Ask Paul: March 7 (Premium)
- Paul Thurrott
- Mar 07, 2025
-
11
? Protozilla?
oasis21 asks;
We know Mozilla is trying to improve it’s revenue streams. What do you think is stopping them from trying to become Proton? I know they had a VPN. It seems like a perfect business for them. Like basically copy Google, Microsoft, Apple products and “don’t be evil”. Wouldn’t it be interesting if Proton buys Mozilla to bail them out if they start having money trouble.
I have this mostly unwritten editorial called “I Want to Use the DuckDuckGo Web Browser But I Can’t.” It currently starts out with:
I love the idea of DuckDuckGo, the company and its products. But I still can’t use the DuckDuckGo web browser, and neither can you. That needs to change.
I mention this because I feel like Mozilla and DuckDuckGo are two companies that we should trust but neither seems to elevate to that level of outright trust, as Proton has (for me, at least).
Trust is a tough thing, it’s difficult to earn and very easy to lose. And Mozilla has made so many mistakes, strategically or technically, that make fans worried that it will never live up to its lofty ideals. DuckDuckGo is less problematic in a sense–I ‘trust’ the company for the most part and feel they’ve done a reasonable job with search and AI–but they never closed the deal on their browser by completing it from a functional standpoint. How do you even release a browser without extensions? This seems crazy. (, but it .)
Mozilla’s plan to expand beyond the browser, which was triggered by its rapidly declining usage share, was certainly understandable. And like many defeats, it wasn’t any one thing that sunk things for them. Some of it was just them doing the wrong things. Some of it was them not paying enough attention to the product its fans really cared about, and making bad technology decisions. Some of it is just tied to the difficulty of converting free users to paid users. Etc. It’s not all their fault. But Mozilla made mistakes too.
We can debate web rendering engines until we’re blue in the face–the people who feel strongly about this will never give it up–but Mozilla’s too small and too fragile to be one of three web rendering engines. My stance on this has never changed: This is the wrong place to innovate, it’s where we need one standard, and that standard is Chromium. This raises all kinds of alarms about giving control of the web to one company, etc. I get it. But I don’t care and don’t see the issues. Apple can afford to fight on this point, but they’re not innovating there either. I’m sure all the work they do is just to ensure that Safari renders the web correctly. Which means, like Chromium. That battle is over.
But it’s not, right? As long as Mozilla keeps going with Gecko, and with its extension system, and with Mozilla sync or whatever it’s called this week, Firefox remains this thing that is familiar but also different. And like Borland in the late 1990s, it will always be a bit behind in keeping up with the thing they are competing with. And its usage share has never stopped falling. In the end, what we’re left with here is more brand and ideals than it is product. I feel bad for Mozilla and Firefox. I feel they’re worth saving. But I’m also not even sure what means now.
What is Mozilla? If you look at , it’s kind of all over the place. The bits I’ll pull out that I like include building products that put you (the user) in control, privacy advocacy, and keeping the Internet open, are all difficult to argue with. But maybe difficult to build a successful business around. We know from Google’s recent U.S. antitrust trial that Google pays Mozilla about $400 million a year to be the default search engine in Firefox. And this is problematic. It makes Mozilla feel a bit hypocritical in that it undermines its ideals. And it makes Mozilla even more fragile as a business. (.) Would it survive without Google’s annual gift? Probably not.
Proton is interesting. That company has a suite of offerings, all privacy-focused, all open source, all useful. It seems to align with Mozilla (and DuckDuckGo, which is why I mentioned it up top). And you might argue that its products are complementary with those offered by Mozilla, though with some redundancies (mail, VPN, etc.). Proton is just as idealistic as Mozilla, and . But it’s also a private company and we don’t really have a handle on its value, cash balance, or earnings. Could it acquire Mozilla? Should it?
Sadly, I’m not sure I see the benefit. If anything, maintaining Firefox/Gecko would be a huge time and resources suck. It would need to spin off or otherwise integrate/dump Thunderbird (email), Firefox Relay (identity masking), and VPN. The responsibility for MDN Plus, which is like the central database of web developer documentation for the world, should perhaps be handed off to W3 or whatever. Etc. All I see here is a lot of work and expense with little upside. It’s a shame.
But between Proton, Mozilla, and DuckDuckGo, I see this loose, disconnected world of open standards and Big Tech resistance. There are probably other companies that could perhaps be included in this non-alliance alliance. Is there some combination of these companies that makes sense structurally? I don’t know. I vaguely would like each to succeed and survive. I am especially unclear on how that works for Mozilla. I feel like Proton might not be able to handle that responsibility. That maybe it is better off as it is right now.
