Flock, a social-focused browser startup that has raised nearly $30 million in venture funding, has ceased building on top of the open source Firefox browser, say multiple sources. The next version of the Flock browser will be built on Google’s open source Chrome browser platform. The last version of Flock was released in October 2008.
Flock first launched in October 2005 and has had 6 million or so downloads. But it still has less market share than even Netscape, which was discontinued over a year ago.
In the past Flock has said all it needs is a few tens of millions of users to score big dollars from the search engines (each active user generates $5 or so in search engine revenue). But after three years of trying, Flock hasn’t been able to achieve more than a fraction of that number of users.
As to why Flock is leaving Mozilla: sources say that they’ve become frustrated with Mozilla’s lack of attention to Flock’s needs. One source says Flock felt like the “red headed step child of the Mozilla development community.” Sources are also saying that Flock feels that Google Chrome is far easier to work with than Firefox.
One problem is that Chrome isn’t yet cross-platform and works only on Windows machines. But Google is actively working on Mac and Linux versions of Chrome and should release them in the next few months. Right about the time the next version of Flock is released.
Flock hasn’t yet returned a request for comment on this story.
Update: Flock CEO Shawn Hardin responds in the comments:
Mike,
I was responding to your email from only a few hours ago when I saw your article. It’s important to clarify a couple of things. We haven’t ceased development efforts on the Mozilla platform. Our upcoming release of Flock 2.1 is built on the Mozilla platform. Having said that, the browser space is heating up, and we’ve seen a variety of exciting technologies emerge over the last several months that are appealing.
We always have and will continue to make architectural decisions that balance what’s best for our users and what’s best for Flock as a business. This has resulted in a healthy, growing user base and business for Flock, and we expect this to continue in 2009. In fact, with over seven million downloads almost entirely from word of mouth, Flock enjoys a highly satisfied user base with consistently over 92% customer satisfaction, very strong net promoter scores, and an average of four hours of usage per day.
With a continuing focus on user-centered browser innovation, our team is in active research and development on a range of exciting new enhancements to Flock. It is still far too early to comment on anything specific, but we are very excited about this design phase…
$30 million in and have nothing to show for… starting from scratch. Ouch!
I still fail to see what their business model is. Or maybe a business model and selling stuff is an archaic concept in today’s day and age.
This is why I keep questioning myself if I wanna go to the West to look for better funds… It seems (correct me if im wrong) that they always go for freemium services and revenue generated from ads…
Good luck to them if this is true, which I doubt it is. Switching platforms would mean at *least* a year of downtime for them (no new releases, no new features).
Also, why would Mozilla need to address Flock’s needs? Mozilla is a non-profit providing an open platform for others to build upon. Flock is a for-profit building a single product intended to steal marketshare from Mozilla.
stealing marketshare from Mozilla? what craps are you smoking here? You yourself said it, “Mozilla is a non-profit providing an open platform for others to build upon”, and Flock is one of it. Mozilla should be happy that other project uses it, not afraid of others “stealing markshare” with products based its own FREE and OPEN platform, which actually ADDS to its marketshare!!!
Flock… yet another example of VC lameness.
Hehe.. yeah.
Glad to have you back and write the first news, Arrington.
Watch for the announcement “Google makes 20M investment in Flock”
What’s the value proposition to me?
There’s always one in the bunch who asks about value proposition… I’m sure banjo you don’t even know what that means!
@Banjo you can always go to Flock and check the browser out… Or even mail them…
To me, yep, no value proposition… I tried it, and its more hectic… I think its me, i just cant stand seeing so many things happening in the screen at one point in time…
That’s ridiculously stupid.
Flock is setup as a social media browser… part of that means being able to make up for their shortcomings using Firefox plugins. Chrome is sleek but besides not being cross-platform there is also not a plugin setup in place.
