By the way, picking this up from a while back:

Originally posted by karahd
- about:version shows details of what version of Chrome is running, along with the user-agent text that the browser reports when identifying itself to Web sites. Why "Mozilla" is in this string is a mystery to me, though perhaps it has to do with the way Chrome can use Firefox plug-ins; why "Mozilla" is apparently in the iPhone's user-agent text is even more a mystery.
This dates back to some Microsoft shenanigans ages ago. Or even further back, to some webmaster stupidities shortly before the MS shenanigans.

There was a time when the only browser that announced its User Agent as "Mozilla" was Mozilla (well, that broad branch - Moz, Netscape, etc). This browser had features that other browsers didn't, so web designers went "Is the string 'Mozilla' in the UA? If so, put this code out, if not, just emit something simple". And then Microsoft bring out their own browser. It supports a whole lot of stuff that used to be Mozilla-only. Oh dear, all these web sites don't send that lovely impressive content... I know! Let's announce ourselves as Mozilla "compatible", and then they will!

Of course, nowadays it's the other way around. Webmasters put in IE-only code... and so Mozilla browsers like Firefox are left behind. What's the solution? A UA-switcher!

I think things would have been amusingly interesting if the Mozilla name had been completely dropped from modern browsers, but left in the user agent string as an orphan. Because it's much much easier to rename a browser than to make drastic changes to things that depend on UA. Of course... nobody SHOULD depend on the UA. It should be a point of curiosity only, with the possible exception that spiders/bots could announce themselves, and be given a simpler version of a page (eg a set of navigation links rather than a drop-down list and a Go button). But, the world's not likely to change any time soon.