• douglasg14b@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Firefox is a commercial product. Is it not?

    They need to make money so that they can fund hundreds of engineers salaries to keep building it and maintaining web standards operability.

    And somehow do this while keeping off with Chrome who has a team 4-5x their size.

    Trying to figure out a way to be independent of Google while competing with Google is a tough nut to crack. If they can’t sell it and they can’t get enough donations, then then it comes down to partnerships and advertising.

    • blind3rdeye@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Firefox is a commercial product. Is it not?

      Well, it’s partially a matter of semantics. Perhaps different people have different understandings of the word ‘commercial’. For me, I’d say that Firefox is not something a user pays for. It’s existence is not about making a profit, or strengthening a business, or anything to do with money at all - and therefore it is not a commercial product.

      I agree that the engineers should be paid, and that browser development is very difficult. But nevertheless, Firefox historically has not been about maximising a profit - or even making any kind of profit at all. (Although it does seem Mozilla leadership are looking to change that.)