Atlassian is acquiring The Browser Company
445 comments
·September 4, 2025crowcroft
The strategic insight behind Arc was perfect – your browser IS the Operating System, and so we should build a browser that can function as that platform.
Arc had pretty good market validation with early adopters, they say that growth was flattened out but IMO that's normal for most products, and it's up to the company to find out WHY growth flattened and then solve that problem. Not kill the product and chase some entirely new idea about AI.
I wouldn't be surprised if the investors were fed up with the business and wanted out, pretty good exit all things considered.
bhouston
> The strategic insight behind Arc was perfect – your browser IS the Operating System, and so we should build a browser that can function as that platform.
Marc Andreessen said famously (or at least is paragraphed as saying) in 1994 that the "Browser is the Operating System" and people have been doing riffs on that since then.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2012/04/22/always...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/09/software-...
This was also the idea behind Chromebooks:
scrlk
> Marc Andreessen said famously (or at least is paragraphed as saying) in 1994 that the "Browser is the Operating System" and people have been doing riffs on that since then.
Isn't that downstream of Sun Microsystems’ old slogan: The Network is the Computer?
mananaysiempre
AFAICT, Sun’s underlying vision was more on the side of pervasive RPC and/or downloadable code, i.e. closer to DCOM or NeWS than HTTP.
(We have in fact ultimately ended up layering downloadable code on top of HTTP. I don’t think I like the results, yet some of the things I don’t like seem inherent to downloadable code in general.)
hippo22
Sometimes there isn't a reason why a product fails to find broad product adoption. If you take VC money, you need a mega hit. Sometimes, all you find is a niche.
crowcroft
Which is why tactics are so important. I would say no one has actually got the experience right yet, 'browser is the OS' has been true for a long time, and no one has delivered it yet.
Similar to ambient computing and augmented reality.
mattlutze
One might suggest Cromebooks have done so well because Google got it more or less right.
tomjakubowski
They say the browser is the OS, and yet eww is only one small part of Emacs.
wslh
In 1994 the browser was not an operating system, was an hyperlink media app. JavaScript was born in 1995 and for years was “only” used for modifying the colors of HTML buttons on a mouse-over.
al_borland
This wasn't a new insight by Arc. ChromeOS exists. Palm's WebOS was a thing. Even Apple pitched rich web apps as the avenue for 3rd party developers to make things for the original iPhone, they were just a bit too early. There is even Electron, for web apps to run as desktop apps on all major operating systems. Most browsers can also turn any website into a self-contained web app that lives along side other local apps.
I don't think Arc ever realized their vision. They gave some cryptic ideas of their vision for the future of the web, but I don't feel like they fundamentally changed anything. I was expecting Arc to eventually get to a place where I could login to Arc on any computer and have my home session, always up to date anywhere I was. Of course, this idea would have been a lot better in the 90s or 00s when computer labs were more common and everyone didn't have a computer in their pocket. The value of a cloud OS isn't as appealing as it once was.
In terms of growth flattening out; they threw in the towel too early. It was only after they stopped adding new features and decided to give up on Arc that it seemed to really start to get traction. I was seeing blog posts and YouTube videos left and right about Arc, all while knowing that it was effectively dead, but the memo never made it to the people who just found it and were sharing it like crazy. A new browser from a new company, that piggybacks on the browser that already has 70+% marketshare isn't going to take over the world in a few years. It was a long play and they were too impatient, and had already given up by the time they started to get some real traction outside of the early adopter space.
I remember when Firefox really hit the mainstream. Friends would see friends using IE, and push them out of the way to install Firefox. It felt very grass roots, but it worked... it just took time.
chillfox
Doesn't help that it didn't run on Linux (where a lot of people are willing to check out new tech), I kept checking in on it a few times a year, but it was never available. I have gotten people to use Firefox and Chrome in the past, but I did not push Arc to anyone as I could not use it myself.
mattlutze
I'm a little surprised how many Chromium browser builders we have in the market, and how each continues to convince a group of investors that _they_ are going to be the ones to finally get it right, while still building on Chrome's skeleton.
