opener about how much crap it stops - I’ve not really noticed until now because my laptop has all sorts of filtering on it anyway

            For me I notice it when I leave Korev Towers and use my phone or tablet on other networks

      2. ChoHag Silver badge

        About 99.98% of the population don't know *that ads are optional* and don't care for the geekery that said knowledge would have come from.

      3. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Unhappy

        I very much wish it were not so...

    3. imanidiot Silver badge

      Given how much Opera(GX) is getting pushed and how shit it really is while still getting a lot of uptake I guess there's just a lot of idiots out there.

      My browser of choice is still Firefox, even though I preferred the GUI of many redesigns ago.

      1. Ramis101

        Yea, i'm hoping these 36 people were all in charge of mucking with the UI, adding the phone home options, pestering about refreshing your browser & syncing stuff. Oh and deciding to ignore my DNS choices over theirs - is my latest rant!

        Give me Firefox ~4 again or thereabouts please and stop Mucking with the UI. Yes i want a menu bar, no i don't want HUGE tabs that i have to google how the hell to shrink back to normal again

        /edit

        Forgot about the constant nag to update as others mentioned

        Basically if they didn't have en ESR branch i would have ditched it yonks ago.

        /

      2. Gerhard den Hollander

        OperaGX

        Sorry,

        I personally rather like operagx. Opera has been amazing, then became shite but for the last 5 years orso has been really good again.

        But that might just be because i really like the workspaces and the whatsapp side bar.

      3. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        My browser of choice is still Firefox, even though I preferred the GUI of many redesigns ago.

      4. BiffoTheBorg

        Pale Moon?

        1. imanidiot Silver badge

          For some reason I had lots of problems with Pale Moon with sites not loading correctly, crashing to desktop etc last time I tried it. Gave up quickly and went back to Firefox.

    4. Snake Silver badge
      IT Angle

      RE: why?

      Because Mozilla has a long, long history of not listening to its users to avoiding giving them what they want.

      Mozilla only seems to hear its developers.

      1. Rich 2 Silver badge

        Re: RE: why?

        I doubt know why you’re being voted down - this is a long running and well documented issue.

        I for one am getting really bored of clicking-away the “there is an update available” box that pops up every day (and yes, I know it can be suppressed but I don’t know where the file it to edit on Linux - all the instructions I have found so far refer to a windows installation, and besides, WHY take away the “fuck off and stop asking” button that FF USED to have until recently). This is a classic example of not listening to users

        1. Dave559

          Re: RE: why?

          That sounds like you have maybe installed Firefox manually? In any sane Linux distro, the distro packagers will have disabled the update checks and nags, and just let the package manager take care of updates (and, if your distro gives you the choice, choosing the ESR version helps, because what sort of lunatic wants to update their browser every 6 weeks and find that things have been shuffled around for no good reason yet again?)

          1. Ian Johnston Silver badge

            Re: RE: why?

            In Xubuntu - and perhaps other Ubunti - the developers have decided that Firefox updates are essential to security, so they are installed automatically. You are given no choice, can't delay them and only find out when it attempts to restart, losing all your open tabs and any work in them while doing so.

      2. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: RE: why?

        (living/working in a tiny software-dev bubble world where customers cannot 'bother' you)

        This is a common problem in software development, EPITOMIZED by Micros~1 since "Windows APE" and TIFKAM.

        /me now goes off and continues working on a customer-requested mod that will take days' worth of my time, and costs the company more money than it earns from it, but preserves the business relationship... which is sometimes MORE IMPORTANT

    5. JoeCool Silver badge

      partially because

      they arent just compering with chrome and ibrowser. because of tied bundling they are also competing with android and ios

    6. Ian Johnston Silver badge

      Because they give their product away for free and it's still not good enough to get many users.

      1. ChoHag Silver badge

        But it's open sores! They deserve adoration just for being!

    7. CowHorseFrog Silver badge

      They caught the worst disease of all, they were taken over by a corporate leadership board.

      Its bullshit all the way down, until the parasite kills the host.

