Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Mozilla Businesses Firefox The Almighty Buck

Firefox Fail: Layoffs Kill Mozilla's Push Beyond the Browser (cnet.com) 319

So much for Mozilla's quest to bring Firefox to new and different places. From a report on CNET: The nonprofit organization told employees Thursday that it is eliminating the team tasked with bringing Firefox to connected devices. The cuts affect about 50 people. Ari Jaaksi, the senior vice president in charge of the effort, is leaving, and Bertrand Neveux, director of the group's software, has told coworkers he will depart too. Mozilla had about 1,000 employees at the end of 2016. The layoffs greatly curtail the nonprofit organization's ability to make Firefox relevant again. Once a dominant choice for internet browsing, it has long been overshadowed by Google's Chrome. Mozilla tried to take the web technology powering Firefox to other devices, but struggled to get acceptance. Its shrinking influence comes at a time when more people are browsing the internet on their phones -- an area where Firefox is particularly weak.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Firefox Fail: Layoffs Kill Mozilla's Push Beyond the Browser

Comments Filter:
  • by DarkOx ( 621550 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:07PM (#53789975) Journal

    Mozilla probably should have focused on writing software and staying out politics rather than screw up their fund raising potential by going full on SJW.

    Let this be a lesson to companies and non profits a like, its really better to stay out of politics which are beyond your area of direct interest. You will only get hurt.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by JohnFen ( 1641097 )

      I don't think that Mozilla's political stances had anything to do with this. I think that it's more deeply connection to decisions that have been made about their product line.

      • by TodPunk ( 843271 )

        I don't think the original poster is correct in why he's saying what he's saying, but his point might have some merit to consider. Not nearly as much merit as he thinks, but some.

        Decisions about the product line and their decisions in politics could easily be branches of the same root. Corporate culture is really important, and we have several pieces of data that would lend some credibility to the idea that their culture is sacrificing some very important technical decisions for the sake of something else

    • by OhPlz ( 168413 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:14PM (#53790065)

      Yep. I wonder how much of this can be attributed to Mozilla forcing Brendan Eich out of the CEO position.

      • I personally know several people who switched from Firefox as their main browser as a result of the 'sacking'. It's interesting that a long- term inflection occurred at that point in the Firefox adoption curve. I'm sure that'a not the only factor in Mozilla's decline, but it surely can't have helped.

        Unsurprisingly, when I posted that observation on a few sites, I was downvoted into oblivion. It's hard to hear properly when your fingers are in your ears!

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I doubt that many people started or stopped using Fx over this issue. Most of the hemorrhaging happened as they started down the path of becoming a Chrome also ran. Why bother with Fx if it's just aping Chrome?

          • But the two things - Eich's departure and aping Chrome - are likely related and it's probably no coincidence that their market share fell away at the same time.

            When the entire executive of a business is focussed on internal politics, the business quickly becomes rudderless. When the outcome is the loss of an inspirational leader, the period of naval gazing is even more damaging. Combine that with serious annoying a proportion of your previously loyal customer base and your doom is sealed.

            Politics and busine

            • But the two things - Eich's departure and aping Chrome - are likely related and it's probably no coincidence that their market share fell away at the same time.

              But they didn't.

              FF started its precipitous drop in market share around the second quarter of 2009. The Eich stuff happened in 2014.

              • "FF started its precipitous drop in market share started around the second quarter of 2009"

                FTFM

          • Thats a fair point, he says typing into chrome. I still have firefox i actually have firefox nightly builds too.

            Somethings do work better in firefox than chrome and thats when i swop. Somehow Mozilla needs to make Firefox my default, the reason for nightly is because of new CSS features If I can get the latest CSS features and develop in firefox. I would probably switch. Currently its works in chrome also works in firefox. If web developers can deploy sites with the latest CSS standards and have them work i

        • by clonehappy ( 655530 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @05:12PM (#53790545)

          There's no explaining this to someone who has been indoctrinated into believing they always have the "moral high ground", whether or not they actually do.

          Most smart businesses will shit bricks if their CEOs, employees, representatives or anyone associated with their brand does ANYTHING, even in the slightest, to offend or otherwise piss off even small groups of their customers.

