Then you go on to say that Mozilla Corporation has been “successfully pulling the wool over the eyes of so many people” and give one pretty feeble example. How can you in all honesty suggest that Mozilla's structure from the Mozilla Foundation, to the Mozilla Corporation, to Mozilla Messaging is in any way deceitful or deceptive? It's all well laid out and described in detail on Mozilla's very own publicly accessible websites.

I have not once said that the Mozilla Foundation is not a non-profit organization. I'm saying that Mozilla Corporation is absolutely a registered FOR PROFIT corporation. There's been no deception by the foundation.

But don't let the fact that the Foundation is the sole stockholder of the corporation make you think that the corporation isn't a for-profit (and very profitable) entity. The Corporation is actually quite up front about it's for-profit nature.

No, it isn't. You seem confused and more interested in sophistry than rationality.

Just take a deep breath and think about what you're saying logically. Your contention is that the Mozilla Foundation, a very public, very visible organisation, has some how, for *years*, managed to deceive the IRS as to it's “true” status as a for-profit organisation.

There's no mystery here. There's no conspiracy. The Mozilla Foundation and the Mozilla Corporation are not somehow secret or working to further clandestine agendas. Please grow up.

If actually publicising their profits would actually harm them in some way, either causing users to change or developers to walk away, then that says something very interesting about the open source community imho.

Firstly, the people judging Mozilla act like a kid wanting to get best toy. But this kid has no idea about that companies will produce new/better toys and he will need to cry again to get better ones. You may force your parents to buy the toys you want, everytime, but the web is not your toy. Most people are crying for 6 years about the craps Microsoft produce every year.

Secondly, as I said, capitalism can't work in computing world. It's not an observation belong to anti-capitalists, It's a clear scientific fact make capitalists to think open source is communism. Let me quote the explanation I've written:

“But in computing, capitalism CAN'T work. Because, it can't get enough support from it's major supporting devices like military and government. Also, things forming bourgeois class like raw material, production devices and distribution are not under control of the companies. Believe the economics science, capitalism doesn't work in an environment that allow FREEDOM. “

Learn the history. Not only history of the video codecs, desktop environments, computing history, but also development of the societies and the economics.

Thirdly, there are many better desktop environment alternatives for Linux that you have no idea about.

I'm being pragmatic and there's just as much (if not more in cases) to support my argument than yours. Your talk of societal development is a big strawman here; but I'll entertain it briefly: huge development in science and technology is enabled every year by the capitalism you so despise. While it may not be your particular nature, human nature in general aligns very well with reward system that capitalism puts in place.

As far as my knowledge of alternate desktop environments, I've been an avid linux user on both the server and desktop since the mid 90's, so I'm well aware of the technologies powering those desktops. This really seems like another strawman to me so I'm leaving it here.

Firstly, you people judging Mozilla act like a kid who wanting to get best toy. You can't figure out that there will be better toys and you will need to cry again to get best one. You want your parents to buy best toy every time, but the web is not your toy. You can not get what you want every time. People are crying for 6 years because of the craps Microsoft produce every year.

Secondly, if you try to be pragmatic, read the history. Not only history of the desktop environments or computing world, but also development of the societies and the economics. There is a branch of science trying to find best way to move humanity forward.

Thirdly, there are many great desktop environment alternatives you have no idea about them, too. Keep believing in the money.

But I would question to validity of considering the Mozilla Corporation out of the context of all of Mozilla however. Many public benefit organisations are non-profit but have revenue generating (for-profit) subsidiaries. Being revenue generating, however, does not mean that the Mozilla Corporation is not aligned with the goals of the Mozilla Foundation. That is what the Mozilla Corporation executes against.

I hope that Mozilla is pretty open about its finances (e.g. http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2009/11/19/state... ). But clearly, you feel we can do better there.

The general public (unlike you) does not care about your development methodology. It's fine that you do, but to make blanket statements about “capitalism doesn't work in computing” is both incredibly naive and just plain wrong.