> it behooves Mozilla to increase their browser's market share.
i would imagine quite the opposite. Google's funding is implicitly a mechanism for google to _prevent_ firefox from gaining a large enough marketshare to threaten chrome, whilst it remain a "viable alternative" to give to regulators.
It might be that google is on paper paying for search engine traffic, but i think it's plain as day to anyone, that if firefox's market share grows significantly higher than chrome, google would actually stop paying firefox in an attempt to prevent chrome from being dethroned. I think the firefox executives know this - and therefore, never actually attempt to focus firefox's market share but instead, focus on peripheral features.
After all, their lavish pay (despite apparently being below market for the same position elsewhere) depends on google.
i would imagine quite the opposite. Google's funding is implicitly a mechanism for google to _prevent_ firefox from gaining a large enough marketshare to threaten chrome, whilst it remain a "viable alternative" to give to regulators.
It might be that google is on paper paying for search engine traffic, but i think it's plain as day to anyone, that if firefox's market share grows significantly higher than chrome, google would actually stop paying firefox in an attempt to prevent chrome from being dethroned. I think the firefox executives know this - and therefore, never actually attempt to focus firefox's market share but instead, focus on peripheral features.
After all, their lavish pay (despite apparently being below market for the same position elsewhere) depends on google.