Until that happens… I won’t use it. I use Flock on my laptop just because it does do a good job of centralizing things in a way I find convenient on my laptop. But the moment I can’t use delicious or shareaholic is the moment I drop them.
On my main Mac… Firefox 3.1.
Chrome has plugins coming — it’s been announced. Ridiculously stupid person.
Yes, I’m aware of that.
But coming isn’t “here.” Lot’s of things are coming but until it’s in place and there are a LOT of them, it’s not terribly useful.
Still, with the update that Mozilla support will continue is good news. And when Chrome has more options they can drop Firefox.
Coming is not even close to being the same as the thousands of add-ons already available in the Firefox add-on community. I use Flock, but I would drop it in a heartbeat if I couldn’t use Firefox add-ons.
I agree completely, and hope that a few concurrent comments might discourage them from changing.
I used Chrome for about a week, and found it to be
* Unstable – crashes at least daily, sometimes even when using Google apps
* Less usable – tabs/windows work better in Firefox
* Less configurable – cookie-handling
Sure, Chrome has nice options and perhaps it is a bit quicker, but not much. And Firefox has become complacent with its innovations recently. Maybe pressure like this will refocus its attention.
I definitely agree with this. I use a fair amount of plugins and would be very frustrated if they disappeared.
It’s hard for me to see how they could duplicate the sheer number of good FF plugins on Chrome in a short enough time to make the transition painless from a user persepctive.
So… what did they get $30 million for?
Lately I’m often reminded of the good old days of the dot-com bubble when everybody with a pulse got funding.
As banjo says above, what’s the value proposition for the users?
We work with all the browser platforms. In some ways, Firefox is behind and slow to change.
One example is cross platform CSS3 development. IE has its awkward filters, but they have been around since IE6. Webkit moves faster to deploy CSS3 recommendations. I don’t see much progress from Firefox.
Firefox slows new UX functionality that could benefit users. Rather than browser features, they should pay attention to gecko improvements. Just one opinion.
Really?
https://develop..._for_developers
Not enough for you?
Mike,
I was responding to your email from only a few hours ago when I saw your article. It’s important to clarify a couple of things. We haven’t ceased development efforts on the Mozilla platform. Our upcoming release of Flock 2.1 is built on the Mozilla platform. Having said that, the browser space is heating up, and we’ve seen a variety of exciting technologies emerge over the last several months that are appealing.
We always have and will continue to make architectural decisions that balance what’s best for our users and what’s best for Flock as a business. This has resulted in a healthy, growing user base and business for Flock, and we expect this to continue in 2009. In fact, with over seven million downloads almost entirely from word of mouth, Flock enjoys a highly satisfied user base with consistently over 92% customer satisfaction, very strong net promoter scores, and an average of four hours of usage per day.
With a continuing focus on user-centered browser innovation, our team is in active research and development on a range of exciting new enhancements to Flock. It is still far too early to comment on anything specific, but we are very excited about this design phase…
Thanks Shawn. Added your comment to an update to the post.
Nice to see you back.. hope you had some good down time!
Hi Shawn,
So can confirm/clarify either way whether you will or wont be switching over to Chrome at some point in the near future?
Cheers, Zee.
Guess not..
Embedding FF in your own applications is hard and hacky. Embedding Chrome is straightforward. Many of the old-school Mozilla developers on the new groups are unhelpful and smug. That’s not the case with Google Chrome folk.
Flock makes money via the search box on the top right of the browser (and probably the links to sites that it comes pre-loaded with). It just so happens that Yahoo is the default search engine that Flock is initially set to thanks to the deal that Bart Decrem (formerly of Firefox/Mozilla fame) created.
Why does it mean using Chrome? is not like the were using Firefox right? They were using Gecko, should this be “using WebKit”?
Yeah that bugged me too, they’ve got the terminology mixed up in the article.
Are they really using Webkit wrapped in a Chrome API, or are they using Webkit and parts of Chrome?
