> "Funding" makes it sound like Google is doing this out of charity, or like Mozilla is a pre-profit startup that needs outside investment. Neither is true.
I didn't even imply that, so don't suggest that I did. It's dishonest, and rude.
> Google isn't "funding" Mozilla; it's a customer of Mozilla. Their search traffic payments aren't charity or venture capital; they are revenue.
Yes. I know this. My concern is this customer accounts for, what, 80% of the total revenue? Are you telling me that if this deal feel through, Mozilla wouldn't be impacted? Because that is my concern. From my perspective, despite having contributed numerous times whenever I could to the Mozilla Foundation, it concerns me what would happen to Mozilla is Google didn't contribute.
Hell, my most recent donation was helped along precisely because of this fear.
> And there are other search engines who will also continue to pay for valuable traffic.
Bing. I have no doubt, but I don't know that. It's all behind closed doors for the most part.
You make it sound like Mozilla doesn't need my donations, and doesn't need the Google deal. Could it do everything it does without donations or Google as a customer? Could it? If so, great!
I feel like I'm being vilified for being concerned.
> I didn't even imply that, so don't suggest that I did. It's dishonest, and rude.
I'm very sorry!
I hope I wasn't putting words into your mouth. I was reacting less to your comment and more to the repeated use of the word "funding" in all sorts of articles on this topic. I think it both reflects and affects how (some) people perceive Mozilla. For example, the business press would not say that the Defense Department is "funding" a contractor like Raytheon, no matter how big a customer they are.
I'm probably feeling overly defensive after all the articles trying to create drama by claiming Mozilla was in imminent danger of Google "pulling the plug" (when actually a deal was still in place, and both parties were actively negotiating the new one but just couldn't talk about it yet). Within the Mozilla project, we know our userbase is still growing, and the market for search traffic is as strong as ever. But outside, friends are still asking me about these baseless scary stories in the press.
> Bing. I have no doubt, but I don't know that.
Yes I believe Mozilla earns revenue from Bing, and also several other sites, including regional search engines in various locales. In some of our localized builds, Google isn't even the default search engine.
> You make it sound like Mozilla doesn't need my donations, and doesn't need the Google deal. Could it do everything it does without donations or Google as a customer? Could it? If so, great!
Not at all! As I mentioned, donations are very important to Mozilla -- disproportionately important, because in addition to the financial resources, they give us individual support that's important to our existence and activities as a non-profit public service foundation. And income diversification (your stated goal) can't hurt either.
And you're correct that Mozilla would be impacted hugely if for some reason Google stopped paying search affiliates. (But of course, Google would be greatly impacted too, which is one reason I'm not actually worried about this right now.) I have no doubt that Mozilla will grow other sources of revenue if it needs to -- but that's a matter of long-term contingency planning. And no matter what Google does, our own priorities are clear: Make great software that serves our mission and our hundreds of millions of users. As long as we do that, we have leverage and we have control of our fate.
Many successful open source projects run on volunteer contributions, individual donations, sponsorships, and other sources of support. If revenue did decrease for some reason, Mozilla could continue to exist as a smaller organization -- even a much smaller one if necessary, like it was when Firefox was first developed. We wouldn't have the same reach we do today, but we're already used to competing with companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft that have literally hundreds of times more money than us. Mozilla's biggest strengths have always been in the community and the source code. Steadily-growing Firefox revenue is a lever that helps amplify those strengths, but remember that the success of Firefox created the revenue streams, not the other way around.
I'm glad you're concerned, because these are challenging times for Mozilla and the open web. We do need all the support we can get. But I hope Mozilla gets support based on the great things we've done and will do -- not based on fear that someone else will come along and squash the movement. We will not be squashed so easily!
I'm sorry as well. I probably overreacted. Mozilla is just one of those organizations that I respect and worry over. I remember Netscape, and then Mozilla, and then a little 0.1 browser named Phoenix, and have used every version.
> I was reacting less to your comment and more to the repeated use of the word "funding" in all sorts of articles on this topic.
I do the same far too often. I reply to a specific comment, and instead of replying to that one comment, I reply to everything that comment reminds me of. It's not fair. I understand how easy it is to do.
It's all good. =)
> I'm probably feeling overly defensive after all the articles trying to create drama by claiming Mozilla was in imminent danger of Google "pulling the plug" (when actually a deal was still in place, and both parties were actively negotiating the new one but just couldn't talk about it yet). Within the Mozilla project, we know our userbase is still growing, and the market for search traffic is as strong as ever. But outside, friends are still asking me about these baseless scary stories in the press.
Didn't know you were apart of Mozilla. Should have checked your bio. Btw,
I LOVE YOU GUYS! =)
Anyways, to your point: outside, baseless scary stories or not, it's all we had to go on. Just think about it for a second from our point of view: Google has Chrome, the #1 browser by some accounts, and it's paying Mozilla for searches. And then their deal with Google ends. And nothing is really said from either party. I get emails from Mozilla asking for donations after this happens. Press reports talk about the how much Google as a customer means to Mozilla's bottom line.
So... I get nervous.
> Not at all! As I mentioned, donations are very important to Mozilla
Oh, I realize this. I only wish there was some way I could contribute more regularly. As it stands now, I have to be reminded to contribute. Might it make more sense to help automate that process for those interested? Reddit took the plunge with Gold Accounts, and that seemed to have helped. You don't even need to do anything. Just something that lets me say "Yeah, I'll contribute $X per month, because I love what you do, but fairly forgetful and will sometimes miss the 'Donation' emails."
> Mozilla could continue to exist as a smaller organization -- even a much smaller one if necessary, like it was when Firefox was first developed.
I don't want to see that though. You guys do too much awesome. Besides the EFF and FSF, there is Mozilla. And with you in the ring fighting the fights you fight, I know that someone is looking out for me.
> we're already used to competing with companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft that have literally hundreds of times more money than us
True, but I'm not. And I see these big 800lb gorillas and remember the days of IE6 dominance and the end of the browser wars. I remember vendor lock in.
> But I hope Mozilla gets support based on the great things we've done and will do -- not based on fear that someone else will come along and squash the movement.
That's a fair point. And a good one.
I'll leave it at that, before I start gushing completely as a fanboy.
I didn't even imply that, so don't suggest that I did. It's dishonest, and rude.
> Google isn't "funding" Mozilla; it's a customer of Mozilla. Their search traffic payments aren't charity or venture capital; they are revenue.
Yes. I know this. My concern is this customer accounts for, what, 80% of the total revenue? Are you telling me that if this deal feel through, Mozilla wouldn't be impacted? Because that is my concern. From my perspective, despite having contributed numerous times whenever I could to the Mozilla Foundation, it concerns me what would happen to Mozilla is Google didn't contribute.
Hell, my most recent donation was helped along precisely because of this fear.
> And there are other search engines who will also continue to pay for valuable traffic.
Bing. I have no doubt, but I don't know that. It's all behind closed doors for the most part.
You make it sound like Mozilla doesn't need my donations, and doesn't need the Google deal. Could it do everything it does without donations or Google as a customer? Could it? If so, great!
I feel like I'm being vilified for being concerned.