There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

The Google antitrust ruling could be an existential threat to the future of Firefox | Financials show 86% of Mozilla's revenue came from the agreement keeping Google as Firefox's default search engine

Mozilla has a close relationship with Google, as most of Firefox’s revenue comes from the agreement keeping Google as the browser’s default search engine. However, the search giant is now officially a monopoly, and a future court decision could have an unprecedented impact on Mozilla’s ability to keep things “business as usual.”

United States District Judge Amit Mehta found Google guilty of building a monopolistic position in web search. The Mountain View corporation spent billions of dollars becoming the leading search provider for computing platforms and web browsers on PC and mobile devices.

Most of the $21 billion spent went to Apple in exchange for setting Google as the default search engine on iPhone, iPad, and Mac systems. The judge will now need to decide on a penalty for the company’s actions, including the potential of forcing Google to stop payments to its search “partners completely,” which could have dire consequences for smaller companies like Mozilla.

Its most recent financials show Mozilla gets $510 million out of its $593 million in total revenue from its Google partnership. This precarious financial position is a side effect of its deal with Alphabet, which made Google the search engine default for newer Firefox installations.

The open-source web browser has experienced a steady market share decline over the past few years. Meanwhile, Mozilla management was paid millions to develop a new “vision” of a theoretical future with AI chatbots. Mozilla Corporation, the wholly owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation managing Firefox development, could find itself in a severe struggle for revenue if Google’s money suddenly dried up.

aggelalex ,

Everybody forgets that if chrome and chromium breaks away from Google because of this ruling, it’s going to have the same issues as Firefox, if not worse because it’s an arguably worse product. The ruling has been pronounced, but what will happen because of it is yet to be defined.

ShepherdPie ,

Why would Chrome/chromium break away? Isn’t this just about the search engine side of things? There’s no need to dump Chrome if all they need to do is drop themselves as the default search engine.

aggelalex ,
Tyfud ,

That’s not it at all. The issue is funding Mozilla. Having it as the default search engine is something google currently pays them for the right for. If the DOJ says that’s anti-trust practices, then Google stops paying Mozilla for that right, and 80% of Mozilla’s funding dries up overnight.

Scrollone ,

I feel like the real problem is Google paying Apple, since they’re both major players, not Google paying Mozilla. Firefox is not a major player at all (unluckily…)

Scrollone ,

I feel like the real problem is Google paying Apple, since they’re both major players, not Google paying Mozilla. Firefox is not a major player at all (unluckily…)

mke , (edited )

I believe I remember reading that Apple gets a share of the money from google searches by their users, too. That’s an absurd amount of incentive to sit on your ass and never try anything different.

I’ll try to add a source here, later.

Edit: it is now later:

An expert witness for Google let slip that the company shares 36 percent of search ad revenue from Safari with Apple.

Source - The Verge article

zecg ,
@zecg@lemmy.world avatar

I use only Firefox / Fennec, but fuck Mozilla. The obscene amounts they paid their CEO for stupid decisions, their shitty Pocket acquisition, regressions such as saving page as pdf simply disappearing on mobile. Let that rotten corporation die, the code is open source, someone will do a Gecko browser.

Supermariofan67 ,

I don’t think it’s quite as simple as someone just forking it. Realistically, a browser is an extremely complex piece of software that requires a lot of organizational effort to maintain, deal with security issues, etc. Pretty much every other piece of software on a similar scale I can think of (the kernel, KDE, Blender, Libreoffice) has some sort of organization behind it with at least some amount of officially paid work. All the major forks of Firefox or chromium follow quite closely to upstream for this reason (which is also why I’m skeptical of Brave’s ability to maintain manifest v2 long term, despite their probably genuine best efforts to do so).

I do wish that Firefox were developed and funded by an organization specifically dedicated to developing it. This could of course happen if Mozilla dies. But that’s going to require someone starting it, which is not at all a small or cheap task.

I could also see a future where Oracle or IBM buys it 😂🤡

Tja ,

Firefox enterprise edition, now with Lotus integration!

leanleft ,
@leanleft@lemmy.ml avatar
bighi ,

Mozilla gotta do something.