          Even if a group of people only represent small portions of your customer base, a 1-3% drop in your market share can equate to a tanking stock price, boards replacing executives, layoffs/downsizing, etc. But if you piss off roughly half of the country? Well that's OK because they're deplorable and you don't want such unwashed Nazi KKK member redneck backwoods uneducated stump-jumping hillbillies giving you money anyway.

          Then wonder why your customer base is steadily dropping, because those deplorable people are only a fringe minority of nutcases, right? Right?? Again, a smart business stays the fuck out of politics and tells their representatives to do the same. Notice you don't see the largest blue chip corporations playing this identity politics bullshit, at least out in the public view where everyone can see it. Do you see Verizon posting BLM nonsense? Do you see IBM letting their employees off to march against Trump? Even if those megacorps are the ones behind the scenes pulling the strings, they're smart enough to keep their fucking name off of it!

          Point being, it doesn't make sense from a business perspective to get involved in this kind of public virtue signalling or identity politics. The blue chip companies understand this, the new money trash think they're invincible. Any company that does (looking at you Silly Valley), should expect their stock price to drop and people to slowly migrate away from their products. You see, most people who stop using Mozilla aren't going on Twitter or Facebook to broadcast how wonderful of a person they are because they're boycotting a product. They just silently note to themselves that this company isn't worthy of their business and they move on. When you've got large portions of the population keeping track of these things in their heads and making conscious efforts to actually use products that support their beliefs (or at the bare minimum, keep their mouth shut about what they think), you'll see the death of these companies that only cater to the virtue signalling trendy hoards on social media while paying customers look the other way.

      • Approximately zero point nothing.
      • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @05:16PM (#53790583)

        Yep. I wonder how much of this can be attributed to Mozilla forcing Brendan Eich out of the CEO position.

        I don't think that was the cause of anything; rather, it seems to me that forcing Eich out was a symptom of a larger problem.

        For the past several years, Mozilla has seemed to let broad ideology drive its decisions. In addition to the Eich debacle, Mozilla refused to support h.264 for years - even after it was clear that standard had won the web streaming format war. Basically, the company's leadership seems to make decisions based not on what the customer wants or needs, but rather according to the philosophy of those leaders. Certainly they're free to do that; but customers are also free to not use their product when it becomes clear the customer isn't the company's priority.

        On a side note... am I the only one who can't figure out why the heck a web browser company needs 1000 employees?

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          I think Mozilla should have stood behind Mr Eich. His contributions to Free and Open Source software are enormous. I think it would have been better for all if a man who understood the technology, was the CEO.
        • For the past several years, Mozilla has seemed to let broad ideology drive its decisions.

          You do understand that this has been the express purpose and intention of Mozilla from day 1, right? It's not some kind of trap they fell into.

          I also commend them for fighting the good fight against h.264. It's too bad we lost, but that's the shakes sometimes.

    • by orasio ( 188021 )

      Mozilla's raison d'être is political. The project had tthe mission of keeping the web open.
      Software is the tool to push the politics forward.
      It did succeed for a few years, and now it's over.

      It's no surprise that now that Firefox is becoming irrelevant, Chrome is becoming more closed, forcing DRM down your throat and all.

    • > Let this be a lesson to companies and non profits a like, its really better to stay out of politics which are beyond your area of direct interest.

      In my experience, this is true. I damaged my business by talking about politics on message boards where my customers gather.

      On the other hand, I'm a member of a non-profit which has as one of their core principles that they stay out of politics and advance no particular opinion on controversial issues. The organization focuses on their purpose, not getting di

    • Mozilla probably should have focused on writing software

      They're writing Servo all right. Which is a step in the right direction no matter where you want the browser to run.

    • by Nemyst ( 1383049 )
      Mozilla's problems date back from well before any of this political bullshit. It all started when they lost track of what made Firefox popular and decided to ape Chrome more and more (and to cock up when they didn't ape Chrome). Guess what? When your browser just clones another one, people will have a tendency to migrate to that other one.

      Oh, and Mozilla being unable to anticipate and properly react to the mobile market has crippled them hard. Having a unified experience across platforms with bookmark/his
  • The layoffs greatly curtail the nonprofit organization's ability to make Firefox relevant again.

    I'm pretty sure that Mozilla has spent the last few years demonstrating that they lost that ability long before these layoffs.

