1288
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
1288 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
59381 readers
1204 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You could have said the same for Internet Explorer some years ago, and they got their lunch eaten despite being free AND the default owned by a monopoly
The difference is that Google had the capital and a monopoly itself. Mozilla doesn't have shit.
Except and arguably better product in the browser space?
Both Mozilla and Opera had better browsers.
Mozilla has a regular income from Google.
Yeah, they're pretty much owned by Google, thus not a competitor.
Google paying Firefox explicitly to make Google the default search engine. That doesn’t mean they own Firefox in any way shape or form. Firefox routinely makes anti Google decisions, and acts against googles interest. It’s pretty clear they aren’t googles bitch.
Most of the revenue of Mozilla Corporation comes from Google (81% in 2022). They have influence.
The excuse of search engine funding is a fig leaf for the US and monopoly laws.
Google pays every browser they can to make Google the default search engine. Including direct competitors, and companies that have a direct interest in going against Google. Companies like Apple, who butt heads with Google regularly.
That doesn’t mean they have influence.
Agreed. Those other companies don't rely on Google for 80% of their income. That's where the influence occurs.
Can you point to an example of Mozilla bending the knee, in the slightest, on a subject Google would want them to have a different opinion than normal on?
https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/a-dangerous-conflict-of-interest-between-firefox-and-google/
The first explicitly states its conjecture. In reality, it’s much more likely in my mind that Mozilla is not well suited to fast paced changes like the recent YouTube cat and mouse Adblock saga. Imagine if you were waiting not for an extension update, but a browser update.
The second isn’t even about Mozilla. They rely on Google for the anti phishing list. Is there a free and open alternative? I legitimately can’t find one. I can find paid alternatives, but I doubt users would be willing to pay.
I believe these are reasonable examples of slightly bending of Mozillas knee to Google, as requested.
The second one isn’t even Mozilla…
Mozilla chooses to implement Google's phishing list.
The alternative being?
A non Google supplier
Such as?
Like, you’re pretty clear about not using Google. The question is, what service exists that is within their ability to pay (free)?
“They shouldn’t use google” is a fine argument, assuming it’s possible to stop using google without incurring huge fees and/or removing the functionality completely.
Why assume they won't pay?
Even for free they could support something like openphish.com and help it grow and maybe outclass Google.
The point is that we don't know the details of their agreement, nor the unwritten rules to guarantee continued support.
openphish.com would very likely buckle under the load. They’ve had ~2 million urls per day in the past seven days. There are 181 times that many users of Firefox.
Again, I get where you’re coming from. There’s just literally no viable alternative.
Maybe there's no viable alternative because Firefox users are not supplying the demand.
However, rather have the current arrangement than no Firefox. But I suspect that Mozilla are not as free from Google as they would like to be.
However, if Google decided one day to yank 80% of Mozilla's income...
Yeah that would be problematic to an extent. But I doubt that’ll happen, and if it did I’m sure it would continue just in a slower/reduced capacity.
Yes but Internet Explorer had massive issue, nowadays it’s Firefox that has compatibility issue, doesn’t have a platform where its default (Microsoft has windows/edge, android/chrome, iPhone/safari) and no meaningfull advantage on the other.
The cards are stacked against it, if only they could use Google money to get some advantage, like a better design. Right now if I open Firefox there is 3 row of sponsored clickbait articles. The reason I paid money for Mac is because I was fed up of the very same bullshit on windows, make something lean, sleek that works well and people might use it but here it’s a kind of dinosaur software that is even filled with sponsored articles.