Using Webkit itself – rather than wrapped in a Chrome API (I don’t know if that actually exists or not) – seems like it would be a better idea if they want to keep up the cross platform support.
7 million downloads and how many active users? I’d guess around 650k if even that
I used to work at Flock but haven’t in over a year. I have no clue what their business plans are but:
Starting from scratch? Sorry, but most of flock is JavaScript. Those parts are easy to port over. You overestimate the complexity.
Regarding Mozilla vs. Flock openness – Flocks code is licensed under the GPL. Mozilla could take it if they wanted – but then they couldn’t do a non-open source browser…. When I was at flock getting changes pushed upstream required constant effort and they didn’t really seem to want them.
I’ve been hearing a lot of what you are saying in your last paragraph.
It’s not going to be any different working with Google. Working with an upstream vendor is hard, no matter who it is. If upstream wants only good quality code, which both Mozilla and Google do, you’re going to have to go through code reviews, and you’re going to have the easy solution (that might work for your app only) shot down in favor of a real fix.
Mozilla takes *a lot* of patches from non-employees. The project would be dead in the water if it didn’t. I understand that for someone like Flock it can be tough to balance “shipping your product” and “getting patches upstream”, but it’s open source, so you get out of it what you put into it.
Another ex-Flocker here…
Yes they’re not starting from scratch, but they still have to “de-XUL-ize” it and “de-XPCOM-ize” their code. Additionally, Javascript occasionally works differently with a different engine, and Flock’s Javascript has never been written with cross-browser in mind. Of course it’s not an impossible task, but it’s going to be way harder than the recent switch from Firefox 2 to Firefox 3.
The real question is whether the switch is really worth it. Yes getting stuff upstream to Mozilla has always been hard, but it’s not like Flock really need to push changes upstream to get its product done.
Cool
I know what their plan is… their plan is to get bought out by Google. They were unable to find a buyer for their Mozilla browser since Mozilla doesn’t do a lot of M&As (they only did one that I know of: Himanized) so now they’re shifting their tactic and will try to outdo Google and get acquired that way.
But still… no one will buy them for $300M and no one will buy them for even $30.
Best their VCs can hope for at this point is to get 30-50c on a dollar.
LOL man that was funny!
I highly doubt that. I think this is being done for pragmatic technical reasons. Google don’t buy companies for technical fit, they buy companies for the staff, ideas or customers. I can’t think of a significant Google acquisition that was built on Google tech.
Ian
“But Google is actively working on Mac and Linux versions of Chrome and should release them in the next few months.”
The next few months? Are you sitting on a pile of patches the Chromium community doesn’t know about?
smart Shawn. nice one.
This is a smooth move.
I don’t, in general, like everything-but-the-kitchen-sink applications such as Flock. They tend to suffer very quickly from feature creep and overall lack of focus. The Flock UI is a particularly severe example — it looks like the dog’s breakfast.
I use yoono and I switched from flock because i wanted to use firefox addons and still have the social media stuff and i use a pc at work so yoono works with pc and mac cause it’s in firefox.
flock never really got me hooked but i wish them the best of luck.
No business model.. just a bunch of fluffy nice features on top of a browser that is already solid. And Mozilla not paying attention to your needs? Please… just.. please.. they DO NOT HAVE TO CARE about your needs. Your Needs != Revenue for Mozilla.
I’ve always understood the value proposition for the users, but I have never understood how they planned to make anywhere near a reasonable return on that $30 million. Its highly unlikely that anyone will purchase them, they have no revenue stream from the browser, and it has no real competitive advantage – other people can (and have) do the exact same thing with their own browsers.
I appreciate what Flock is, but from a VC perspective this one has to be a disaster.
It feels like a punch below the belt. I still can hear mozilla whining.
And the question is, Do you really like chrome more than firefox anyway?
I cannot yet get to use it cause it does not run on mac. Or does it?
