181–190 of 352 posts
I'd swear this happened already... I updated Firefox on an old Android tablet yesterday and the default search was already switched to Yahoo. Edit: ah, now that you mention it, it was a Beta version.
Firefox for Android has been testing Yahoo as the default search engine for a few months. Mozilla's search deal with Google did not cover mobile browsers. Firefox OS uses Bing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Making the product worse, from the perspective users care about, for ideals. FF, for instance, made their multi-browser "sync" horribly complicated for users, to preserve zero knowledge, which is the opposite of what 99% of users wanted. Chrome made it simple (and THEN added a fairly decent ZK option buried in advanced). What makes Mozilla/Firefox relevant is having enough users that it can't be ignored. Mozilla is a…
Yeah, Sync could be improved a lot. The good news is that we are working on it, and I have hopes that the next version will solve all issues (both performance and UX) without sacrificing privacy. Now, if the question is whether adopting Yahoo & co will be bad for the user experience, Mozilla is betting on the fact that these smaller search providers can deliver not just a comparable experience, but also innovation fr…
"Google will also continue to power the Safe Browsing and Geolocation features of Firefox." It's disappointing to hear that Firefox isn't yet using Mozilla's location services project [1]. Background: These are the services that will, say, take the SSID of your current WiFI access point and map that to a latitude/longitude. My understanding is that almost all commercial users subscribe to Skyhook Wireless's database[…
Looks like a smart move by Yahoo to be the default search for a major browser: google/chrome, bing/ie. This also means that Firefox will likely get some serious support from Yahoo in $$s to build back market share. Question is can they catch Google?
I suppose they could, if they went for the same questionable bundling [1] and SEO [2] tactics as Google :)
Adding to that the fact that Google occasionally promotes Chrome on their various products (search engine et. al.), they haven't been particularly fair all in all. I doubt Mozilla will go that low, and I doubt they could gain significant ground even if they did.
[1] https://blog.avast.com/2009/12/03/avast-and-google-chrome
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Every intermediate layer that Google does not control is a risk to their business. Every intermediate layer that Google does control is also an opportunity for lock-in. Which is seriously starting to piss me off, as they are increasingly turning their back on open standards.
As a Googler who cares very much about open standards, I don't think that assessment is fair or accurate.
However, Google's purpose in the world is not to advance open standards.
That is Mozilla's purpose. That's why this is a strategic, long-term decision on Mozilla's part. A world with a strong Google, strong Mozilla, and strong Yahoo (and Apple, and Microsoft, and Samsung, and Intel, etc.) is better for everyone.
A world where any one of those entities controls too much power is worse.
For me, I look forward to working with partners at Google and Yahoo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does promoting Yandex and Baidu in regions where they are already dominant (Russia and China, respectively) align with Mozilla's new mission? I'm not sure how entrenching their hold on their home markets promotes user choice, innovation, or privacy.
Because it prevents the worldwide biggest search provider from eventually also taking over those remaining holdouts?
Perhaps Yandex is more at risk, but my impression is that Yandex dominates Russia much as Google leads the US. In Russia, Google is the underdog. Firefox's switch can only dampen competition in the Russian market, while users in markets without Yandex neither gain nor lose.
The rest of the world may stand to benefit, if these national champions expand beyond their borders, and if they offer users a better choice than the competition. But that remains to be proven. In the meantime, Mozilla's switch will certainly have a measurable impact on the current competitive landscape.
(throwaway account) While I believe the party line is probably true ("Mozilla decided not to go with Google"), it's also disingenuous. Mozilla chose not to go with Google because Google wasn't willing to pay what they were before. They straight up told Mozilla this 3 years ago when they signed the billion dollar contract; Mozilla had 3 years to become profitable. That's why they switched focus to FirefoxOS; they thou…
Yahoo! is OK, but... Yandex and Baidu are not exactly recommended company for an organization that pretends to hold the Open Web's moral higher ground. They practice large-scale censorship, they are instruments of repressive regimes. How does that make any sense?
Note that Mozilla has had revenue arrangements with Yandex and Baidu previously. And Google doesn't exactly have clean hands in China itself.
What did Google do in China? I remember them pulling out of China, declining to participate further in censorship there, and being attacked (hacked) by the Chinese government. What am I forgetting?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember I started moving out of Google's claws when they started pushing Google+ everywhere. Today my primary browser is Firefox, Search engine is DDG (with occassional Google search), Email is FastMail. The dependency on Google had started to annoy me.
The biggest thing i'm looking for now is a replacement for Google's apps suite - mainly Calendar and Docs/Drive. Something that i can use on the web and sync to my (Android) phone. If the Docs replacement just did text documents, that would probably be enough; if it did spreadsheets and text, it would definitely be enough. It would be great if it was free, and fine if it was cheap. Not Apple (no better than Google),…
It also is probably worth noting that, while Apple is plenty evil in its own ways, if you're looking to avoid the rampant data collection of Google, Apple is significantly better in that regard.
(throwaway account) While I believe the party line is probably true ("Mozilla decided not to go with Google"), it's also disingenuous. Mozilla chose not to go with Google because Google wasn't willing to pay what they were before. They straight up told Mozilla this 3 years ago when they signed the billion dollar contract; Mozilla had 3 years to become profitable. That's why they switched focus to FirefoxOS; they thou…