    • by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @05:00PM (#53790429) Journal

      I'm pretty sure that Mozilla has spent the last few years demonstrating that they lost that ability long before these layoffs.

      Turns out Mozilla can't compete against the world's largest advertiser who push chrome at very opportunity. And they're double fucked on Android because while technically you can install a second browser, now the google search bar always opens links in Chrome (with a well hidden option to then open in firefox) even with Firefox set to the default browser.

      They're locked out of Apple and they're completely marginalised by Google on Android and massively out advertised and Microsoft is pushing their own browsers on Windows. The fact they have any market share at all is a testament to how great a browser it is.

  • garbage article (Score:5, Insightful)

    by buswolley ( 591500 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:19PM (#53790111) Journal

    I use Firefox almost exclusively and I am very happy with it.
    I don't see how this article is relevant to Firefox anyway. Who was going to use firefox on a TV, or toaster IoT anyway?
    THis is Mozilla being smart so they can put more resources into the projects that matte more, including firefox for mobile and desktop.

    • Re:garbage article (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Nunya666 ( 4446709 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:30PM (#53790207)

      I use Firefox almost exclusively and I am very happy with it. I don't see how this article is relevant to Firefox anyway. Who was going to use firefox on a TV, or toaster IoT anyway? THis is Mozilla being smart so they can put more resources into the projects that matte more, including firefox for mobile and desktop.

      Good for you, but you are in the minority.

      Mozilla signed Firefox's death certificate when they decided to abandon their developers and their users by turning FF into a clone of Chrome. Announcing the intentional breaking of add-ons that have millions of users was downright ignorant. Completely redesigning FF so that longtime developers essentially have to learn a new programming language was also ignorant.

      Mozilla will die because of their stupid decisions. Unfortunately, only the users will suffer from it. Ignorant management has already been paid, and they'll just move on to another company.

      • Sadly, I agree with you.

        I still use Firefox, as I have done for over a decade now, primarily because -- despite its flaws -- it lets me do things that no other browser does, and it's the one I trust the most in terms of privacy (although that trust is not absolute). The extension changes sure look like they will kill features important to me, either by making them technically impossible or by making things painful enough for developers that they won't develop for the platform. If that turn out to be the cas

        • Re:garbage article (Score:5, Interesting)

          by steveg ( 55825 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @05:12PM (#53790543)

          Exactly. All this talk of politics is a red herring. Firefox is becoming irrelevant because they have abandoned the features that make them valuable and embraced features that really don't matter. Or are annoying.

          Firefox is still my browser of choice, *despite* all the "improvements" they've made over the last few years. To borrow a phrase from long ago, "It sucks less." At least compared to all the rest.

          There are no good browsers anymore. Firefox used to be one, but they're driving the "It sucks" bandwagon as hard as they can, and by the time they finally vanish, there will be nothing left to mourn. For now, they're the best of a bad lot.

          Their politics is fine. Good, even. It's their software choices that are the root of their downfall.

          • If you want FF the way it used to be? Use Pale Moon [palemoon.org], want FF with a newer UI and some whiz bang features added? Use Comodo Icedragon [comodo.com]. That is the nice thing about today, we have real choices and aren't stuck in the old "Netscape VS IE" duopoly where you had to choose the least sucky of 2 sucky choices.
        • by gnunick ( 701343 )

          I don't use Firefox on my mobile devices, though, because it just plain works poorly for me.

          I also use FF (almost) exclusively for browsing on the desktop, but unlike you I do use Firefox on my Android phone. For me it definitely looks and works better than Chrome. But I never use FF for UI development anymore. The dev tools suck, and even just using them slows the whole browser down to the point it's unusable, unless you only have one or two tabs open.

          Chrome definitely wins the contest for the best developer's browser. But all the better... I use superfast Chrome for development, and when it cras

          • by jemmyw ( 624065 )
            Funnily enough I just switched from using Chrome to Firefox dev edition for development because Chrome kept being slow and doing weird things with my console logs.
            • by gnunick ( 701343 )

              Interesting. Well, that's all the more reason we can't afford to let Chrome become the only browser left standing. Monopolies kill innovation and progress.

              Personally, I just don't see why anyone would prefer Chrome over Firefox for everyday browsing. I'm not saying it's bad. It works great in my experience. Each browser has its pluses for developers and/or power users. But I'd say that neither browser is markedly better for the average user.