  2. JLV

    Yeah, well, Firefox, the browser, is still my mainstay, but it's struggling and seems to be getting buggier on edge cases. I mostly like it because of NoScript (which can often be annoying too).

    On iOS, it a) doesn't do well to save pages to the home screen. Chrome does. b) sometimes doesn't open links from SMS. Chrome does. As a result, I've had to change to Chrome as a default browser.

    On Linux, CTRL+F doesn't actually open a search dialog. You have to use the menu, which lists CTRL+F as a shortcut. I think it does repeat searches though, once opened.

    What's their latest marker share? 3%?

    IIRC a software millionaire recently sponsored Ladybird, a fledgling browser, because he says FF does not accept direct sponsorship/donations. Heck, if we were promised it would just go to the browser, rather than "advocacy", I'd happily pay a one time $50-ish fee (no, not a sub).

    Not that I agree with his politics, but Mozilla might have benefited from keeping Brendan Eich as a CEO. Esp judging from Brave.

    1. Natewrench

      Uncontrolled schisms

      You see that's the beauty of libre software hyper competition and uncontrollable schisms. Don't like Firefox either use it loose it modify it or go to another browser like lb. Vote with your code and wallet

      1. Snake Silver badge

        Re: go to another browser

        And the irony of you missing the point that the topic of the article, and thereby this discussion, seems to be due to users doing exactly that...??

    2. BenDwire Silver badge
      Holmes

      CTRL+F opens a dialog(ue) in FF on my Debian 12 system. And I have NoScript installed too.

      YMMV

    3. -maniax-

      > On Linux, CTRL+F doesn't actually open a search dialog

      Works fine for me on Linux Mint across every version of Firefox on 2 machines I've used for the past few years

      I have NoScript installed as well as few other privacy and utility add-ons installed but I've just tested a clean profile default profile and CTRL-F works on that as well so it doesn't seem like I've tweaked anything to cause CTRL-F to work

    4. Dan 55 Silver badge

      On Linux

      Brave statement to make given the proliferation of versions and distros.

    5. Irongut Silver badge

      On iOS it isn't Firefox it's Safari wearing a fox tail plug.

      > On Linux, CTRL+F doesn't actually open a search dialog

      Works for me on Arch.

      1. Tom Chiverton 1 Silver badge

        Probably has the shortcut mapped to something, such as their window manager.

        1. JLV

          No, I don't. CTRL-F works just fine in Vivaldi. I am on Ubuntu 22.04, Cinnamon. I did not remap those keybinds in Firefox either.

  3. Bachelorette

    Seems giving their CEO a pay rise to 6.9 mil didn't help stem the crumble.

    1. O'Reg Inalsin

      Small comfort

      Although it might help to alleviate the pain of losing so many employees.

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      maybe Elon can fix it

      Maybe Elon can fix it?

      First, reduce costs to a fraction of what they were like he did with Twitter (now X)

      Then integrate with X search, and call it the X browser with extra privacy settings, a PROPER UI, and maybe built-in secure VPN access for posters who do not want to GET ARRESTED for speaking out online...

      Aaaand move the operation to TEXAS.

  4. StrangerHereMyself Silver badge

    Profit

    It wouldn't surprise me in the least if they decided to become a "for profit" company. I mean, they've been raking in hundreds of millions every year whilst frivolously wasting it on all sorts of ill fated projects that didn't improve the browser in the least. They're obsessed with freeing themselves of Google's search dollars whilst they'd be better off embracing it and investing in improving Firefox.

    1. Spazturtle Silver badge

      Re: Profit

      Firefox is already made by the for profit Mozilla Corporation who are owned by the Mozilla Foundation.

      1. StrangerHereMyself Silver badge

        Re: Profit

        I mean getting rid of the Foundation and just becoming a "regular" for-profit entity. That way they can also put themselves up for sale or list on the stock market (horror!).

        The altruistic part of Mozilla seems more and more like a joke. I'm pretty sure the execs are thinking of simply pilfering the company and leaving the spent husk to wither and die.

        1. Arthur the cat Silver badge
          Unhappy

          Re: Profit

          That way they can also put themselves up for sale or list on the stock market (horror!).

