| ▲ | pseudalopex 6 days ago |
| How many engineers are enough to make a browser? How do you know? Vivaldi employ 28 developers and 33 others to make an unstable Chromium fork and email program.[1] Bloat and bullshit features to you are minimum requirements to someone else. [1] https://vivaldi.com/team/ |
|
| ▲ | rdiddly 6 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| There are about 800 unique weekly committers to the Chromium project, so that's a start at gauging the number for that project. A little harder to find that same figure for Firefox, but Wikipedia says Mozilla Corp had about 750 employees as of 2020. Anyway, if you have $50M, you can afford 500 people at $100k, or 250 people at $200k. So you simply declare, this is how many people it takes to make a browser, and set your goals and timetables accordingly. I feel like the goals and direction might be more important than the number of bodies you throw at it, but maybe that's naïve. But when the product is mature like Firefox (or Chrome for that matter) you do have some flexibility on the headcount. |
| |
| ▲ | tikhonj 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | You're significantly underestimating fully-loaded cost per person + other expenses. An engineer making a $200k salary is going to cost the company something like $300k, and there are some additional fixed overheads. And $200k is quite a bit less than your competitors are paying. So you're looking at something more like 150 employees total of which <100 are going to be pure engineers, and that's stretching your budget and operations pretty aggressively while also fighting an uphill battle for recruiting skilled and experienced engineers. (And browser development definitely needs a core of experienced engineers with a relatively niche set of skills!) | | |
| ▲ | tigroferoce 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Working at Mozilla should be more than money. $200k/year is more than enough to be happy in most of the world. You don't need to compete on rock stars that must live in San Francisco, and focus on people that are happy with a high paying job and have enough idealism to accept "only" $200k/year. | | |
| ▲ | account42 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Exactly. One of the biggest problems with Mozilla is that they see themselves as akin to Google et al. |
| |
| ▲ | rdiddly 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | None of those figures are what the engineer makes, they're costs. And they're illustrative, not literal. You won't pay everyone at the same rate either for example, and not all will be engineers either, and I totally left both those facts out of it. Oh no! And also omitted the fact that a company whose vision and ideals people agree with can hire said people for less money, which again brings us back around to the point that the vision might be more important. |
| |
| ▲ | Fnoord 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe they should quit their presence in the Bay Area. The rent is insanely high. Not just of an office, also the workers. Besides, freedom of speech, liberty, DEI are each under pressure in USA. Mozilla is very much welcome here in Europe :-) | |
| ▲ | pseudalopex 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Another comment observed your cost estimates were low. > But when the product is mature like Firefox (or Chrome for that matter) you do have some flexibility on the headcount. Google could reduce Chrome development to maintenance and remain dominant for years. It would be much like Internet Explorer 6. Firefox falling too far behind in performance or compatibility would be fatal. |
|
|
| ▲ | prepend 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Brave has about 300 employees and don’t break out engineers [0]. One of them is Brandon Eich so that counts for a bunch. Their revenue is only $52M so kinda what Mozilla would earn off their endowment. [0] https://getlatka.com/companies/brave.com |
| |
| ▲ | pseudalopex 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Latka are not reliable. And you assumed Brave were profitable? Brave make a Chromium fork and a search engine. Does a search engine or a web browser engine require more people? | |
| ▲ | FooBarWidget 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Brave doesn't make their own browser engine. |
|
|
| ▲ | shevy-java 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Ladybird had fewer devs, so what were these devs at Vivaldi doing? I don't think your argument has a lot of merit. 28 is not a magic number. |
| |
| ▲ | pseudalopex 6 days ago | parent [-] | | > Ladybird had fewer devs, so what were these devs at Vivaldi doing? The Ladybird developers have not produced a browser comparable to Firefox or Vivaldi. Vivaldi have not produced a browser engine comparable to Ladybird of course. > I don't think your argument has a lot of merit. 28 is not a magic number. 28 is a magic number was not a reasonable interpretation of my comment. | | |
|