And based on their actions on recent years, that something is probably going to be: 1) firing more developers, and 2) increasing the compensation of their CEO.

zaphod ,

I’ll add:

  1. Buying some random companies
SirEDCaLot ,
  1. Change the UI and mess with plugins.
  2. More bloat in the install package that should be optional plugins.
Sabata11792 ,
  1. Offer advertisers user data.
SirEDCaLot ,

(for absurdly small amounts of money)

rob_t_firefly ,
@rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world avatar

Also forcing in AI somehow.

SirEDCaLot ,

Spend millions developing the AI with no real goal of what it will do or why it should exist… (Seems to be the current trend these days)

TheJack , (edited )

I have written this elsewhere many times and I know it’s extremely unpopular with FOSS crowd but truth needs to be told in here once again:

Everyday I use Debian, Ubuntu and Windows 10/11/Servers.

I’m an “IT guy” and have installed Firefox on literally hundreds of computers over a decade. I also install and setup extensions like uBlock Origin (with few comprehensive ad & malware blocking lists) , Dark Reader, Auto Delete Cookies, Crypto blocking and many more… but I have given up on Firefox 2016 onwards.

You could give Mozilla 10 billion per year just to develop Firefox but Mozilla can and will decide that they wanna spend only 1 or 10 percent of that money on actual Firefox development.

They will spend most of their money on anything but Firefox.

I mean I love world-peace, and cancer and aids free world too but with the money Mozilla get in a year, none of that gonna happen.

Mozilla couldn’t stop Russia attack on Ukraine; neither were able to solve Israel Palestinian conflict nor hunger and migration from African countries to Europe…

Then what are they spending money on?

What they could have done successfully is to spend all the money they made from Firefox towards Firefox development alone. But this is the thing Mozilla do not want to do and are open about it.

Now I don’t want Mozilla to stop developing Firefox either but because Firefox needs money from Google, Google must be allowed their monopoly on search… is utterly insane thinking.

If Mozilla cannot survive without Google monopoly, so be it.

I would say some open source/ Linux foundations/ Linux distros needs to fork Firefox and let Mozilla die peacefully.

MCasq_qsaCJ_234 ,

There is already the Ladybird project, which is a fork of the SerenityOS browser. We can say that it is a spiritual successor, although its license is more permissive than the Firefox browser.

greywolf0x1 ,

I think Servo, not the Ladybird project would be the rightful successor to Firefox

ProdigalFrog ,

Ladybird is in a prime position if they keep up their steady progress, I really hope they succeed.

PrivateNoob ,

I would be happy to seem them being open to use already working solutions, and not doing everything by themselves, since it just slows development speed by a lot, but it’s understandable.

mke ,

Once again, note that if you’re the kind of user who shuns Brave because the CEO says stupid stuff every once in a while, you’ll probably not look fondly upon Ladybird’s project lead and main developer being scared of pronouns.

See the issue on github.

If you don’t care about that, it’s an interesting project. Can’t say I approve, though.

Posting this to inform people and let each one decide what to do on their own. Don’t harass anyone, please.

Kecessa ,

How about… AI instead?

systemglitch ,

What improvements would you like to see through development?

TheJack ,

Semi-TLDR: Improvements under Mozilla? None.

They do not even want to develop a better (than Chrome) browser… they wanna “build a better Internet”.

Mozilla Foundation is making US$ 300-400 millions for many, many years (US$ 593 in 2021-22). If they could not develop a better Firefox all these years, it’s not happening __ with or without Google money __ ever.

When Mozilla /Firefox developers don’t even care/do not listen to feedback for simple things like ability to differentiate between active and inactive tab colors (why everyone that uses Firefox must play around with css to make Firefox usable?), expect them to develop something better or comparable to Chromium based browser is out of question.

Longer, rant version:

According to the Mozilla Foundation’s 2021–2022 financial statement, which is the most recent one published, $510 million out of its $593 million in revenue came courtesy of Google’s search payments.

