| ▲ | plorkyeran 7 months ago | |||||||
If you don't use Pocket then the acquisition was bad because they spent a bunch of money buying an unrelated company to add a feature you don't want. If you do use Pocket then the acquisition was bad because you don't want to be relying on a weird side project of a company because they'll do a terrible job of maintaining it and it'll inevitably get shut down. | ||||||||
| ▲ | x0x0 7 months ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
> they spent a bunch of money buying an unrelated company to add a feature you don't want While fiddling (and paying their execs $$$) as the only useful thing they do -- firefox -- crashed and burned into irrelevance. Leaving the company useful only as an ersatz chrome hypothetical competitor to keep the feds / EU at bay. Great for the overpaid people running it; less good for anyone in our industry. Exec pay: up and to the right. Marketshare: way down and to the right. Don't worry guys -- now they're playing VC and AI, at which they're sure to be as good as they were at running Firefox. Though I guess since you could say their only successful product was anti-trust insurance sold to Google, that's at least in the finance space, so in some way related to being a vc... | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | burnte 7 months ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
This is exactly correct. And everything happened exactly as written! | ||||||||
| ▲ | Centigonal 7 months ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
like grape jelly and tomato soup, two great tastes that don't belong together. | ||||||||