          Unfortunately that would pretty much guarantee rapid enshittification.

          I'm pretty sure the execs are thinking of simply pilfering the company and leaving the spent husk to wither and die.

          Classic principal/agent problem. See also: representative democracy.

      2. Natewrench

        Re: Profit

        How the heck is it legal for a non profit to own a for profit and vice versa

        1. Arthur the cat Silver badge

          Re: Profit

          How the heck is it legal for a non profit to own a for profit and vice versa

          Completely standard in most(*) legal jurisdictions. The same deal applies to the charity and profit making corporation bits of Raspberry Pi.

          (*) Possibly all, IANAL.

        2. Ian Johnston Silver badge

          Re: Profit

          Very common indeed in the UK. Charities can't make commercial profits, so many own trading arms. For example, the Talyllyn Railway Preservation Society owns the Talyllyn Railway Company and the Open University owns OU Worldwide.

          1. StrangerHereMyself Silver badge

            Re: Profit

            Isn't that a loophole big enough to drive a truck through?

            1. Ian Johnston Silver badge

              Re: Profit

              The opposite, really. It ensures that the commercial side of things can't benefit from the various tax breaks (not VAT, business rates reductions and so on) available to the charity side. Think of it as a way of separating one overall organisations for-profit and not-for-profit operations.

          2. collinsl Silver badge

            Re: Profit

            And in a similar but not exactly the same way, the BBC owns BBC Worldwide which shows ads and makes profit, even though the BBC in the UK is forbidden from doing so.

          3. TimMaher Silver badge
            Unhappy

            Re: Talyllyn Railway Preservation Society.

            Reminds me of The Italian Job.

            Oh, wait.... Quincy Jones just died.

            Sad times.

    2. abend0c4 Silver badge

      Re: Profit

      increase agility and impact as we accelerate our work

      They've obviously been practising the lingo of the for-profit boardroom.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Profit

        "as we accelerate our work"

        Is accelerate a new buzzword. It was being used in one of my companies last meetings a lot.

        Do upper management go to buzzword seminars to get the latest ones.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    AI research or Thunderbird?

    Who to cut, who to cut?

    Which one is useful to real people versus which one sounds sexier when you go around advocating?

    Decisions, decisions.

    1. FIA Silver badge

      Re: AI research or Thunderbird?

      Which one is useful to real people versus which one sounds sexier when you go around advocating?

      It AI. In both cases.

      Sorry. Annoying I know, but true.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: AI research or Thunderbird?

        "AI" is useless Is not true artificial intelligence - it's just an overhyped buzzword.

        I won't buy anything that touts "AI", and that's not because I'm a luddite, it's because it doesn't actually exist.

        1. MrReynolds2U

          Re: AI research or Thunderbird?

          Indeed. The marketing term AI is, like all marketing-led initiatives in software, vapourware.

          1. FIA Silver badge

            Re: AI research or Thunderbird?

            Indeed. The marketing term AI is, like all marketing-led initiatives in software, vapourware.

            You're being too literal, AI isn't literally 'Artificial Intelligence', 'Artificial Intelligence' is the term people now use when they mean 'the modern field of machine driven statistical analyses and inference'. Don't dismiss a field because it's badly misrepresented.

            AI may be a horrible buzzword, but there's also advances in technologies behind it. Mainly massive advances in statistical inference due to the availability of large datasets and the distributed storage and processing needed to analyse them. These technologies aren't individually new, but the combination is only now becoming possible, and is providing tangible benefits.

            Just because a technology is vastly overhyped, and misunderstood by a lot of people, doesn't make the core tech useless. It just means the noise has to die down first.

            XML is a useful file format, but for a while it was 'the answer to every software solution'. This lead to a lot of people dismissing it's use out of hand because of the reputation it had got, without actually getting as far as considering if it was appropriate.

            No, AI isn't intelligent, and many of the uses are bullshit, but it does have several real world examples, where, like any new tool, it does make things easier, or possible.

            Culturally it's image and sound processing capabilities can be used for things like remastering old works where the source tracks don't exist, or convincingly and cheaply de-aging actors .(See the trailers for the new Tom Hanks film 'Here' as an example). It can also be used to more easily make fakes and knock-offs.

