zlacker

>>himara+(OP)
This is why, when you claim to be running a non-profit to "benefit humankind," you shouldn't put all your resources into a for-profit subsidiary. Eventually, the for-profit arm, and its investors, will find its nonprofit parent a hindrance, and an insular board of directors won't stand a chance against corporate titans.

>>jasonh+4t
Doesn't Mozilla run the same way with for-profit under a non-profit?

>>pkaye+GE
How’d that work out for them?

>>tsunam+fG
They still exist and put out a product used by quite a few people, so quite well?

You can't judge a non-profit by the same success metrics as a for-profit.

>>cthalu+oK
They have been a consistent downward spiral into irrelevance. So I’d say … not fine.

>>tsunam+J11
They are the last survivor offering an alternative to Blink and seem to be indefinitely sustainable for their core product.

Other companies tried competing against Chrome, and so far Mozilla is the most successful, as everyone else gave up and ship Chrome skins people basically only use by subterfuge or coercion. I'd say that's pretty good.