I doubt they care over at Mozilla – Flock’s taken their codebase and given them back what exactly?
Flock is 100% open source. Mozilla is free to integrate any part.
Ian
This is a lame response. No open source project works this way. “It’s open source, you could take it!” just isn’t how anything gets done. All the work is in integration and cleaning up patches and getting them into a state where they’re acceptable to the upstream repository. Having contributed significant patches to multiple open source projects, I can tell you that no project goes around looking for people who have taken their code and done something useful with it. The onus is on the developer who did the work to get it to a state where upstream can use it, in every case I’ve seen.
Flock has contributed a lot of patches to Mozilla.
Additionally there has been a close collaboration between the build teams, and the Flock build team helped configuring Mozilla’s tinderbox to improve the build time.
I had never even heard of Flock until August of 2008 with the Thirty Day Challenge. Ed Dale introduced it to us to get newbies used to social networking. It has some features that I really do appreciate. Most of them have now been duplicated with newly created Firefox plugins.
If the new Flock can carry the speed and efficiency of Google Chrome…count me in! One of my favorite features of Chrome is that if a page crashes…you only lose that one tab not the entire browser. Brilliant!
$30 million…I think I’m going to build a browser. LOL
Flock is more of Social Browser and it never got that much attention from readers .
I wasn’t impressed with Flock in the first place and I switched to Yoono that does very similar things and a bit more, and is just a Firefox add-on from a company that did not raise $30M (not that I recall, at least).
Ditching Firefox is a bit like slapping their users in the face.
They move to Chrome, so what, do they think their competitors won’t ?
Who the Flock cares? I just had to say it…
Go Flock! Fly be free Flock!
Flock is more like a Social OS with a pulse on what’s going on in my web. I don’t want to have to be everywhere online and I don’t have to with Flock. Flock brings it to me.
A browser is what we used when the net was young and in it’s tween years. Now, I don’t browse. I plug in all over the web and I want one place to help me experience, filter and share it more efficiently. This is Flock to me.
Flock ‘n Rock baby.
I’m a huge fan of flock. Started using it ever since Geoffrey Arone (one of the co-founders) showed it to me when it first started.
It hands down has the best RSS reader out there. Once you use that, you’ll find you will be 3X more efficient in reading.
I use chrome and flock daily with the occasional firefox 3 for sites that just are a bit more picky.
One day Chrome will be totally dominant.
How does this solve any of flocks fundamental issue of getting more users?
They’re going to just try to get hype by saying they’re built on chrome. But they still have a HUGE uphill battle of trying to pit themselves against two huge heavy weights. I don’t see them catching up to firefox anytime soon. Not only that, but firefox still hasn’t trumped the IE trio (v5+v6+v7+v8 %’s).
Lets be realistic, even if google chrome does somehow catch up to firefox, that doesn’t mean that flock will. Lets not forget that flock never did catch up to firefox, which is silently ran with/against for a while.
And lastly, just because they’re code is javascript, doesn’t mean it will all just ‘port’ over to chrome. You have to change architecture, communicate with a non-existent interface, deal with a completely different UI, etc.
Best of luck, but I honestly think this is just another delay tactic until they can figure out how to adapt a once promising relic of the early web 2.0 days. They need to hurry up or else someone else will beat them to the punch with an group of firefox extensions.
Nice to see you back, Mike! We’ve just been all having a jolly good time, you know hangin’ out, chillin, and destroying the reputations of perfectly good companies, like Last.fm. I hope you and the rest of the Tech Chrunch team are proud of yourselves for posting rumours and not retracting or updating them!
Flock has contributed a lot of patches to Mozilla.
Additionally there has been a close collaboration between the build teams, and the Flock build team helped configuring Mozilla’s tinderbox to improve the build time.
Sorry, forgot to add great post! Can’t wait to see your next post!
I guess they are moving to Chromium rather than Google Chrome…
another ex-flocker here joining the party a bit late.