Source: fortune.com/…/mozilla-firefox-biggest-potential-l…

The fundamental issues as I see are:

Complete lack of vision. Utterly worthless CEOs. Spending money on everything else but development of Firefox.

Especially when Firefox made them US$ 510 million in 2021-22.

Instead of spending millions on worthless CEOs, why not spend millions on developers so people would use Firefox on their own, instead IT guys like me forcing friends & family to use it.

I try to find annual cost of developing & maintaining Linux kernel but could only find articles and PDFs from 2008/2017 mentioning total worth etc but not actual annual cost.

Just as a thought experiment, imagine every Firefox (desktop, mobile etc) stops working all of a sudden… IMO, the world and internet will not come to a full stop.

Now imagine what would happen if every computer, server, router, switch, phone, tablet, stops working completely at once, that runs on Linux kernel.

So if Linux kernel can be developed for $510 million (assuming its below this mark), why can’t Firefox be?

I’m trying to figure out why US$ 510 million is not able to develop something better or comparable to Chromium based browsers.

Then there are issues related to lack of vision and no importance/urgency towards finishing a product.

Why only few extensions were allowed on Firefox mobile for many years without any explanations. Even developers of major extensions were not able to figure out the criteria to make their addon available on Firefox mobile.

What was the rationale behind it… Driving people away who were using Firefox mobile? If the product was not ready, do not fucking release it.

You need highly talented and additional developers to release product sooner… hire more, pay more. You got $510 mil just from Firefox.

I do not see any future for Firefox under Mozilla.

Only if some real big names (like Linux foundation etc) from FOSS world hard fork the Firefox, it might have a future.

I think, with real big name sponsors (pro-open source companies), search revenue will not be an issue.

IMO, the new organization (of course with big sponsors) of new fork must have one, single mission/goal… develop a great browser. New org must not have a mission statement written by MBAs:

“We’re building a better Internet”

Source: www.mozilla.org/en-US/mission/

Something people will use it on their own for its merit.

Aatube ,

I'm going to go eat now, so I'll just respond to the short version:

Yes, the CEO is overpaid, but I do not get you at all.

active and inactive tab colors

The colors are perfectly distinguishable? Whatever's active has a giant white background and border and shadow.

expect them to develop something better or comparable to Chromium based browser is out of question.

It's already better than Chromium. For example, not only is it a bit less resource-heavy, it also has features that allow uBlock Origin to function much better even before all the Mv3 stuff.

TheJack ,

Regarding tab colors, I’ll post screenshot from my Debian machine later tomorrow.

If something is better (or at least perceived as better) people will use it on their own. Default or not.

Examples: VLC player. Microsoft Office

Even if LibreOffice is free, why people are paying for Microsoft Office?

I have to spend 10 times more time on LibreOffice on Debian/Ubuntu than on Microsoft Office on Windows. Same with simple touch ups in GIMP vs Microsoft Paint.

Firefox market share in 2024: 3.36%

Source: backlinko.com/browser-market-share

Aatube ,

If something is better (or at least perceived as better) people will use it on their own. Default or not.

Wait until you learn about how monopolies work.

Most people are lazy. They don't switch until some major thing happens. VLC doesn't even have as much market share as you think it has; most people just use whatever comes with their system.

TheJack ,

On how many computers (not your own and not as a part of your job) you have installed Firefox yourself?

On how many phones you have installed Firefox personally?

How many calls you have attended to solve Firefox related issues?

How many childhood friends you have fought (verbally) insisting to use Firefox? Not just one time but for years.

You didn’t comment on usability points I’ve mentioned of GIMP or LibreOffice… Ohh that’s right, you could not.

As per your logic, how apple was able to sell even a single iphone when Windows Mobile was there already?

With a better product or some unexplainable magic?

That’s exactly what Chrome did initially. They built a better product, when apparently Mozilla/Firefox executives were in deep cryogenic sleep.

Why Chrome was able to beat internet explorer. Android was not a thing back then, hence no monopoly/no default installations.

Why people are paying many times more on apple/samsung phones when far cheaper options are available in hundreds?

