> This would be a decent point if nobody had any interest in chromium alternatives and Firefox was a new upstart brand, neither of which are true.

What? The dominance of the mobile space by one of their competitors, who pre-installs their own browser, and who advertised said browser for free on the most visited website on the planet (google.com) for years, is absolutely relevant regardless of how old Mozilla is.

And the world isn't like HN, most people don't care that much about their browsers, and don't even know what "chromium" is.

Firefox has, since incipience, faced that challenge.

Anyhow, the point I’m making is that I don’t agree that it is impossible to compete with trenched competition.

Firefox has some prior momentum themselves, they’re not quite an upstart.

The last 10 years worth of CEOs for Mozilla Corp.

2008-2010 John Lilly

2010-2013 Gary Kovacs

2014 Brendan Eich

2014-2019 Chris Beard

2020-now Mitchel Baker

[edit formatting]

This brings up a fascinating point that spins off into another, entirely complex discussion: does Mozilla pay enough for a great (not good) CEO?

They pay too much for this one.

Is CEO greatness something that comes with higher pay?

They already replaced their last CEO due to outrage. Another replacement would signal disaster.

Was the last CEO let go for performance reasons?

You can read https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2019/08/29/my-next-chapter and decide for yourself.