Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pwdisswordfish5 2003 days ago
> I genuinely have no idea what point you are trying to make.

The point, as already stated, is that people who were official mouthpieces for Mozilla said for years that the default search engine simply wasn't up for sale to just whomever would pay for it. That it pointed to Google because Google's search engine was the best search engine for Firefox's users. Just like Google was the default search engine before Mozilla ever signed a deal. Just like Wikipedia was added to the searchbar without anyone paying to make it happen. That any royalties were icing on the cake. (See "serendipitous" in the previous comment). What's hard to understand about this or the earlier comment?

1 comments

>is that people who were official mouthpieces for Mozilla said for years that the default search engine simply wasn't up for sale to just whomever would pay for it.

This is untrue. They openly stated they sold it to Google in 2008, and in 2011 a bidding war between Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo saw the price triple from 100 million to 300 million.[1]

Maybe at some point following a contract they had a generic "Google was the best choice" PR statement, but they've never hid that it was up for sale to whoever wanted it or that it made up most of their budget.

And even if they did say the royalties were icing on the cake, what would be wrong with then changing their policy to generate as much money for development as possible?

http://allthingsd.com/20111222/google-will-pay-mozilla-almos...