But, there's a bunch on WebKit and Gecko as well.
crowcroft
On the other hand, it's kind of crazy no one can make an OS except Windows, Apple and Google? Trillion dollar market and no one can compete.
alemanek
Browsers display content that follows a very specific set of standards. There are also suites of tests to verify your compliance with those standards. So, every browser that is standards compliant should work for the vast majority of websites in existence. Still a big lift but doable for talented team.
Now an OS without application compatibility is kind of DoA unless there is a very compelling reason to switch. Add in hardware compatibility and it gets even worse.
Much bigger hill to climb then incorporating an existing browser engine into a custom spin of a browser. Even a browser engine from scratch would be smaller than a new bare metal OS.
johncolanduoni
There’s a huge market for OSes that can consistently run Windows software. There’s no market for a brand new general purpose OS that can’t run anything until software developers port to it. Similarly, nobody is keen to pay anyone for an OS that can run Android or Linux software when they can get that for free.
dehrmann
A nearby comment repeated the quote "the browser is the OS."
The OS game is over. Desktop computing is becoming a professionals-only thing. We can talk about pros and cons of Windows, MacOS, and Linux, but it's a shrinking market without room for a fourth player.
coliveira
OS is the perfect software to create lock in for consumers. Once a company is successful there, it is very difficult for others to compete.
greymalik
RIP BeOS
hnlmorg
…and Linux, Android, WebOS, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonflyBSD, GNU Hurd, Minix, QNX, Inferno, L4, FreeDOS, OpenSolaris forks like Illumos, OpenIndina and SmartOS, the various embedded real time OSs, the various Sony PlayStation and Nintendo Switch system softwares, various different bootloaders and UEFI interfaces, networking firmware like Draytek firmware, Cisco IOS, etc.
And that’s not even covering the numerous hobby OSs out there like Haiku, SerenityOS, ReactOS, TempleOS, SkyOS.
Then you have experimental OSs like Singularity too. There’s numerous examples of them alone but I think you get my point. :)
bsder
Building an OS is easy and straightforward.
Now let's make that OS talk to a graphics card--whoops, no Nvidia for you, peon!
An OS isn't a problem. Hardware support on an OS--that's a huge problem.
conceptme
Linux?
blehn
Isn't that basically the same premise as Chrome, which already dominates the market? Google even made something called ChromeOS. Arc wasn't really more than a distracting skin on Chromium with a few innovative bits of UI...
bageljlin17
Exactly, they basically have better designer. For the real tech feature, I really don't think they ever brings any new invention to the product. Data sync, AI, etc. All other competitors have these features. They even need to count on chromium update.
knr2345
Did they drop data sync? Could have sworn all of my spaces, tabs, folders, favorites and etc synced anytime I logged back in on my other machine (with access to spaces on iOS well)
It’s been a while since I used it regularly though.
cryptozeus
100% on point, classic case of drinking ai cool aid and killing what users wanted
crowcroft
The thing is they make the correct diagnoses of Arc's issues [1], but then instead of addressing them and doing the hard work of building a great product, they took the easy way out and started another greenfield project. How often has that ever been a good decision?
1 - https://browsercompany.substack.com/p/letter-to-arc-members-...
MangoToupe
> How often has that ever been a good decision?
It got them acquired, so certainly it worked for them this time.
> doing the hard work of building a great product
How often has that ever been a good decision?
creatonez
> The strategic insight behind Arc was perfect – your browser IS the Operating System, and so we should build a browser that can function as that platform.
I'm sorry, but this is the exact same insight that MSN Explorer had. And everyone in retrospect sees that as an absolute spamfest. Ironically, in a very similar way as AI features are seen today.
foobarchu
Similarly, isn't this the insight that led to both ChromeOS and FirefoxOS?
wpm
How many actual regular every day people are using either? ChromeOS's big market is "tired and underfunded K-12 IT/Library/HVAC admin who just doesn't give a fuck give the kids a chromebook so I can go do something else", it's not exactly making waves among the general populace.
dehrmann
> I'm sorry, but this is the exact same insight that MSN Explorer had
The internet wasn't fast enough. There are a number of dot-com era ideas that were before their time for various reasons. There's also Wordle. That game could have been made (and I think variants were) for at least a 20-year window, but it caught on late in the pandemic when our streaming queues were exhausted.
null
rvz
Spent more money on marketing + steve jobs cosplaying than building a browser that is better than chrome but had zero revenue for years to show for it.
They betted on the possibility that OpenAI or Perplexity would buy them. With the Google monopoly suit not requiring them to sell Chrome after all, there was no reason to raise any more money as they continued to lose money.
That looks like an exit on terrible terms, like Humane and HP.
crowcroft
All things considered the cash looks pretty good – maybe not the deal they wanted, but doesn't look bad all things considered.
drewbeck
I'm a huge fan of Arc and generally not a fan of TBCNY due to their abandonment of the browser for their AI hype machine, Dia. What's odd about this acquisition is that the move to Dia was (publicly) presented as a move toward the consumer; that consumers weren't ready for a radical reinvention of the browser interface so it made sense to revert to something more standard if you wanted to do something new with the browser.
I always saw Dia as fundamentally a move toward AI investor bux, but I did find the "Arc was too novel for large uptake" a reasonable perspective.
Atlassian, tho, has nothing for the regular every-day consumer, they make SaaS for business. So what's the deal?
My dream for Arc, from the beginning, was that it could act as a middle-man between all the various SaaS platforms we use daily at work. Imagine: your Shortcut tickets link automatically to Slack and you can one-click open the relevant Slack channel in a side-by-side view.
We do so much switching between contexts and imo the browser could be a great surface for improving our workflows.
joeblubaugh
> Atlassian, tho, has nothing for the regular every-day consumer, they make SaaS for business. So what's the deal?
sometimes you just find a big enterprise sucker who's desperate to stay relevant.
NaomiLehman
Opera and Vivaldi have some impressive features up their sleeves. Similar philosophies to Arc Browser. Worth giving them a try!
Pfhortune
It has been so tragic to see the unforced downfall of this company. Arc is such an amazing browser that really did some new and interesting things. They clearly have some phenomenal talent on the team, having managed to get their swift-centric development working on _Windows_. That's a huge and difficult undertaking!
And they threw it away to work on (probably) the CEO's new fixation and threw Arc away like an old toy. And now they're selling to Atlassian and I would bet money, will just evaporate. Nothing they ever built will mean anything to Atlassian in the long term. Nobody wants to use an Atlassian browser.
jonas21
If going from a product with miniscule market share and no revenue to a $610M exit is a tragic unforced downfall, I really need to start failing more.
neutronicus
> Nobody wants to use an Atlassian browser.
False.
On my work machine, I would grasp at any straw that promised to make JIRA less annoying.
Pfhortune
Based on my usage of Jira over the years, I believe all the annoying parts of Jira come from _within_ the walls of Atlassian HQ...
milkshakes
Or they could take that money and actually improve the UX instead of needing an AI to navigate it?
cyberpunk
They used to have an iPad app that made it actually tolerable. Then killed it.
RIP ipad app. You are missed.
tombert
I hate Jira like all good people, though in fairness I haven't really found a replacement for it that I actually liked.
The closest I've used was Pivotal Tracker, which I believe is dead now, but I still remember finding stuff annoying about it (though drawing a blank on those facts right now). I wonder if dedicated ticket management stuff at scale is just inherently going to be annoying.
I use Obsidian with the Tasks plugin as a Jira-lite, and for whatever reason it doesn't bother me. I think it's because I can tune it however I want without a bunch of menus and write my own arbitrary queries, but I also think part of the appeal is that the tasks can be part of my notes, instead of a separate application (which is why I couldn't stick with OmniFocus).
makeitdouble
Did any Atlassian product ever make JIRA less annoying ?
My impression was JiRA is the planet and everything else are satellites turning around. They come and go but never touch JIRA.
faizmokh
> Nobody wants to use Atlassian browser.
I don't want to use Jira either but yet I can't run away from it
taminka
> having managed to get their swift-centric development working on _Windows_. That's a huge and difficult undertaking!
im not a swift expert, but building your project for one of the officially supported targets shouldn't be considered a "phenomenal" achievent? lol
jshier
Considering TBC hired the one guy doing anything with Swift on Windows and paid for much of the work needed to make Windows an officially supported platform, it was still an achievement. I'm not even sure I'd call Windows officially supported since most of the support comes from TBC and not Apple or official Swift channels.
askonomm
I recall something about them trying to get SwiftUI working on Windows, which would've been a pretty big thing indeed. No idea if they ever did or how exactly they built the Windows UI in the end.
null
basisword
The achievement wasn't building Swift code on Windows, it was using Swift to build a native Windows application utilising Windows API's.
https://www.swift.org/blog/swift-everywhere-windows-interop/
Pfhortune
Ah, fair enough. Showing my ignorance on that one. I know little about their tech stack and was under the impression they had some secret sauce.
basisword
You're not ignorant, the other person was.
taminka
i mean they did have some really cool designs, but technically they just had relatively advanced chrome fork...
nerdjon
What is with this need for a single application to do so many different tasks instead of just being focused on doing its job and doing it well (browsing the web in this case).
I just don't understand how they can with a straight face say "Today’s browsers weren’t built for work." when their entire business relies on browsers ability to do exactly that and have basically been fine (heavy javascript usage in Jira aside which this is not going to magically fix).
Looking at any of this I just don't see what this is actually supposed to solve.
cosmic_cheese
I’d like to ask the same thing. The main things I want from my browser are for it to be a good browser. Fast and secure with excellent tab and bookmark management capabilities. Anything else except maybe ad blocking is extraneous.
I understand that a lot of people live in their browsers, but for web apps I’d rather split them out into “installed” PWAs and have them benefit from system app/window management facilities than have them clog up my browser’s tabs.
forbiddenvoid
I want a browser in my apps, not apps in my browser. The whole thing has just gone completely backwards in the last 20 years.
Browsers make terrible operating systems. People live in their browsers because they have to, not because they want to.
sagarm
I want to. I like that I can open multiple windows, tab them, share and save URLs, all with no stupid app-specific updater widget, a pretty good sandbox, and explicit permissions for breaking out of that sandbox in limited ways (e.g. notifications). All that works seamlessly and consistently on Windows, MacOS, and Linux. Often the same URLs also work well on mobile (Android) without installing more stupid apps. Extensions allow you to modify the apps, while staying in the sandbox.
Native app updaters and tray icons and startup services are incredibly obnoxious.
presentation
Are you paying for your browser?
There’s your answer.
neutronicus
Well, Atlassian may be acqu-hiring the team specifically to make a JIRA PWA
threetonesun
Zawinski's Law in action.
I suppose the good thing with AI is we're coming close to being able to roll our own versions of whatever we want when the software we were using ascends to the enterprise plane.
ozgrakkurt
I would like to see you and all people think that they can roll own software with AI come together with AI as well and write chromium one day
threetonesun
I don't think I was suggesting you build your own Chromium so much as do what all these other browser projects do and fork it. The "software A got too bloated so we released software B" cycle is eternal but I'm optimistic it's moving even closer to the actual user than it has been in a while.
webworker
Arc was the only Chrome browser that I could stomach as a development browser/environment. Kind of tight-lipped, but I assume it'll keep getting updates?
I use Safari day-to-day, but its behaviors are inconsistent with caching which makes development hell. I notice this caching behavior even when you have it disabled in the network developer tools.
ghm2199
I've switched to Zen browser recently (I like it's spaces and folder structure to organize work on a daily basis, same as Arc). fFox nightly is not there yet but it's getting close with tabs on the left..
dutchCourage
I've also made the move to Zen. I think Arc users will feel right at home there. It hasn't quite reached he same level of polish just yet but being in active development is a big plus.
On top of that, Zen can be personalized with CSS. As someone who spends a lot of time in the browser, it's been awesome to be able to tailor it to my needs. https://docs.zen-browser.app/guides/live-editing
cosmic_cheese
I’m hopeful for Zen, not just as a successor for Arc but as a Gecko-based browser that sweats the small details. I appreciate that Firefox exists but it’s got a number of rough edges that’ve seemingly been forgotten.
CarbonNanotubes
One thing I noticed shortly after when I initially switch Arc a couple years ago from Firefox, ads were more targeted at me and I definitely felt more tracked online. I started using Zen Browser at work because they blocked Arc for Windows (Zen blocked as well but I can run the Twilight build without being blocked :D) and the more I used it I just like it better than Arc in general and it was nice to be back to using Firefox again. When Arc went into maintenance mode it was just that last thing to finally get me to move off of it and over to Zen everywhere.
jimmydoe
Zen is nice.
Arc is still irreplaceable for its true separation of tab and window, it’s like tmux for browser, I haven’t seen any other browser do that.
shuckles
Pinned tabs in Safari propagate between windows.
felarof
We are in early stages, but as a big Arc fan myself, we want to bring build this feature.
If you can raise a github issue, we can get to work asap https://github.com/browseros-ai/BrowserOS
nicoka11
Actually you can do it in chrome (having multiple profiles basically), but yeah nowhere as good as arc is, i'm using zen rn but still very sad for arc, I have some hopes they bring back arc to life (either directly or inside of Dia)
Reagan_Ridley
I think the one you replied to was referring the fact that Arc can have multiple windows (terminal) "attach" to same tab (tmux session), that has nothing to do with profile.
jshchnz
$610M, all cash??? How were they worth that much... all they seemed to ever do was rebrand
Waraqa
"Arc isn’t just a Chromium fork. It runs on custom infrastructure we call ADK — the Arc Development Kit. Think of it as an internal SDK for building browsers (especially those with imaginative interfaces). That’s our secret sauce. It lets ex-iOS engineers prototype native browser UI quickly, without touching C++."
https://open.substack.com/pub/browsercompany/p/letter-to-arc...
scosman
A UI framework? What’s the other $608m for?
Groxx
Yeah, I kinda read that as "it's not just a chromium fork with additional code. the code is organized. nobody has ever done that before!"
ausssssie
Or... A UI framework? what's the other $612m for?
ale
Just like the old Carlin joke. Made me chuckle.
manquer
Is a browser SDK for iOS worth that kind of money targeted users who are comfortable with Objective-C and not C++ even a market of note.
It would be one thing if they said it is for say JS developers or something a-la electron there are plenty of apps from MS teams to slack to linear etc who perhaps would pay for that enough, but swift /objective C dev not comfortable with c++ would be minuscule market ?
daveidol
ObjC is mostly dead, and most Swift devs are not comfortable with C++.
cosmicgadget
Sounds perfect for Atlassian's love of "imaginative" interfaces.
hahn-kev
How's that different from Electron?
weaksauce
that's kinda funny since that's basically exactly how firefox does it with the chrome of the browser being javascript and html and css itself.
NoteyComplexity
Probably they were just chasing the hype because the word AI appeared in the browser, considering the news mentions “browser with AI features”. So does their acquisition news.
I hope I am wrong.
djoldman
100% agree. The odds of this investment paying off feel slim to none.
guluarte
It would have made sense if they had a large user base or groundbreaking tech, but they are just a Chrome fork with a very niche set of users.
theappsecguy
I mean have you seen some of the valuations for VSCode forks with some AI slapped on haha. I agree that this seems a lot for what I assume is a product with no solid revenue stream
Shank
I would've actually expected a buyer like OpenAI or Anthropic, if I'm being perfectly honest. Atlassian is such a strange buyer. $610m in cash is really low in the grand scheme of AI pricing too. If they're only worth $610m, I feel like this says a lot that "AI browsers" aren't actually worth that much. Remember, Instagram was $1b. The Windsurf acquihire was $2.4b and there are surely a lot more people in business that use browsers than write code.
Was Atlassian the highest bidder, or was Atlassian the only bidder?
k9294
It looks really overpriced to me. Dia is a rough MVP. Arc is really a very niche browser with little adoption. I dont think technology worth this money, and Arc the user base is low compared to major browsers, probably around 1-5 million users with no growth (most likely they hit the plateau even before they decide to kill the Arc in favor of Dia).
tripletpeaks
This is the first I’m hearing of either of these products, or this company. If you’d asked me what a program named Dia was ten minutes ago, I’d have confidently replied that it’s an open source gui diagramming tool.
rgblambda
Dia is the Irish word for "God". Probably not what The Browser Company were going for, but I can't unthink that when I see it.
democracy
Same, and I don't not really wanna try:
"A new AI browser from the makers of Arc: Chat with your tabs"
say what??? )))
warthog
Considering they never made revenue, there must be more than one bidder - otherwise the price could have been much lower. I remember them raising at $500 MM at the last round
new_here
Agreed, OpenAI and Anthropic want to get as close to the user as possible. Browser is used more often than a specific website or standalone desktop app and much less work than an entire OS. Raycast also seems well positioned but perhaps more niche.
Perhaps Atlassian was sitting on cash and needed to make some bets. If you can build a big enough user base for a browser it can earn handsomely from AdWords type referral fees. Look at what Google pays Apple to be default on Safari and how much referral spend Chrome recouped for Google etc. Maybe Atlassian will try and promote Dia to its customer base and look to launch more AI type commercial product discovery experiences like Perplexity Shopping.
utyop22
"Perhaps Atlassian was sitting on cash and needed to make some bets
Perhaps investors should put on a stupidity discount and discount the value of cash when valuing the value of equity!
RachelF
Given Atlassian's terrible product quality, I give it two years until anything they buy becomes borderline unusable frustration.
al_borland
I lost all faith in The Browser Company when they went into a maintenance-only mode with Arc to shift to Dia, without any real announcement. Just a reply to a Twitter post calling them out. They figured no one would notice. I think they eventually addressed it after some public pressure, but I don’t think they sold the decision well.
AI seems like a feature to add to existing browsers, not something that needs its own dedicated browser. People’s workflows get tied to a browser, especially one like Arc, so to proclaim it done, with no need for any new features after just a couple years, while most expect a browser to carry on for decades, left a really bad taste in my mouth.
I was excited when they launched, but won’t miss them. They felt more like a dev backed hype machine. I’m not sure what Atlassian has planned, but won’t be surprised if they kill the browsers and integrate some tools into their existing product line.
hbn
Hey, give them a break. Arc is like... 2 years old. You can't expect anyone to maintain legacy code THAT OLD!
That's like 17 hot new frameworks out of date!
julianozen
I've been using it for 4 years!
democracy
We are looking for someone with 10 years of experience though! Rejected!
muragekibicho
The java, it is scripting, all day, every day, hakol hayom
CarbonNanotubes
yea, I guess Google, Microsoft, Apple and Mozilla also ditch their work after only two years as well...
Also 2 years or even 4 years is not that long at all
rkomorn
I'm not a mind reader but I think the post you replied to was sarcasm.
neodymiumphish
Actually, I think the switch to Dia was them providing certain potential buyers proof that they (as a dev team) could build a new browser with a completely different UI and mindset/intent quickly. Essentially just something to prove their "Arc Dev Kit" efficiency.
julianozen
Yep, you nailed it.
Why would I try/migrate to a new workflow after they axed my old one. You can't rebuild customer trust after that
CarbonNanotubes
I just switched to Zen instead.
rvschuilenburg
Zen was a bit rough around the edges when it first launched, but it's a solid replacement to Arc now. Honestly don't miss Arc anymore.
amykhar
I also hated that they were trying to make it a free tool, which would mean selling user data to make money, and would require growth at all costs.
These days, I'm trying to migrate to paid tools. I would much rather work with a slower growing company that has a real business model other than grow and sell out.
knr2345
I share your sentiment but still can’t imagine adding a browser-specific AI subscription alongside my current GPT or Claude sub.
al_borland
Same. Old business models make more sense to me and seem healthier for customers, employees, and the economy. Growth at all costs, with the goal of a quick and profitable exit only benefits the founders, and is generally a net loss for society as a whole.
I can’t say I’d be above taking the briefcase full of money when dangled in front of my face, but when that’s the goal from the outset, the incentive structure feels backward.
thewebguyd
> a real business model other than grow and sell out.
This is why I have problems trusting any new SaaS these days. The industry has changed from wanting to build a good product to wanting to grow fast and then exit, and typically the users get screwed.
You just can't trust that anything will stick around, so why bother adopting the tool in the first place, especially for anything that's not open source.
lotsofpulp
Assuming the business has access to the data, the backup plan for the business is always to sell the data. There is very little chance the leaders of a business simply wind down the business and close the doors.
felarof
I was a big fan of Arc too, they should at least open sourced it after abandoning.
Anyways, now we are building BrowserOS, an open-source alternative to Dia -- https://github.com/browseros-ai/BrowserOS
Leo_666
I'm also a big fan of Arc, and I'm currently a heavy user. I have zero interest in the upcoming Dia release - I feel like Dia is a step backward compared to Arc.
sniffers
Building Dia was such a colossal mistake, and the folks running TBCNY seem to not understand. They believe they are reinventing the wheel, and every time I hear them talk I cringe.
whalesalad
Selling for over half a billion dollars sounds like zero mistakes were made.
afavour
Doesn't mean it isn't a mistake, just means you've conned someone into thinking your mistake was a good choice.
whalesalad
That is 99.99999% of all things in life. Business. Sales. Dating.
sniffers
They talk about their product like it's the reinvention of fire. Seems awful low for that. And if they made no mistakes, surely they wouldn't need to be acquired? Surely they'd be making their own money?
And there are plenty of stories of how they treat their employees that suggest there are absolutely mistakes being made.... company is a joke.
meshugaas
their valuation from last funding in March 2024 was $550m, sold for $610m minus cash on hand. so basically at value...agreed that it's a nice windfall for these folks but relatively bad outcome. When you're building a new browser with AI a year before the trillion dollar AI industry goes bananas for AI browsers and you end up with 600 mil, that feels like an L.
jazzyjackson
On the other hand, what is an AI browser supposed to enable that justifies a billion dollar valuation?
Reagan_Ridley
Dia was built for VC, no user will really like it.
CarbonNanotubes
why does everything need to be about making macho bucks? Make a good product and support it long term, don't sell out just to fill your pockets
whalesalad
When someone comes knocking on your door with a check for $610 million let me know if you have the restraint to say no and go back to work.
null
arnvald
I really appreciate that there's a company trying to reimagine browsers. Arc was an interesting idea, I used it for a few months, but in the end I switched back to Firefox. I haven't tried Dia yet, and now I'm not sure if I should.
I do think that selling a browser is going to be an extremely difficult task, so having an enterprise software machine with huge customer base might help it, but Atlassian strikes me as a company that will eventually just kill the project and turn this into a de facto acquihire.
Cu3PO42
If you liked Arc, you should try Zen. I understand it brings many of the same ideas to a Firefox base.
arnvald
Thanks for recommendation, I'll give it a try
null
4ggr0
+1, i used firefox since my childhood, never interested by Arc because it's idiotic to me that a browser requires an account. a while back someone suggested Zen, i now use it as my main browser since a bit over a month. really happy :)
sniffers
Skip Dia, it's a security nightmare.
Illniyar
Isn't Atlassian where products go to die? :)
Is this is an acquihire? Atlassian does not seem to have strategic overlap with making a browser in any meaningful way I can think of.
cpach
I think Atlassian is kind of trying to be the Lotus Notes of the 20s. If so, I can see why their upper management approved this acquisition.
Will anything good come out of it…? I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it.
https://browsercompany.substack.com/p/your-tuesday-in-2030
https://www.atlassian.com/blog/announcements/atlassian-acqui...
https://www.theverge.com/web/770947/browser-company-arc-dia-...