Mozilla Contemplates a Future Without Google 200
An anonymous reader points out a story at Business Week which begins:
"Mozilla Chair Mitchell Baker says the Chrome browser is making the foundation behind Firefox rethink its reliance on revenues from Google. Since Google introduced its own Web browser, Chrome, the prospect that Google may not re-up the three-year contract set to expire in 2011 has Mozilla considering other search partnerships and ways to generate revenue, Baker said. 'There are probably other search engines that would pay us more money,' Baker says. Yahoo! and Microsoft's MSN, Google's two main search rivals, come to mind, but Baker says smaller search engines wouldn't be discounted should such a situation arise. One player Baker won't identify 'offered a blank check to replace Google,' she says. Set to launch on certain Nokia phones in late spring, Fennec is the first Mozilla browser optimized for mobile platforms. If it gains traction with enough handset makers and mobile users, Fennec could represent another way to draw revenue from a partnering search engine."
Objective to improve Firefox or promote Chrome? (Score:2, Interesting)
Yahoo? (Score:5, Interesting)
Either way, I think Google was a significant player in making Mozilla much more successful, especially with Firefox. They did promote it initially after all.
Re:Objective to improve Firefox or promote Chrome? (Score:3, Interesting)
Yahoo is just too incompetent as a company to leverage it (try to advertise on Yahoo, and you'll see what I mean).
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:3, Interesting)
"GMail will no longer be available for your browser after July 10, 2009. Download the latest Chrome browser for the best operating experience."
I'd probably get Chrome for Gmail and Google Voice and keep FF/Safari for other stuff. But 90% of GMail's target audience wouldn't.
Linux fork (Score:1, Interesting)
If the linux devs working on firefox were to seriously fork it, and get away from mozilla proper, so that any future releases had *nothing* to do with the windows version, and they renamed it so there was a distinct and clearcut difference when talking about "firefox", I'd pay for the thing yearly, some reasonable sum, say 10 or 20 bucks. I'd like a REAL *quality* open source browser that had nothing to do with a closed source operating system. For me, and probably millions of other people, the internet browser is "the killer app", and as such is worth something and worth support.
Re:Unlike Microsoft, Google doesn't have a record. (Score:3, Interesting)
Exactly. Google will do the profitable thing, which is to stay with Mozilla. It doesn't matter that Chrome now exists; Firefox most likely generates more revenue for Google than Mozilla makes from all sources combined.
There is nothing stopping Chrome and Google's deal with Mozilla from coexisting. As long as all web browsers lead to Google's search engine, Google will be happy. It is Internet Explorer they want to destroy. And they have been successful, Chrome apparently is stealing more users from IE (http://www.inquisitr.com/3031/chrome-internet-explorer/)
Re:IBM FireFox? (Score:4, Interesting)
MS Firefox is more likely.
MS has no inherent interest in propping up IE, which is a widely disliked, cruft-heavy bit of software that provides no revenue for them but batters their public image.
I think it quite likely that the big check that was offered to Mozilla came from Microsoft - and that they're thinking of taking it. In some ways, Firefox is a better fit for Microsoft than for Google: Microsoft doesn't rely on ad revenues, so the fact that it is much easier to block ads on Firefox than on Chrome isn't an issue for them.
If and when that happens, I look forward to watching a million heads explode.
Re:IBM FireFox? (Score:5, Interesting)
The major Linux distributions, like Red Hat, would probably chip in. Part of the reason that Linux has any desktop market share at all is because Firefox runs on it, and many major sites support it. If people couldn't access their banking sites, YouTube, etc. with their Linux browser, they would replace their Linux desktop with Windows. Or, in the case of netbooks, buy the Windows version instead of the Linux one.
Re:Enemy of my enemy is my friend. (Score:3, Interesting)
If Microsoft gives up IE, is it still Mozilla's enemy?
Re:Google Won't Let this Happen (Score:4, Interesting)
I can't believe Google will let the contract expire.
They won't. This is how CEOs of companies communicate with each other: through the media. These statements are for Google's benefit only. She is telling them: don't think about trying to use Chrome as leverage in our search agreements, because we have plenty of other options. Why the hell else would she make that "blank check" comment? It serves absolutely no other purpose than sending a message to Google.
Another example of this was Steve Jobs' "offhanded" remark that iPhones would never run Flash. He was sending Adobe a message: we don't need you, so don't even think of trying to charge us to put your "ubiquitous" runtime on our phones. We'll take it for free though, thank you very much.
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:2, Interesting)
Software with a 25% market share isn't going to disappear over night just because their main sponsor backs out. That 25% who use Firefox now are going to keep doing so, until something actively changes their mind.
Google can certainly do a good job of changing people's minds if it tries, though, and it's something Mozilla will need to be ready to fight against. While they won't disappear over night, they can still be beaten by the competition just as easily as anyone else.
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:3, Interesting)
What kind of cash burn are Mozilla going through anyway? Sounds like it must be high. Is there a way to significantly lower this figure? Is it mostly advertising?
Maybe the default search engine should be randomly chosen when a new window is created. If you want to be on the list, throw in some amount of money. The percentage of times your search comes up depends on your percentage of cash donated.
I also want to state that Mozilla should have user's best interests at heart and should be wary of Google's recent anti-privacy 'brow raising.