              If not for the fact that Google keeps trying to shove it down every

          • For me it definitely looks and works better than Chrome.

            I've never used the mobile version of Chrome, so I can't compare to that. But FF on my phone is borderline unusable -- it's incredibly slow, and absorbs an untoward amount of system resources. I get the impression that my experience isn't typical, but honestly, the browser I do use (Boat) works well enough that I can't be bothered to try to get FF to work better.

            I also use Thunderbird exclusively as an email client.

            As do I. I am continually amazed that there isn't any desktop email client that even comes close to the venerable old T-Bird.

      • Mozilla signed Firefox's death certificate when they decided to abandon their developers and their users by turning FF into a clone of Chrome. Announcing the intentional breaking of add-ons that have millions of users was downright ignorant.

        You;d have as many if not more saying exactly the same if they didn't break the extensions though. The old extension model was heavily tied to a browser architecture that has no future. It was either break extensions (and people get mad) or get completely left behind tec

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Dagger2 ( 1177377 )

          It's actually not very tied to anything. Bootstrapped (restartless) extensions are just a Javascript file with two functions, "startup" and "shutdown", that have a reference to an object that allows access to the rest of the code in Firefox. Firefox's Javascript support certainly isn't going anywhere.

          (Extensions that require a restart are loaded via XUL overlays, and so are somewhat tied to that particular XUL feature, but it's not like you couldn't port that to HTML.)

          Of course, it's true that much of the e

    • I'm not sure why you would want to use anything beyond a $0.04 PIC on a toaster. It's not like I need to check my toast's status while I'm on vacation in Bali.

      This really goes for anything in my house, and since I'm a nerd and an engineer, I've had the ability for two decades to almost trivially do it if I wanted. In fact I was really into doing stuff like this in the 1990's, but beyond the 'wow, look what I can do' factor it was always cumbersome even when it might have been handy which honestly was nev

      • To be honest, I'm not sure why you'd even need a $0.04 PIC. None of them fancy computerized toasters seem to toast bread any better than the $10 electromechanical ones.

    • I use Firefox almost exclusively and I am very happy with it.

      Have an internet cookie. I for one think that there is zero reasons to stick with it now. Every reason most people switch to Firefox is gone. They shat on their core, they shat on their users, and the idea that to expand marketshare by taking something that by-n-large people have shown they aren't happy with to new platforms is just the pinnacle of stupidity.

    • 100% agree. I pretty much love Firefox... it's been the best Browser for a long time in my opinion. And I use them all to some extent every day for various reasons. Firefox is my favorite still. I can't ever trust microsoft or google with my info anyway, so that is a big consideration.

  • by jfdavis668 ( 1414919 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:19PM (#53790113)
    All our business computers were just converted to Firefox.
  • by Thelasko ( 1196535 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:20PM (#53790123) Journal
    I use Firefox on my mobile devices because it allows much better ad blocking than Chrome. However, even with the ads, Chrome is much faster. Fix the speed problem, and it's still an excellent browser. However, it seems like Mozilla is focused on everything but speed.
  • by Artem Tashkinov ( 764309 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:26PM (#53790169)

    high ranking Mozilla employees don't understand one very important thing about Firefox: it was this popular because it was powerful with its add-ons/extensions.

    Throughout its history Mozilla has made changes to Firefox which rendered thousands of add-ons broken, they changed its look and feel without giving an option to go back, and limited the user's freedom in other ways.

    You don't fuck with your user if you want the user to keep using your product. Yet Mozilla is frightening us with the complete abandonment of XUL which will kill Firefox's most powerful add-ons which are able to do the things which WebExtensions API are unsuitable for. Even recently introduced e10s rendered four of my add-ons dead - they are marked "enabled" yet don't work at all.

    It's a sad story really. Once a powerful web browser, now a weak shadow of itself.

    • I abandoned Mozilla/Firefox lost me when they lay in bed with Microsoft. To me, that was it, and I have never gone back. I also don't regret it one bit!

    • Just to be clear, abandoning XUL wouldn't kill Firefox's current extension model. Mozilla killing Firefox's current extension model is what's killing it. The current extension model does not depend fundamentally on XUL, and would work fine in a world where the browser UI had been migrated from XUL to HTML.