Can you name a single country on earth, where only apple/samsung phones are allowed to sell… so they can be called duopoly/monopoly.

In August of 1997 Bill Gates invested US$ 150 million to save apple, at a time when sony had market cap of US$ 34.86 and apple had just US$ 1.68 billion.

So, why apple was able to beat sony (which was dominant player in portable music) in music player business with ipods and hence started its meteoric rise?

Sources:

cnbc.com/…/steve-jobs-and-bill-gates-what-happene…

companiesmarketcap.com/sony/marketcap/

companiesmarketcap.com/apple/marketcap/

What monopoly is at play with VLC player?

You didn’t mention any VLC installation numbers. Well it can be installed from many places on Android but here’s just one source, play store.

It’s over 100 million.

play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.videola…

As per your view, why people even use VLC?

What monopoly was at play when Firefox had 32.21 percent market share?

Source: enterpriseappstoday.com/…/firefox-statistics.html

blog.mozilla.org/…/firefox-surpassing-50-market-s…

What monopoly was at play when Google launched in 1998? Yahoo was there already. Why people chose Gmail, when Hotmail, Yahoo and many others were there already.

Why small, medium or large device makers use Linux kernel? I’ve never read Linus Torvalds paying billions to corporations.

I can go on but I have to catch a flight.

I’m not gonna argue with you anymore as I find your worldview incredibly narrow/selective.

I think this is why Mozilla is at 3.36 % marker share as Mozilla might be surrounded by people/publications that keep repeating, “Everything is fine, no need to change anything at all”.

Aatube ,

I do not like walls of text, so I'll answer half before I go to sleep.

If you exclude my own, then 0. I am not in tech support.

Re: GIMP & LibreOffice: I often use these and have trouble recognizing why people hate them. The latter defaults to a worse interface for some reason while tabbed view is hidden behind a simple and great toggle. I feel like the hate on GIMP is because people try to impose proprietary paradigms and do not realize that a "find action" mennu exist.

how apple was able to sell even a single iphone when Windows Mobile was there already?

Windows Mobile was never there. Additionally, iPhone had charisma and massive marketing. Charisma is the thing that propels many things good and bad. There's even an entire book about this called "The Charisma Machine".

Microsoft was also facing federal prosecution around this time for monopolizing. The result of the case was forcing Microsoft to advertise other browsers, including Firefox and Chrome and Maxthon and two others, all of which gained significant market share. This reset the market, and eventually Firefox emerged as the victor by a bit, and then Chrome beat that bit. If that court case didn't happen, we'd still all be using some kind of Internet Explorer.

Why people are paying many times more on apple/samsung phones when far cheaper options are available in hundreds?

Because they are paying for the far cheaper options. While Apple and Samsung attract with big bucks on marketing and charisma, the 3rd largest phone seller worldwide is Xiaomi, the budget option.

why apple was able to beat sony

I'm noticing a pattern here of you bringing up examples of leaps and bounds/cross-generational products. If someone builds a browser comparable to the iPod, I doubt we'd even call it a browser anymore. Unless you have a next-gen product, people will remain on the default option.

You didn't mention any VLC installation numbers. Well it can be installed from many places on Android but here's just one source, play store.

It's over 100 million.

These are rookie numbers compared to the number of android phones sold worldwide. Subtract that by 100 million, and that's mostly all people who use the default option.

Aatube ,

Diversifying into non-firefox stuff people can pay for is the way they try to get some extra revenue in case something catastrophic happens.

TheJack ,

I don’t think diversification gonna help with the mindset Mozilla Foundation have.

For my take on Mozilla, please read the reply I’ve just posted:

lemmy.world/comment/11639087

Thanks.

umbrella ,
@umbrella@lemmy.ml avatar

quite a good chunk of that goes to their ceo anyway.

vanderbilt ,
@vanderbilt@lemmy.world avatar

I am livid over her absolutely disgraceful management over Moz. When electron was building a de facto monopoly of Chromium on the desktop she made no moves to produces equivalent tooling. While Node grew into a behemoth she totally ignored it. The only thing that has come out of Moz in the last decade that mattered was Rust, and she’s already fired the Rust team. She is poison and serves only to suck up a salary that could fund development.