            Scientifically, it's massively helped in the search for new drugs or more effectively filter large datasets in fields like astronomy.

            Even personally, just being able to find that picture I knew I took by giving my phone a vague description is helpful, not life changing, but helpful. Being able to quickly touch up photos without being a Photoshop expert is helpful. Being able to take the grainy picture of my parents wedding day and upscale it using AI so it could be printed and framed was helpful. It wouldn't have made the celebrations any less, but it wasn't a bad addition.

            Sure, it's massively over hyped ('Significant breakthrough in statistic analyses due to the availability of large scale information, distributed storage and processing' doesn't sound nearly as sexy), and it's most definitely not 'Artificial Intelligence', but to dismiss the entire field due to idiots misusing it seems odd.

            The reality is, the good uses of AI you'll rarely, if ever, know about. They'll just make other things better (e.g., you may get a new drug, you may not know it was initially developed using AI, but you'll be happy if it makes you well).

            Or.... on the other hand... there's an email client.

  6. tony72

    Wait ...

    Royalties – largely fees from search engines – fell to $510 million

    So they're taking in roughly $500 million in royalties alone per year. And they have 120 employees. That's $4 million per employee per year. Where's all that money going? Are they burning it to keep warm?

    1. Guy de Loimbard Bronze badge

      Re: Wait ...

      Mad numbers when you distill them down.

      4 mil per head?

      I'm with you, exactly where is the money pit?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Wait ...

        Indeed. I'm not at all sad about these cutbacks at Mozilla. They sadly too long ago succumbed to wikipissification, where, having far more money than they actually needed to focus on the core tasks of developing and improving their software (yet failing to actually invest wisely on such), they decided to piss a lot of it against the wall on all of these mostly irrelevant side projects: not that internet privacy advocacy isn't very important, but there are plenty of other organisations very active in that area, and, let's be honest, can any of us think of a single useful thing that these Mozilla freeloaders (as opposed to the good privacy features in Firefox itself) have done in this regard that achieved any media or political, or even public, influence whatsoever? It's an awful lot of money to squander on a self-congratulatory blog (etc) that I'm sure virtually nobody actually reads or pays any attention to. Good riddance to the unnecessary fluff, and hopefully a Mozilla now re-learning the meaning of what it is to feel hunger will spend its resources much more wisely from now on.

        1. heyrick Silver badge

          Re: Wait ...

          "as opposed to the good privacy features in Firefox itself"

          What, you mean the ones they keep trying to break?

          [side note: their add-ons on mobile devices is a complete joke; the pre-screwup Firefox would happily run a lot of regular add-ons, but now there's a curated selection of, what, maybe 16 or so? and it's been that way for ages]

          "It's an awful lot of money to squander"

          You're looking at it from the point of view of Mozilla. Try the point of view of the source of the money. Thinking of the wads thrown by the chocolate shop, maybe it's a tax write-off? Maybe it's enough to keep the anti-competition guys off their backs? Probably counts as a good investment for them.

          "hopefully a Mozilla now re-learning the meaning of what it is to feel hunger will spend its resources much more wisely"

          When has that ever been the case? The high ups, used to lots of money, respond to less money by upping the prices, shoving in adverts, and carrying on as normal - like Netflix...

          1. Missing Semicolon Silver badge

            Re: Wait ...

            I wonder what proportion are whale-song-merchants or engineers?

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Wait ...

            "as opposed to the good privacy features in Firefox itself"

            What, you mean the ones they keep trying to break?

            That seems a bit unfair: I use Firefox because it's the least shit (used to be "best", but, yeah, well) browser for privacy, and it still has better privacy features than any other browser (admittedly, with a huge amount of help from NoScript and Cookie AutoDelete, and uBlock Origin, too). They're not the ones forcing people to prostrate themselves on the Manifest v3 rack, after all!

            Yes, "privacy-preserving ad measurement" is somewhat murky, but given how the mainstream web works, if we really have to, I'd rather have that (if it lives up to its promises) than all of the rest of the data reapists that we have to protect ourselves from.

