3

Currently, Google pays Firefox's bill by having them set their default search engine to Google.

This will no longer be when Chrome is in the hands of another party. DOJ is currently advocating for this forced sellout.

So will Firefox be no more after that?

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Godort@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Google search is not the same thing as google Chrome. Search still sees a benefit in paying to be the default search provider in Firefox.

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Part of the DOJ ask is that the Google search business should be enjoined from paying for preferential default status on other platforms.

They want to prohibit the Firefox arrangement as part of the anti trust matter.

[-] Squizzy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Which is justified in all fairness, firefox is too dependent on monopoly for support to be competitive going forward

[-] dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The main reason of Google's financing is probably because they don't want to be accused of a browser monopoly. So this will stop, leaving Firefox with very little income.

I'm not sure if the reason you said is enough for them to keep paying.

Google search is not the same thing as google Chrome

I never said that

[-] ElPussyKangaroo@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Google pays Firefox to have Google Search as the default search engine. Chrome is not the major money maker. It doesn't even earn any money.

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

It doesn't even earn any money.

Neither do the rotisserie chickens at the store. Or Costco's $1.50 hot dog and soda combo.

Chrome isn't intended to make money, it's a loss leader.

[-] VerPoilu@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 months ago

Google has been paying Firefox since before Chrome existed.

[-] jaycifer@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Even if Google stopped paying Mozilla, the organization has enough in savings to operate for several years. That’s plenty of time to cut back on spending and find other revenue sources. My only concern would be that they cut back on Firefox development rather than what I would consider a side project.

[-] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

The majority cost of Firefox is engineering.

Any cutbacks will negatively affect the ability for Firefox to keep up and will probably start a slow decline towards collapse and irrelevance.

[-] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago

It probably won't die in the next decade...

But also Internet standards are only getting more complicated... Eventually there will be no browsers left, and we'll have shifted to an app-only paradigm. Isn't that exciting.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I don't follow your logic. It'll be even more important for them to get exposure through Firefox if they lose control of Chrome, not less.

[-] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 1 points 3 months ago

Quite the opposite. The death of Mozilla Corp will drive the community to greater heights. I expect to see Floorp, Librefox, and even Basilisk/Pale Moon having a voice in the conversation of post-MozCo Firefox.

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I've got to say, Librewolf has been a breath of fresh air. It even is compatible with Firefox sync with a little poking around.

[-] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I switched to it some time ago. Took a while to find all the dials to turn to get some (trusted) sites to work, but the fact that it’s free of telemetry and has Ublock makes it worth it.

[-] deafboy@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

You know what awaits us at greater heights? The state sponsored APT groups and ransomware operators.

I just can't see how cutting the funding for both chrome and firefox is going to make the web a better place.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago

Chrome funding would shift, not necessarily stop. And having a dirty source of funds as your primary source is fundamental corruption. Even if works now, the future is bleak.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 0 points 3 months ago

They were doing fine before they started taking money from Google, I'm sure they'll do okay after they stop.

[-] Metz@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Is there even a "before"? The very first release of Firefox was in 2004. Google started paying Mozilla in 2004. The only time there was no funding from Google was 2014-2017. In that time Yahoo took over that part.

There was however the 2 year period from 2002 - 2004 when Firefox was still "Phoenix" which was mostly funded by AOL.

To my knowledge, there is not a single moment in the life of Firefox when it has had to get by completely without external funding. And 95% of that time, it was Google.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 0 points 3 months ago

Mozilla existed before Firefox.

[-] Metz@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Well kinda. The Mozilla "Project" goes back to 1998. The Mozilla "Foundation" to 2003. As said, Phoenix was released in 2002 and then renamed to Firefox in 2004.

But in that 4 years they worked on the Netscape code to make Phoenix, they were as well funded by AOL, or not?

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago

Currently, Google pays Firefox's bill by having them set their default search engine to Google.

This will no longer be when Chrome is in the hands of another party. DOJ is currently advocating for this forced sellout.

Why does Alphabet not controlling Chrome mean Alphabet would suddenly stop paying Mozilla to make Google Search the default search in Firefox? That's totally unrelated.

(Saying Alphabet instead of Google to help differentiate between Google and its products.)

[-] olafurp@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

It's another clause in the anti trust case that paying FF and Safari for being the default search engine is anticompetitive

[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev -2 points 3 months ago

Then say that in the post lmao

this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
3 points (71.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

38666 readers
483 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS