The stock Android browser is not Chrome. It uses Webkit but otherwise the development is completely separate.

The Adobe reader plugin for Mac is a Safari specific plugin. It does not use the standard NPAPI plugin architecture that nearly all other non-IE plugins use.

The dev for pdf-mac stopped updating their code early in the 3.6 release cycle. There is a edit you can do to make the 1.2.0 version run in Firefox 7 but you need to run Firefox in 32 bit mode. http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20110622163401497

If you are experiencing crashes please provide crash ids. https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Mozilla%20Crash%20Reporter

Please provide crash IDs then. https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Mozilla%20Crash%20Reporter

Mozilla has no control over Google's toolbar team. If they don't want to support a browser there is nothing Mozilla can do. The Google toolbar is closed source binary extension.

Ubiquity is now a community project. You can find the community updated version at https://bitbucket.org/satyr/ubiquity/downloads

These decisions that may seem random or ill thought out to you have data behind them. A surprisingly large number of people would be happy with a back button, a bookmark menu and a way to bookmark a site. Now these might not be the same users that Firefox has but there are a lot of people who only use those functions.

http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2010/04/14/menu-item-usage-study-an-update-to-the-initial-analysis/

Re:re: #1 Bookmark keywords have been a part of Firefox since pre 1.0 as it was a Netscape feature.

Re: #2 since Firefox 4 address bar search now does a normal Google search again as it did pre 1.5.

This is not about making more money. Mozilla is not driven by that economic model. Mozilla sees the walled gardens of the current crop of smartphone and similar devices operating systems as a threat to personal freedom and the heath of the internet. This project is an exploration partly to see what technical gaps exist that web application needs access to function in a similar manner to a desktop application.

There are already companies and working groups trying to accomplish this. Rather than have the specs written without any exploratory work. Mozilla is proposing to build out B2G to evaluate where those problems and shortfalls are. To me this seems like a better idea than having device manufacturers who want to expose the world. Is the user on 4g, wifi, what is the access point name, what is the user paying per kb, etc.? Or having working groups building out a spec absent of actual web developers.

Android is being looked at as it has open source code e.g. the Linux kernel and device drivers that work on the majority of phones produced today. The whole point of this is evaluate what applications on the web need. Instead of one application written 3 or 4+ times for each of the Smartphone operating systems one would write one HTML app and it would run on modern Trident, Gecko, Webkit, Presto, etc.

Except that the engines were the Saturn V stage one. All I can say is that was a piece of shit article. I feel dumber for even looking at it.

Microsoft was throwing stones in a glass house. Their Siliverlight implementation has the same problem http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/676134/dos-vulnerability-in-silverlight-5s-3d-similar-to-webgl-dos-vulnerability

I don't think you understand who you are talking to. Secondly as a non-profit selling Firefox is not a primary goal. It is then ends to a mean of promoting open source and open standards on the web. https://www.mozilla.org/about/mission.html

One trick pony that produces code that other applications use as a foundation. NSS, Spidermonkey, XULrunner, NSPR, Bugzilla...

Funds open source groups developing code for accessibility, teaching web standards, creating open standards...