            [side note: their add-ons on mobile devices is a complete joke; the pre-screwup Firefox would happily run a lot of regular add-ons, but now there's a curated selection of, what, maybe 16 or so? and it's been that way for ages]

            Mobile is sadly a different world, and if you're using Firefox on Google Android, you're already kind of hosed anyway. Other Android forks may be less bad, perhaps.

            "It's an awful lot of money to squander"

            You're looking at it from the point of view of Mozilla. Try the point of view of the source of the money. Thinking of the wads thrown by the chocolate shop, maybe it's a tax write-off? Maybe it's enough to keep the anti-competition guys off their backs? Probably counts as a good investment for them.

            You might not be wrong there. Sadly!

            "hopefully a Mozilla now re-learning the meaning of what it is to feel hunger will spend its resources much more wisely"

            When has that ever been the case? The high ups, used to lots of money, respond to less money by upping the prices, shoving in adverts, and carrying on as normal - like Netflix...

            Yeah… Which is why Firefox somehow needs to be wrested from the money-grabbing parasites "running" Mozilla and put under the control of an organisation which genuinely has web citizens' interests at heart and which will use the money (and user donations) only to develop the browser, and not any of the sideshow stuff. If only…

          3. Dan 55 Silver badge

            Re: Wait ...

            [side note: their add-ons on mobile devices is a complete joke; the pre-screwup Firefox would happily run a lot of regular add-ons, but now there's a curated selection of, what, maybe 16 or so? and it's been that way for ages]

            You must be holding it wrong, I can find 1,724.

            1. heyrick Silver badge
              Thumb Up

              Re: Wait ...

              Thanks, I needed to update the app. Nice to see all the rest of the add-ons are now available so I can install something to tell those cookie pop-ups to sod off.

        2. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Black Helicopters

          Re: Wait ...

          how much of that "fluff" was political donations in the recent USA election? Interestingly enough the announcement came a couple of days after the election was 'called' for the next US Prez...

          [3 guesses on which candidates the "allegedly laundered" money might have gone to, and the first 2 guesses do not count, but being based in SAN FRANCISCO with satellites in Beijing, Toronto, and Berlin should give a pretty big hint...]

          Moving to Texas or Louisiana or S. Carolina or similar would cut the employee living expenses in half, and because of "progressive" and state tax rates, Moz could reduce wages to 1/3 of what they were (for employees inside the US) without affecting anyone's net disposable income (after paying for necessities) - just sayin'. SF living expenses are some of the HIGHEST, ANYWHERE.

    2. Persona Silver badge

      Re: Wait ...

      Also $1.2 billion in financial assets, up from around $1.1 billion in 2021

      This is not a sign of a firm with financial problems, it might simply be a purge of non performers dressed up nicely to give them better job prospects.

    3. doublelayer Silver badge

      Re: Wait ...

      Mozilla the foundation had 120 employees. Mozilla the corporation, owned and paid for by the foundation, has an additional 750 or so. Do the calculations again and the numbers start to look a little more normal, especially as they're not using all of that revenue to pay each worker, some gets saved so they can continue to operate if that revenue drops again.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Wait ...

      well, there are employees, and there are over-heads... ;)

  7. Mockup1974

    Not really bad news if it means they actually focus on the products (Firefox, Thunderbird et al.) and not the "advocacy". The latter had some good research (like into car privacy) but a lot of it was just leftist, not tech-related "activism". Hopefully that's the part that goes away for good.

  8. Rui Mae

    Crumble? Wallow morelike

    As many have noted, Mozilla is awash with cash.

    They have a tsunami of $$$ flowing into their accounts every year from Google.

    They are, in effect 'sales reps' for them.

    Just for fun, I went through every single URL linkout to Google in Firefox's about:config setup.

    There are dozens of 'em, and I deleted and nulled every single one.

    Try it why don't you.

    Firefox *still* connects to them.

    'Privacy' my ears.

    1. Hubert Cumberdale Silver badge

      Re: Crumble? Wallow morelike

      Looks like the only references to Google in my config are for "safe browsing", which you can just turn off if you like.