    • by CrashNBrn ( 1143981 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @05:45PM (#53790841)
      Same thing happened to Opera, when it switched to Blink, and they released a browser that couldn't even create or manage bookmarks - until 18 months later.
      [Usage Share Data from Wikimedia visitor log analysis report]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
                 Opera
                Desktop/  TOTAL
      2011/07   3.32%     4.22%
      2012/07   3.00%     4.50%
      2013/07   2.06%     3.24%     - 4 months after Blink
      2014/01   1.51%     2.83%     - 9 months after Blink
      2015/03   0.65%     2.06%     - 24 months after Blink
  • by orev ( 71566 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:26PM (#53790175)
    This was obviously a mistake from the beginning, and everyone knew it. Mozilla has been acting like a fat and happy company rolling in cash instead of a company in a competitive marketplace. Firefox is slow and crashy and I'm almost at the end of my rope with it, and it's very frustrating for them to be constantly distracting themselves with stupid projects. Firefox OS? Rust? Some IoT thing? Come on Mozilla. You actually thought you could make a dent in mobile OSes when even Microsoft couldn't? Do you really think you *need* to invent a new programming language just to write a better browser? Do you really think you have any relevance /at/ /all/ in the z-wave motion sensor in my house? Wake up or die.
    • FYI Mozilla C-levels issue themselves ~$500k salaries. It is this kind of "non-profit". All they do is not to get more users, but more funding and sponsors.

    • Rust?

      If you think Rust is a stupid project, then you haven't been paying attention. I'm a huge fan of C++ and yet browser exploits are still huge, because they're not written in a memory safe language. More and more cores are coming every year still and yet no browser offers parallelism finer grained than per tab.

      Rust is the only thing with a shadow of a promise to tackle either of those two problems. So the only reason for thinking rust is a "stupid" project is if you don't actually believe they are probl

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:27PM (#53790183)

    I'm not donating money because it looks really bad when a CEO who gets paid an excessive amount starts begging for money. If they reduced their pay to reasonable amounts there would be money for more staff and more donations

  • Diversity (Score:5, Insightful)

    by itamihn ( 1213328 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:27PM (#53790187) Homepage

    I use Firefox on my laptop and my phone because diversity is good. If everyone used Chrome, we would have a monopoly again (anyone remembers IE?).

  • Stupid (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:28PM (#53790193)

    Mozilla is run by the most retarded people I have ever seen.

    1.Why do they even have a thousand employees? What the hell are they doing? They are supposed to be making a web browser, not engaging in political advocacy. You don't need a thousand people to maintain a web browser.

    2.Every few years, Mozilla completely changes the interface and dumbs it down for no particular reason other than to be hip because their software designers are a bunch of yuppies. And it usually involves removing functionality in the process.

    3.Driving away Brendan Eich was asinine and once again demonstrates the lack of tolerance of the left and the fact that SJWs have infested Mozilla. Brendan Eich is a technical genius and he is responsible for many of the core technologies of the web (e.g. Javascript) and you are going to drive him away over some insignificant issue because, god forbid, someone has a political opinion different than your own?

    3.Later this year, Firefox will remove support for extensions. In their place will be a WebExtensions API which is only marginally more powerful than what Chrome can do. Many existing addons will never work under the restrictions that system places because WebExtensions offers no way to do low level customization. Several developers of prominent addons have already announced that they will stop development as a result.

  • STOP USING CHROME! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:31PM (#53790215)

    For the love of God, people, stop using Chrome, Chromium, and all other Chrome derivatives! Google, erm, "Alphabet", has too much influence so as it is. Chrome is nothing but their way of leveraging influence on web standards. We let a company get a monopoly on the web browser before and it was a unmitigated disaster. We cannot let it happen again. Google might be Microsoft but it would be just as bad for the web in its own way. And all talk about "but but but Chromium is free... blah blah blah" is non-sense. Without the backing of Google, Chromium development would freeze up and the browser would die a slow security hole death.

  • by JWW ( 79176 )

    One has to wonder if Mozilla is lacking for leadership at the CEO level, and that maybe better leadership could have averted this crisis....

    • I think it's absolutely a leadership problem, but I'm not so sure it's at the CEO level. The problems I see has been in terms of technical leadership.

      Of course, a CEO in peak form would recognize a technical leadership issue and take steps to fix it, but still...

