"Mozilla (despite its issues) is nowhere near as evil as Google and a browser monopoly is good for nobody."
Truthfully, it is good for somebody. For example, it is good for Google.
By extension, it is also good for Mozilla because Mozilla sends FF user data, e.g., default search query data, to Google in exchange for money.
If Google's search business declines due to loss of monopoly (aka competition) and as a result Google decides to stop funding Mozilla, then that's bad for somebody.
Perhaps the reader can figure out who that somebody might be.
re: "nowhere near as evil"
Why would I want to use the lesser of two evils when I can generally avoid popular modern browsers altogether. Zero evil.
Truthfully, it is good for somebody. For example, it is good for Google.
By extension, it is also good for Mozilla because Mozilla sends FF user data, e.g., default search query data, to Google in exchange for money.
If Google's search business declines due to loss of monopoly (aka competition) and as a result Google decides to stop funding Mozilla, then that's bad for somebody.
Perhaps the reader can figure out who that somebody might be.
re: "nowhere near as evil"
Why would I want to use the lesser of two evils when I can generally avoid popular modern browsers altogether. Zero evil.