Regarding taking on Microsoft, Google, and Apple, there’s little wiggle room there. Companies like Amazon, Salesforce, and Meta have all tried and mostly failed. (Salesforce hasn’t driven Slack into the ground, but it also hasn’t done much with it.) There are hundreds of alternative browsers, none of which seem like great businesses. Ditto for individual app alternatives to office productivity solutions (Notion, etc.). AI is a huge wrench in all this. I just don’t know.
I would like Mozilla to survive. I have a hard time imagining that.
➰ We’re being kept out of the Loop
simont asks:
Microsoft Loop. Is it a zombie project for Microsoft or is it still something that Microsoft is actively working on in their plan for note taking domination against Notion?
Like so much else at Microsoft, Loop seems to have fallen by the wayside during the AI boom, but part of that is just PR: Microsoft is pushing hard on AI because the potential rewards are so big. With Loop, it’s created its latest big platform at a time when no one cares about big platforms anymore, and the app we think of as Loop is just the tip of that particular iceberg. And Loop, as an app, is just one of dozens of apps that Microsoft 365 customers–commercial and consumer–just get as part of their subscription. It’s likely most don’t know it exists, and that those that do don’t understand why it exists, what it’s for, and how or whether it replaces other apps they may be more familiar with, like OneNote.
So, what’s the evidence? Is Loop still an ongoing concern at Microsoft? And if so, could it ever rise, Phoenix-like, to achieve some level of usage success?
At a surface level, what I first saw was not encouraging. It roughly corresponded to my memories, which is that Microsoft doesn’t mention Loop for several months at a time. But digging a bit deeper, I can see sparks of life here.
I will step through it.
The can be filtered in various ways, one of which is by product. And if you , you will see that the most recent one is from November 2023. That’s alarming, but Microsoft has of course made Loop announcements more recent than that, including that for Loop 2.0 in August 2024. () Oddly, . For some reason.
The discusses Microsoft 365 features in preview, so it’s more forward-leaning. And it, too, can be filtered to display posts for specific products, including . And there is a lot more going on there, with two (short) posts this month already, and a total of 11 so far this year. The post most worth reading, I guess, is the , which highlights what looks like reasonable progress, much based on user feedback.
Maybe. The very first link in that recap is for something called Copilot Pages, and . I can’t stand the language Microsoft uses here–“Copilot Pages is a dynamic, persistent canvas in Copilot chat designed for multiplayer AI collaboration”–but that seems to be either based on Loop or, God help us, a replacement. Interestingly, if you find , you will see that , is about … wait for it .. Copilot Pages.
“Unlike Loop components (which live in OneDrive), Copilot Pages are stored in SharePoint Embedded,” the Loop account explains. “This makes it easier to manage access, security, and compliance at scale.”
Um. OK. So it’s … better than Loop? Why would Loop discuss this? Maybe I’m missing something, but scanning through the Loop account’s Tweets, I see more content about Copilot than I see about Loop. I’m sure its meeting some internal requirement there, but it’s weird.
Except that maybe it isn’t
, but only mentions the term Loop once, and it’s not for the product. (“We’ve built the world’s best AI feedback loop with Copilot.”) . But it does link to . And that says that Copilot Pages are .loop files. So this is a way to utilize Loop functionality under the IT protections afforded by SharePoint (which also underpins Teams). Interesting. I wasn’t aware of this at the time.
OK, so that explains why the Loop team is tweeting about Copilot Pages now. I don’t see Copilot Pages as a “replacement” for Loop (the app), but it could emerge as the most popular implementation of Loop components and be used in ways Loop (the app) is not. More important in the context of your question, it points to Loop (the platform) being important to Microsoft and even top-of-mind. It’s a part of Copilot for Microsoft 365 now. So it’s not going away anytime soon. That’s good if you care about Loop.
Speaking of Loop as a platform, if you look at the , you won’t find a filter or category for Loop, but you will find the , the underlying platform behind Loop (and Edge Workspaces, Teams Live Share, etc.) , and points at other Microsoft and third-parties (including AutoDesk) that use this technology. It’s semi-understandable that the developer side gets lost in the AI boom, too. But it appears to be moving along.
My high-level summary of all this–no AI was harmed or used in the creation of this opinion–is that Loop is indeed an ongoing concern, especially as a platform, and that it gets lost in the PR noise around AI. Loop as an app–a would-be Notion competitor that users may or may not want to use–feels a bit less certain. But in acquainting myself with where this app is at now, I am reminded that this was sort of always the case. Even as Loop arrived as a web and then mobile app, it seemed almost secondary to the ability to use Loop components in other, more widely-used apps, like Teams. And now that we have Teams Pages, that may emerge as the most mainstream way to use this functionality.