  • Well, that was embarrassing...

  • by cb88 ( 1410145 ) on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:39PM (#53790275)
    At blocking ads on my phone. No other mobile browser allows this. In fact many firefox extensions run in the mobile version...
    • At blocking ads on my phone. No other mobile browser allows this.

      Ghostery [google.com] would like a word.

      • by cb88 ( 1410145 )
        Ghostery is effectively a wrapper around the default browser as far as I can tell... which means you'll be browsing with an old out of date browser on most phones.

        I certainly doubt they built a browser that doesn't use the built in webkit in under 2.5Mb.

        So in that sense no... it isn't a "real browser" in the same sense that Opera Current/Vivaldi aren't real browsers... they're just skins on the built in or bundled webkit... if it bundled a recent webkit ala Chrome it wouldn't be so bad but it doesn't look l
  • Well, this is what dicking around, going every which way instead of concentrating on their core product(s) has got them.
    Worse still are their plans to neuter their own browser to make it more Chrome-like.

    Let's hope they can attract people who actually know what the fuck they're doing and want to rescue Firefox from the smoking ruin it's threatening to become.

  • Something they did - I am not sure what absolutely killed performance. Turning off "Electrocution" seemed to help somewhat, but I am gradually migrating to Chrome as I just can't stand things the way they are now.

  • "Trying to power a low end device with Firefox, is more like trying to modify submarine to fly.

    HTML and JavaScript were never designed for this purpose and it shows. After the browser wars, JavaScript has proven to be bloated and resource intensive. 100x slower then native apps. This is a stupid idea and doomed to fail."

    -Me on Slashdot Sept 15, 2012

    https://slashdot.org/users2.pl... [slashdot.org]

    Why is this so obvious to outsiders, yet so hard for Execs to see with 6 figure salaries?

  • There's a nonprofit Mozilla foundation that takes in about $20,000,000 and there's a Mozilla for-profit company that takes in about $350 million each year (it seems mostly from Google paying to set the default Firefox search engine.) And the nonprofit owns the for-profit company, which makes IRS tax accounting interesting. And that income should be enough to keep 1,000 employees paid, even in Mountain View, and even with the top three execs at the company getting paid about $1M each.
    • Google hasn't paid Mozilla since 2014. Firefox's default search was switched to Yahoo. In 2015, default search was switched to Bing.
  • If they reported that they would drop the "connected devices" firefoxOS, the team would be lay off or relocated to other projects... probably downsize is the best options for the team technical skills (probably more embedded/HW related)

  • WTF are 1000 people doing working on a browser?!
    Mozilla needs a quick kick in the ass to get back to their core product, focus on their actual users and dump the bloat that no one wanted or even asked for.

  • Its shrinking influence comes at a time when more people are browsing the internet on their phones -- an area where Firefox is particularly weak.

    interestingly the phone is now the ONLY place I use firefox, the desktop version is a waddling bloated security nightmare. The mobile version at least doesn't suck as much as Chrome.

    • And you think the mobile version isn't a security nightmare...because it has a different GUI?
      • nope, I just don't care about the security on my phone, especially for the infrequent times I use a browser on it. I have nothing of value on it.
  • I actually prefer Firefox on Android to other browsers on that platform, but its "weakness" is that Chrome comes pre-installed with virtually every Android device now, so - like Linux vs. Windows on the desktop - Mozilla is fighting a lost cause really. It's quite shocking that after all these years, Android Chrome *still* doesn't have extensions, whereas Android Firefox has had them for a very long time now. Apart from the obvious ad blocker extensions, I like "Phony" to force all sites to their desktop ve

  • Make firefox and thunderbird great again.
    And ignore stuff like IoT or Firefox OS (they ignore it since some time now), etc.

    The fail is to lay off people and then remove the additional projects.
    Keep the people, make them fix the thousands of bugs in the bugtracker. Firefox will finally be the best browser again.

  • it was called Netscape. Typing it this on 51.0.3 right now. Add-ons are what make it great and always my first choice.

    "Normal" people I show the adblocking to including playing youtube videos without commercials are usually amazed.

    Fuck Chrome. It hasn't even been a week since the last bullshit Google-lets-you-know-who-is-really-in-charge change to their spyware [slashdot.org]

If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker to come along would destroy civilization.

Working...