Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mozilla and Google's "Don't-Be-Evil" Bulldozer

Posted by timothy on from the not-a-transcript-but-better-than-one dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla execs John Lilly and Mitchell Baker were interviewed at the WSJ's All Things Digital conference last week. In a wide-ranging conversation, they discussed the history of Firefox, proprietary versus Open Source development and the debut of Chrome and Mozilla's changing relationship with Google. A great interview. Well worth reading. There's video as well."

4 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. Love that statement by jfbilodeau · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Walt: Why wouldn't it just be better for the consumer to go with the company that's hired experts to do its translations? Baker: How much software do you really think is great? Walt: Not very much. Lilly: But it's all written by experts. Walt nods, point taken."

    --
    Goodbye Slashdot. You've changed.
  2. Fear of the computer by goldaryn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Walt asks about the Firefox growth curve. Baker says the curve has been relatively linear after an initial spike. "Why don't people use Firefox?" Walt asks. Lilly says people just aren't aware. "Most people think of the browser as a pane of glass; they don't realize that it really effects the way they see the Web. Baker adds that many people fear their computers, and that might make them reticent to experiment with a new browser.

    This last part really is a salient point. I think it's true that average end user really does come to fear the PC, and, in my experience, their local IT geek by association. "Leave the damn thing alone!" they cry, "I don't care about OpenOffice, or Foxit Reader, or Notepad++".

    Bad experiences tend to be a motivator in this aspect, but sometimes it sends people the other way. After a spyware attack, say, people tend to go one of two ways: even more afraid of their PC or they become open minded to new things like Firefox. That's just my experience..

    1. Re:Fear of the computer by goldaryn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Furthermore, this makes the point that it is in Microsoft's interest to not make the computer too safe. If people become comfortable experimenting with their machines, they might learn they don't need Microsoft software. - currently (-1, Troll)

      I don't think the parent is trolling. It seems like a valid point in general that there is effectively two ways to sell things to people, be it new or existing customers.

      Way 1: desire / feel good.......Example: The iPod. I want one of those and/or I will feel good

      Way 2: fear / feel bad..........Example: beauty products. I fear I am ugly (and I will not be loved)

      Obviously there are shades of grey, i.e. most products are both to varying degrees. But the culture of fear at the moment is something that nearly every company uses. So, the parent is right. It IS in Microsoft's interest to not make the computer too safe. They might not necessarily go round explicitly scaremongering (FUD and so on), perhaps they do, I don't know. But parent is right, effectively.

  3. Put honest links in the @#$@ summary by randomchicagomac · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Seriously? A link to "http://bit.ly/4S53f"? There is no *good* reason why slashdot shouldn't use direct links, rather than this URL shortening nonsense, in story summaries. I'd like to know where I'm going in deciding whether to RTFA. Here, the link actually does go to the WSJ's "All Things Digital" site, at http://d7.allthingsd.com/20090528/d7-interview-mitchell-baker-and-john-lilly/ .

    Also, as for Timothy's "not-a-transcript-but-better-than-one" heading: no. This summary in the text is not as good as a transcript, and the video is not as good as a transcript, because reading a transcript is faster, and is something I can do at work. (Yes, I know that it's Sunday).