David Utter, a tech writer over at WebProNews, says Firefox Needs To Go To School and I think I agree. Though, I would probably approach things differently than he’s suggesting. Putting aside the discussion on Mozilla’s approach to improving retention …

See, to me, Firefox’s open source (free) nature is not nearly as important to the world as the leverage it affords us in keeping the Web free and open. The Web is so much larger (in every way) than Firefox and focusing on Firefox, or even worse, on the method of production, just seems kind of silly.

Open source and our public benefit organization are tools that help us deliver on the mission of promoting choice and innovation on the Internet, but it’s the Internet that really matters — a lot more than the Firefox software itself.

Trying to explain that to every Firefox user or potential user would be impossible. The good news is that they don’t actually have to understand that for the impact of their Firefox usage to contribute to the goal of a free and open internet.

So, I say just tell them “because it’s better”
- A

quotes:
http://www.geof.net/blog/2006/12/10/eben-moglen

[...]
We are moving to a world in which in the twenty-first century the most important activities that produce occur not in factories, and not by individual initiative, but in communities held together by software.
[...]
In this neighborhood, at this moment, the richest and most deeply funded monopoly in the history of the world is beginning to fail. Within another few months, the causes of its failure will be apparent to everybody, as they are now largely apparent to the knowledgeable observers of the industry who expect trouble for Microsoft.
[...]
Ownership of software as a way of producing software for general consumption is going out, for economic reasons. But as I said, the economic insight that we can get from watching the transition from steel to software is far less important than the moral analysis of the situation.
[...]

What Mitchell is suggesting is that software is just a means to an end. The end in this case is the users, *not* the software developers.

It is quite reasonable to recognise the software developers as the largest input to the community, and it is quite reasonable to accept that “free software community” and others like it have a large vested stake. But to say they are the only people involved is … well, words can’t describe!

Software is for users. Only software that is used by users is really relevant for Mozilla, as it is for any organisation, including developers themselves. It matters less whether software is “owned” or “controlled” or “sold” … than whether software actually delivers what users need and appreciate.

If you think of it in these terms, you will possibly agree that the way to defeat “the beast” is the same way the beast also works to enslave the user: deliver better software for and to users. That’s something that can *only* be done by involving users, and that can only be done by working out what is of interest to users.

Please, read the Moglen’s speech from last year, and brought Mozilla closer with Free Software community.

Best regards…

Eben Moglen on Free Software and Social Justice
http://www.geof.net/blog/2006/12/10/eben-moglen