      1. Rui Mae

        Re: Crumble? Wallow morelike

        Yes, the, ahem, 'safebrowsing' setiing, if enabled, will send *all* your tyoed URLs directly to Googoe - for, ahem, 'checking'.

        If you disbable it, then *some* of the contacts with Google will stop.

        If you use 'about:config' and seach for 'goo' you'll see all the URLs which firefox uses to contact 'em.

        At least you might be forgiven for thinking so. As I mentioned, if you disable 'safebrowsing' and remove every single Google contact URL, it will *still* contact them. (with whoever knows what detalls -- hard to tell, 'cos they're encrypted)

        If you want to see FF's voluminous outgoing connections, you can use 'about:networking' (with the auto-refresh option enabled).

        No, really, privacy my ears.

        1. Dave559

          Re: Crumble? Wallow morelike

          I thought that the Firefox implementation of Safe Browsing only checked the URLs locally within Firefox within the browser itself against a (regularly updated) list of unsafe sites, precisely so as not to tattle your browsing habits to Google (unlike certain other browsers)? Or did they sneakily and evilly change how it works at some point? :-(

        2. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Re: Crumble? Wallow morelike

          Yes, the, ahem, 'safebrowsing' setiing, if enabled, will send *all* your tyoed URLs directly to Googoe - for, ahem, 'checking'.

          No, it doesn't, it downloads a list every 30 mins... from Google, yes, but it doesn't upload your URLs. You can turn it off in settings.

  9. Tubz Silver badge

    "The Mozilla Foundation is reorganizing teams to increase agility and impact as we accelerate our work to ensure a more open and equitable technical future for us all,"

    If that one statement doesn't make alarm bells go off and big flashing sign saying "WE ARE SO FOOKED" and the bullshit-o-meter to maximum, then nothing will.

  10. MJI Silver badge

    I was going to donate but

    They removed a feature I use a lot, so stuff them.

    Waterfox still has it.

    1. Matthew "The Worst Writer on the Internet" Saroff

      Re: I was going to donate but

      What feature? (I'm assuming XUL, but I want to be sure)

  11. Inachu

    I am pretty sure the next browser revolution will still not be made by microsoft or google as there will always be a newcomer and or new better ideas that

    will not be beholden to advertisers and just hold themselves to true useability by the end user.

    When the big corps design things they always become the slow behemoth unwilling to change. Maybe the next browser might be called Agile or something like that.

    1. Steve Aubrey

      It's kinda Brave to hold that opinion . . .

    2. TimMaher Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: Agile.

      That name has already been taken.

      How’s about Scrum?

      Oh... wait...

  12. Matthew "The Worst Writer on the Internet" Saroff

    Maybe It's Just Me

    But maybe they should consider NOT paying their CEO a 7 figure salary?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Maybe It's Just Me

      well, it's either CEO or the increased agility by fireing staff, and you see which way the money's gone ;)

    2. CowHorseFrog Silver badge

      Re: Maybe It's Just Me

      Hey watch it, trump might just put you in jail for that.

  13. Randall Shimizu

    Mozilla's advocacy efforts seem non-existent....!! I cannot recall when the last time any ads or Firefox promotion

    Mozilla needs to focus on things that will help increase it's market share. Making remembered passwords would help a lot. Contributing code to no script would help a lot. Currently it is way to hard to tell which scripts to unblock.

  14. This post has been deleted by its author

  15. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

    Non-profits with fat cat bosses always make me suspicious.

  16. Jamiet

    Just read these comments to understand why

    Take a look at the comments above. It’s all mildly technical stuff that casual web users don’t give a shit about. The UI is crap, this bit doesn’t work, that bit is flakey, I needed to install x to get y working. You all no doubt work in tech and have an underlying interest in it. The majority of people don’t. That’s why no one gives a toss about Firefox apart from the tech community. In fact most users probably never heard of it let alone could be bothered to install it.

    I open my phone and safari works. I open my laptop and chrome or edge work. You’re lucky if any casual users even install Adblock. Most don’t even know the name of the browser they’re using, they just click a desktop shortcut…

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like