Even more succinctly, I was a bit surprised by what I discovered here. There is more going on with Loop than I’d thought.
? Cooperation is better than antagonism
train_wreck asks:
What do you make of the letter written to the current administration in regards to AI exports? Agree, disagree? Is it just favor-currying?
When Brad Smith took over as Microsoft’s general counsel in 2002, replacing Bill Neukom, he delivered a one-slide presentation to the company’s board of directors. It had a single word on it, “SETTLE.” To that point, Microsoft’s stance in the face of antitrust suits in the United States, EU, South Korea, and elsewhere was until then entirely antagonistic, a childish insistence that it was doing nothing wrong. But that all changed under Smith, and even those who don’t remember Microsoft’s subsequent acquiescence to regulators around the world will surely remember in Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard. and is the proverbial , the polar opposite of Bill Gates and Bill Neukom as a public-facing representative of the company on the world stage.
, and that missive is notable for the language it uses to make his case. That is, he knows his audience. So he dumbed down the argument, crapped on the previous administration and its policies to win points, pushed the patriotic and jingoistic, anti-China themes they all love, and was careful to explain, in very plain English, why our current government must betray one ideal (allowing US technology to benefit those in other countries) to push another ideal (US technology dominance through the financial success of a US corporation). It’s like dealing with a teething toddler who’s too busy thrashing around stupidly to listen to reason.
But the thing is, Smith–and Microsoft–are correct. The AI Diffusion Rule is a classic example of something that seems right in theory but is wrong in the real world. If we restrict how much AI that US firms can sell, the Chinese will fill the gap worldwide and without restrictions.
And we have a related example to guide us: When the US government went after Huawei and other Chinese firms several years ago, that seemed like a good idea to some, at least in theory. But as I argued at the time, all we would accomplish was making Huawei (and other companies) less reliant on US technology. And that’s what happened: Unable to use US software platforms like Android and modern hardware chipsets, Huawei just learned how to make replacements of their own. Now they need us at all.
This same dynamic played out with DeepSeek, where that Chinese firm, denied advanced GPUs by the US government, found a way. That’s how disruption works, and why it almost always comes from the outside. Dominant, monopolistic companies left unregulated won’t innovate, and the stilted market conditions they create force smaller, faster, more nimble companies to think differently.
We’re also seeing the same thing in electric vehicles. China dominates this market technologically, but we are shielded from that in the US, so most have no idea. Chinese electric vehicles are so advanced they might kill the market for European luxury vehicles. Here in Mexico, we’ve witnessed that rapid evolution in recent years, and the best Ubers are the silent and spacious BYD models that most of you have never even heard of, let alone ridden in. The world is changing, but now it’s changing without us. Our policies have had the opposite of the intended effect.
Not surprisingly, Nvidia has started raising concerns about our government’s short-sighted and provably bad policies. As are (or will) other Big Tech firms, including all those that suckled up to the current administration to get sweetheart “look the other way” deals on regulation at a time when they wish to grow and dominate unfettered. Microsoft’s plea is nearly identical. It is preaching common sense and balancing it with the self-promotional needs of the current administration. He is, in other words, looking for that win-win. I suspect he’ll get it.
?♀️ Alexalence
helix2301 asks:
On Twit Leo was talking about how Amazon Alexa+ is going to be free for Prime members but $19.99 for others. He thinks going to be a benefit for prime members but it will push the cost of Prime up or they will do a Prime video and make it cheap add on for few dollars like the prime video ad or kindle ad addons.
Well, we can’t say it “will” drive up the cost. It hasn’t yet, for sure. In fact, we had heard multiple rumors about this service being an added charge, so the initial announcement was a pleasant surprise: Prime subscribers get it for free. That’s almost certainly why Leo believes Alexa+ will be so successful.
I think he’s right. It’s not that Prime won’t see price increases, of course it will. And of course we will blame that on Alexa+, even though Amazon rises prices on whatever schedule anyway. But it won’t be $240 more per year. There will still be whatever value there.
What I don’t see is anyone paying $20 per month for Alexa+. At that point, just get the Prime membership, which is much less expensive and includes all kinds of perks. That seems like the real point of the monthly cost.
What do you think? I really don’t see it taking off on the Alexa devices. I see maybe copilot and gemini being in good spot. Apple and Alexa I just don’t see it being a hit.