Mozilla needs its wake up call and to start being the underdog that makes something worth doing. With Manifest V3 and the anti-trust case on the horizon they have a fork in the road that will define what becomes of them. Hopefully she can make one good decision and it’ll be the right one.

umbrella ,
@umbrella@lemmy.ml avatar

thats ceos for ya.

i doubt they will escape from going through some bad times.

ocassionallyaduck ,

Chrome is the existential threat to FireFox.

Chrome is… Also Google.

Break up Google, make chrome competitive, and then we’ll stop seeing advertisers own the web standards and implement things like AVIF and ManifestV3, and instead embrace open solutions that favor users.

The JPEG XL vs AVIF thing still makes me mad.

sparkle ,

Tax/fine Google more and give the profits to competitors like Mozilla (as long as those competitors use the funds for Firefox)

BobGnarley ,

Sounds too European for the “land of the free”

sparkle ,

The land of the free? Whoever told you that is your enemy!

KingOfTheCouch ,
Buddahriffic ,

Specifically separate the browser side from the advertiser side. Get rid of that conflict of interest.

Lets_Eat_Grandma ,

This isn’t a new threat. This was always a threat.

The things that give google money are the reasons why we don’t want to use google. The things that firefox does to get money are basically just giving google the thing that makes them money.

todd_bonzalez ,
@todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee avatar

If Mozilla collapses for being too deeply intertwined with Google, I won’t mourn them.

Firefox is open source. We probably need to pass the torch to another maintainer anyway. Mozilla has been betraying their original mission a lot.

prof_wafflez ,

I’ll mourn them but now knowing this gross imbalance of funding it’s frustrating that CEO still has a job - and they will surely get a golden parachute while every other employee will just lose their job.

SamB ,

It’s strange how the Internet has been flooded by this news. Like leave Google alone or Firefox gets it. Very strategic use of the media might I say.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

This article doesn’t even bother to explain the connection. I don’t get it if I’m honest.

WldFyre ,

Its most recent financials show Mozilla gets $510 million out of its $593 million in total revenue from its Google partnership.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

Obviously. Why is that threatened by this antitrust ruling ?

WldFyre ,

United States District Judge Amit Mehta found Google guilty of building a monopolistic position in web search. The Mountain View corporation spent billions of dollars becoming the leading search provider for computing platforms and web browsers on PC and mobile devices

JackbyDev ,

Wtf, no? It’s saying “Hey, it’s great that you’re angry about Google search being a monopoly, but you need to be aware and ready that this ruling could further cement their browser monopoly.”

mlg ,
@mlg@lemmy.world avatar

Almost hoping this somehow causes browser support to fracture again.

It would be a pain for developers, but firefox and chrome using a gig of ram to view webpages and play videos is horrendous even with isolated design.

Also because I’m tired of google dictating the www by being a monopoly. It’s 2024 and jpegxl is being treated as ransomware as if enabling a god damn image format is too hard for web browsers. HTTP3/QUIC was 100% google’s invention that they just threw onto the web because no one else is developing this standard anymore. Manifest v3 is an explicit attempt to limit user control over web content. They even cornered the market along with Microsoft using gmail.

sparkle , (edited )

It would be a pain for developers, but firefox and chrome using a gig of ram to view webpages and play videos is horrendous even with isolated design.

That can’t be helped. Hard to explain well without knowing how much CS you’re familiar with, but basically in order to guarantee security/user safety you have to sandbox each tab (basically running an entirely separate container program for each tab which constantly checks for illegal memory access to prevent it from being exploited), all separately running their own interpreters for javascript/typescript, HTML, CSS, all of which are very resource intensive (mainly javascript/typescript). There’s not really any getting around this, no matter how well you design your browser.