I’ve been driving flock and chrome simultaneously since I left flock. I find they both fix each others shortcomings. Chrome sucks at pdf. Flock has some strange flash issues at times, but between the two of them I’m set.
Mostly, I find chrome good for working: attaching and detaching tabs is wonderful for organizing a talk. Flock I use when I want to get distracted. I have flock configured to provide an endless torrent of custom tailored content coming at me from all corners (these days mostly from clickball). If flock switches to chrome I’ll have to figure out a new setup, but by then I’ll probably be able to swap chrome for the chromium flock and flock for firefox 4. In a web with so many goddamn “standards,” two rendering engines are unfortunately better than one.
WHY ARE THE COMMENT IN THE RIGHT SIDE COLUMN OF THE PAGE??
THIS DRIVES ME NUTS
To clarify, the Yahoo deal was done by Geoffrey Arone, who is the co-founder and VP Strategy, no Bart. It was also a very strong deal for Flock.
Flock, sometimes the grass is not greener on the other side. Hopefully Google treats you good.
had not heard of Flock before… i might surely try it.
thanks for the article.
Well well well, yet another completely inaccurate TechCrunch story. Who’d have thought it?
lol
Flock always had a rocky relationship with Mozilla, which is understandable given the competitive nature of their business.
However, Firefox has a good extensibility model (with XUL), and redoing all this work on Chrome might take quite a while. However, XUL/Firefox Extension is definitely good little plugin, but might be not optimum for what Flock is trying to do.
Anyway, I think there is a market for vertical browsers, however, it might not be a $300 Millions dollars one. I will be surprise if the investors would do more than a x2 on this one.
Unfortunately Mozilla Corp are generally fairly unresponsive at incorporating changes into the platform that aren’t directly useful for the Firefox application. I actually think this is the right approach – they can have a far bigger impact by focusing on the application user experience and the web development platform than expending energy on making the insides of Firefox reusable.
Ian
I want Flock to build on Mosaic 1.1 or my AOL 1.0 browser
(smile and wink)
This isn’t that surprising. The Mozilla community is rather broken, the people in charge don’t actually know how to run an open source project.
Since Flock directly competes in their space, it sucks even more for them that others dealing with Mozilla. It seems when it boils down to it, Mozilla the corporation with its bottom line to worry about trumps Mozilla the non-profit org and it’s mission to “support the open web”.
Mozilla is all talk and very little action.
google and mozilla have a slightly abusive relationship… http://tr.im/gX66
I don’t care which browser will eventually evolve to be THE BEST but I better stick with the best we have TODAY. I prefer many browsers over one-two dominant ones because reasonable competition brings out the best in which.
P.S. Cheers, “internetizens”!
Attention Flock Dev Team,
I am a huge fan of flock, but make no mistake about it, it is my chosen flavor of Firefox. It is laid out nicely for the social media user, and most importantly, It allows me to continue with Firefox, a tool I have been tweaking and personalizing for a very long time. I am not alone.
I am a power user of firefox addons, plugins grease monkey scripts and about:config mods. Most of my firefox experience will remain the same, if I said good bye to Flock. I would need a few addons to replace the functionality I will lose.
This news is troublesome to your supporters. Can Flock tell us this is not the shape of things to come? Because it is a real drag to have to go back to retraining my Firefox browser but I would do it in a heartbeat.
You will lose a bunch of your base if you do this.
Please Say it aint so!
Tuna Oddfellow
It’s unlikely they’re building on chrome as there’s not even a plugin Api yet. So they could be building on chromium and extending the chromium ui. Or they could be building on webkit/skia and creating their own browser around it – in fact it’s entirely possible they could be using the existing xul browser with a webkit/skia website renderer – witness ietab on firefox.
I like Chrome for work/business applications. Sending documents around by various means is a little more efficient with Chrome. I still use FF for personal use though. I use This* digital security site to learn the security issues associated with them.