Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 17th Dec 2017 19:39 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones

For a long time, it was just setting the default search provider to Google in exchange for a beefy stipend. Later, paid links in your new tab page were added. Then, a proprietary service, Pocket, was bundled into the browser - not as an addon, but a hardcoded feature. In the past few days, we’ve discovered an advertisement in the form of browser extension was sideloaded into user browsers. Whoever is leading these decisions at Mozilla needs to be stopped.

Mozilla garnered a lot of fully deserved goodwill with the most recent Firefox release, and here they are, jeopardising all that hard work. People expect this kind of nonsense from Google, Apple, or Microsoft - not Mozilla. Is it unfair to judge Mozilla much more harshly than those others? Perhaps, but that's a consequence of appealing to more demanding users when it comes to privacy and open source.

Permalink for comment 652202
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Mozilla Vs Wikipedia (cost base)
by mistersoft on Tue 19th Dec 2017 10:39 UTC
Member since:

I wonder how much the Firefox wage and overheads bill is Vs the Wikipedia one.

Of course the latter will be less expensive head count and more server and bandwidth cost skewed but do we think the overall could be in the same ballpark.

As Wiki seem to make do (just) with their annual donation drive. Maybe Firefox could do something similar

Reply Score: 3