Now, theoretically, with the growing popularity/advances in WebAssembly, and increase in usage of frameworks/graphics APIs like WebGPU, you could completely get rid of that sandboxing and completely get rid of the extremely slow javascript and html/css, in favor of completely using safe, compiled Rust programs. There’s active research using versions of WASM which only accept completely safe code (mainly safe Rust code) so using memory bugs generated from user error to access data in different tabs becomes impossible (aside from potential unaddressed bugs in Rust itself obviously) and you don’t need to sandbox each tab – the program practically sandboxes itself. Then you could potentially have browsers with thousands of tabs perform perfectly fine, assuming each of the websites is programmed competently.

But that’s not going to happen, because billions of users rely on HTML/CSS and JS, and it’s not pretty to transition away from. Getting rid of it would be like getting rid of pointy shoes, or getting rid of US Customary Units in the US, it’s just not happening no matter how much benefit it would bring to users. It’s not so much of a browser company issue as it is everyone ever would complain and potentially trillions of dollars of damage would be done. Also frontend web devs can barely punch out a “hello world” program in JS so there’s no way most of them are gonna be touching Rust or Haskell or something.

ipkpjersi ,

Also frontend web devs can barely punch out a “hello world” program in JS so there’s no way most of them are gonna be touching Rust or Haskell or something.

This is kind of true, but at the same time, I’ve also seen some pretty talented front-end devs fwiw.

ipkpjersi ,

If this hurts Firefox more than it hurts Chrome, that’s probably not a good thing for the health of the Internet. Google running the Internet unchecked would be bad for everyone.

MigratingtoLemmy ,

Will this make ladybird our only hope overnight?

LouNeko ,

I would stand behind the idea of splitting Google in it’s seperate branches with no shared assets. Basically Google search becomes is seperate corporation, Google AI, Google Webservices, Google Ad Services, YouTube. etc… This will hopefully undo some of the webs enshitification since now the essentially most powerful company on the web has to actually offer good product for profit instead of compensating bad product with more profitable one.

BrightCandle ,

That doesn’t produce any practical competition however. Some vertical splitting of the search business seems reasonable so we end up with multiple companies doing search out of it.

BradleyUffner ,

How exactly would you break up search? You can’t really do it geographically like the Bells.

Obi ,
@Obi@sopuli.xyz avatar

If if wasn’t American, I’d say nationalise it. Maybe at some point we’ll need some kind of international version of nationalising.

wanderingmagus ,

Have a UN agency run it?

jakob22 ,

In a perfect world

Omniraptor ,

played a neat game that’s basically a choose your own adventure where you play as president Bernie Sanders. It has this as a possible thing to do.

play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mollein…

nomadjoanne ,

Ah yes, cos that would lead to stellar leadership in Mozilla.

cupcakezealot ,
@cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

if you only do a monthly donation of $5 a month that’s still $60 a year and i urge you do do it. i have a recurring donation for firefox, thunderbird, and wikipedia because i believe they’re essential to the internet.

800XL ,

don’t forget archive.org!

WhatAmLemmy ,

I will not donate anything to Firefox until Mozilla guarantees my money will be spent on Firefox.

But yeah wikipedia, archive.org, etc. Give them your money.

rickyrigatoni ,

mozilla donations not going to firefox was probably the caveat to secure google’s funding. If google has to pull their bribes, mozilla might make donations go to firefox.

Or I could be completely wrong. We won’t know until we know.

sugar_in_your_tea ,

Yeah, I’ll donate to Mozilla the moment they actually apply my donations to Firefox. I’m not going to pay for them to buy ad companies, donate to other charities, or put on charity events. I honestly just want to fund Firefox development.

That said, I’m okay with not 100% of it going to Firefox, as long as the bulk of it does. I understand there’s a lot of admin overhead they need to cover and whatnot, and I’m fine with my money going to that. But it seems most donations don’t make it to Firefox dev.

BelatedPeacock ,

Mozilla doesn’t use their donations for Firefox, though that might change if they lose the Google money.

todd_bonzalez ,
@todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee avatar

i have a recurring donation for firefox, thunderbird, and wikipedia

So to Mozilla and the Wikimedia Foundation?

(weird that you list Firefox and Thunderbird as separate donations)

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines