If the EU wanted to make a difference on privacy, fully funding the Firefox browser would be an inexpensive way for Europe to "buy in" to big tech and maintain some alternative to Google for a web browser engine -- think of Airbus buying the A220 from Bombardier and Montréal.

I'd never thought of this but it strikes me as a really interesting idea. It's really important to retain a well funded, OSS, citizen-oriented browser since the web is a crucial technology now. A foundation funded by the EU (without a political link) would be a great idea -- hopefully lots of other institutions would also provide funding but you'd need a big hitter as well.

Anyone that uses Electron apps contributes to Chrome adoption.

Mozilla had an alternative to Electron and they dropped it before Electron was born even. Who do we have to blame if not them? Their priorities have always been wrong.

Any developers using it, yes that also includes the likes of VSCode.

The priorities of anyone that uses Electron are the ones that are wrong, picking developer comfort instead of what is good for users or the Web.

Use a daemon with local browser or the OS webwidgets.

Yes it is more work that coding against Chrome APIs, but that is the whole point if one cares about the Web in general, otherwise those developers could just update their CVs to ChromeOS developer.

That doesn't make any sense. Using an electron app isn't the same as someone accessing web sites with chrome.

Sure it does, using Electron is picking the easy way of coding against Chrome specific APIs, instead of what Web is capable of across all browsers.

What you're saying is not wrong, but that's only about developers. Users have no say in the stack used in an app, so using that app in today's landscape of walled Gardens makes no difference in terms of chrome's dominance.

That app only exists because those developers decided to support Google's agenda.

Programs built on electron are using chrome is an isolated way, they aren't skewing the percentage of people who access web sites with chrome.

They are increasing the amount of Chrome deployments and developers using Chrome only APIs.

Is there an alternative to Electron that uses Gecko instead of Blink/WebKit?

Yes, the right way to do it, PWAs or OS Web widgets.

a lot of gvts, could easily and should fund Firefox. However, the current Mozilla foundation administration is corrupt and overpaid. Losing market share the were they did would cause a CEO to lose his job in 5 months. Hell, a lot of folks on HN could easily be stewards of Firefox and do a better job than the bozos running mozilla.

It’s a good idea but the problem is the skill build-up. Mozilla development and HQ would have to be relocated to EU shores.

The big monopolies where there are increasingly no viable non-us alternatives are mobile os and browser engines.

I always wonder why Firefox Mobile is so unpopular. Isn't the internet basically unusable without an ad blocker (which they say none of the other mobile browsers support) nowadays? Are the 3.something percent desktop Firefox such a refusenik demographic that they don't browse the internet on their phones at all, or do the mobile Chrome forks have some advantage I am unaware of?

Firefox Mobile used to be decent... no, exceptional 'til they shat the bed by removing features such as extensions, changing bookmarks and disrupting workflows. One can no longer save pages to PDF. Other things take thrice the number of taps to achieve the same outcome.

As much as I love Firefox and Mozilla at large, I believe a lot of their woes are self inflicted. Yes, COVID blah blah blah, but a cursory look at their financials shows a NPO that behaved like Goog was gonna continue funding them indefinitely.

Vivaldi is my daily driver on desktop and Firefox is the "sandboxxed" browser. Might start looking into their mobile offering seeing as FF Mobile isn't getting any better. Damn shame really.

Firefox is not the default browser on mobile OSs. 99% of users don’t change the default. Most people don’t know that this is possible, desirable, or an issue.

And if you're on Apple devices, you're stuck with a skin atop what is essentially Safari anyway.

Posting from Firefox on a desktop. I like my Ad Blockers to actually work.

Even if you do, does it actually change that much? You cant actually stop the os on mobile from using its default browser for most of it's tasks. Firefox on iOS is basically a reskin of safari if I am reading it correctly.

> You cant actually stop the os on mobile from using its default browser for most of it's tasks.

On Android, the only thing that the default browser ever opens for is captive portal detection. Otherwise, all links from apps like Signal or OSMAnd open in Firefox. Granted, I am running Lineage OS. Does a phone with Google Play Services installed override Firefox for Android to use the preinstalled web browser instead?

I've got firefox as my default on Oxygen OS. Don't remember the last time chrome was opened on my phone--by me or by other software. Firefox is even handles the tabs embedded in other apps.

To add to your point, onnAndroid Firefix can even be the in-app browser (what Chrome calls Chrome Custom Tabs), and you can verify this by checking the menu as it will say Powered by Firefox.

I don't know, I disabled Chrome long ago to make sure it doesn't do shady stuff in background.

Speaking as a mobile browser snob who lives and works out of their phone, it changes tons. Firefox Mobile used to be garbage but now it's my primary mobile browser. HN gets overly focused on cyber politics while forgetting the user experience imo. Right now Firefox Mobile comes with a better ad blocker than chrome, a better dark mode than the competition including Brave, and it has a reasonably good setup for a bottom screen omni bar (controversial with people who hate nice things).

Mobile Safari supports ad blocking.

Unless you're on an older iOS device. (I still have my iPad 4, and it doesn't allow ad blocking, not even in Firefox, which I use.)

I am likely truly ignorant here, but I find it a bit staggering that Mozilla is able to spend the amount of money that they do on a pretty narrow set of mature products and services; all of which but one makes essentially zero dollars.

a few tips from from no one:

1. Rewrite the Mozilla mission statement. I read that and have no idea what your organization does. Mission statements seem like corporate naval gazing, but if it is honest and well written it keeps everyone focused on what you are working towards.

2. Refocus on Firefox R&D and core technologies - Firefox needs to be the best browser. It is the thing that makes the company money and makes it recognizable to the lay person. You will never be able to outspend Google, Microsoft, and Apple, but they are always going to have more competing priorities pulling their best engineers away and causing political infighting about what should be crammed into the browser. Mozilla does not have to have any of that.

3. Invest more in Thunderbird the application and develop Thunderbird the privacy focus email service for independent professionals and small businesses.

This comes across a bit negative, but it is because I love Firefox and have loved many other Mozilla products in the past. I very much would like to see Mozilla succeed and create more products that I can love.

4. Quit giving the CEO millions of dollars in bonuses.

> Mozilla gets hundred of millions of dollars in 2019

> Mozilla is endangered

Pick one.

nah. when you have a ceo who wants to price match other ceos in the industry when they dont have money to pay the developers, that has to be decided.

my question. why does firefox need any sort of corporate overlordship? is having a skeleton crew to handle payroll, organise some events not enough ? bureaucracy kills stuff and here you see its best example

If I get $100,000 a year and spend $90,000 a year, my wellbeing is clearly endangered.

Mozilla is in a vaguely similar ballpark, with of course different numbers.