All of these AIs will be fine and for the same reasons. They’re tied to successful at-scale user bases created by Big Tech companies that see this as an existential requirement. Microsoft has hundreds of millions of customers on Microsoft 365 and over a billion on Windows. Apple has billions of customers. So do Google and Amazon.
But each also addresses specific use cases. Apple Intelligence gets crapped on for all kinds of reasons, but all it has to do is integrate with key phone usage scenarios, help with writing, answer questions, and so on, and it will be used broadly just because it’s there. Ditto for Amazon, Alexa, and Echo. I don’t ever really use Alex with or separate from Echo devices, but many do. These products hit at the vast, low-end, mainstream part of the market. So Alexa+ may never be a favorite choice of tech influencers or whatever. But it will be huge with the mainstream Walmart/Amazon audience. Which is most people.
Alexa+ is a classic example for me of something I will almost certainly never use, but I do get that others will. It’s hard to say/write that without sounding condescending, and that’s not my point. I really do think it will do well. And I really do think it will not impact me personally. But we’ll see.
Plus, there will be a coming generation of Alexa+ specific devices of whatever kinds. I’m curious to see what forms they take.
? My new Sidekick?
JHeredia asks:
If you don’t decide to do an article, I’d love to hear your impressions of Sidekick browser once you’ve had a chance to try it.
I’m not sure yet how to handle this, but I did record an episode of Hands-On Windows yesterday that covered Sidekick and two other browsers (Zen browser and Opera Air) at a high level. I’m still not sure about where I stand on this, but it looks solid, and I’m really coming around to the notion of “apps” in a browser sidebar (as per Opera) that can notify you when something happens but don’t take up tab space or resources like pinned (or normal) tabs do. I may write on that topic soon, as a sort of browser-based interaction rethinking similar to .
There is one little wrinkle here, sadly. The makers of Sidekick apparently reached out to App Sumo in late 2024 to tell them that they had made the “difficult decision to shut down operations by the end of 2024” because they “did not see the growth” they expected. That I’d never heard of Sidekick might play a role there, I’m usually up on this kind of thing. But is still up and running and . That said, and their social media accounts (like ) are likewise out of date.
It may be dead.
? Ask not what you can do for Copilot+ PC
williamg asks:
If you were to provide guidance on finding a consumer laptop Copilot+ PC to buy today, would you have thoughts, either general (Snapdragon vs. Intel vs. AMD vs. whatever) or specific (an actual model)? Or, if you are aware of improved offerings announced but not shipped, which of those should I keep an eye on?
Dealing with the current generation products as we must–my understanding is that we won’t see Snapdragon X2 until September–the good news is that they’re all terrific and improvements over the pre-Copilot+ PC past. The Snapdragon X Elite-based models (I’ve not yet used an X or X Plus version) offer the best reliability, efficiency, and battery life, and they are my overall preference. If you want/need x86 for some reason–honestly, playing video games is the only mainstream reason I can think of–then go for an AMD Zen 5-based laptop, which offers the best performance overall, terrific battery life, and very good reliability and efficiency. And while it’s an orphan, even Intel’s Lunar Lake is a nice step forward for GPU, NPU, efficiency, and battery life, though that all falls short of AMD. Based on a few more recent laptops, the initial Lunar Lake issues have been fixed.
I’m in the market to replace my main computer. The plan would be to use this computer for 5 or more years, so I’d like to make the right purchase. Lately, I’ve been experimenting with AI and running models locally. I figured I might as well go with a CoPilot PC, so I can make use of the NPU and model offerings from Microsoft (like mentioned in your “Microsoft Brings More Local DeepSeek Models to Copilot+ PCs” article from March 4).
Right. Any of these platforms should be fine for that.
I read your review of the Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i 15 Aura. I’m not sure if the CPU issues have been addressed, plus there are probably more recent releases I should focus on.
Yes, as noted, the early issues do appear to be fixed. That said, the AMD Zen 5 stuff is dramatically better and those laptops are often less expensive. I should have a review unit in soon with the very latest AMD chipsets that were announced at CES, and those are supposed to be even better. But the mainstream AMD stuff in this generation is already off the charts. It’s a huge improvement across the board.
I still prefer Snapdragon, use my Surface Laptop every day, and I’ve never had any issues. The few compatibility issues I had initially were quickly fixed. The only negative, if that matters to you, is games. It’s not a video game machine. For that, I’d go AMD first, or Intel. Otherwise, I would stick with Snapdragon.
Gain unlimited access to Premium articles.
With technology shaping our everyday lives, how could we not dig deeper?
Thurrott Premium delivers an honest and thorough perspective about the technologies we use and rely on everyday. Discover deeper content as a Premium member.