Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Search Strategy for Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 352 posts

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#291

Post by Yoric »

ExpiredLink wrote: post #281
blumkvist wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's interesting about it? Microsoft killed the company which mozilla originated from. And they were created for the sole purpose not to let Microsoft has a monopoly on the gateway to the Internet...

> they were created for the sole purpose not to let Microsoft has a monopoly on the gateway to the Internet... Created by Google. People often forget (or don't know) that Microsoft's IE once almost had a browser monopoly. Many online applications accepted only IE as browser. Surprisingly, Microsoft did not fight hard to keep the monopoly and even dissolved their team of IE developers. Google and 'their' Firefox took…

> I never understood why Google created their own browser instead of tightening their already strong relationship to Mozilla.

Most likely because they couldn't own Mozilla. Just as Apple created Safari instead of promoting either Firefox or Camino, because they couldn't own Mozilla.

Both cases are companies that attempt to own the entire silo.

> Contrary to most opinions here, I think that Mozilla's decision is more likely the beginning of the end than a promising "strategic partnership".

We shall see. However, I believe that the previous situation was unhealthy: Mozilla was funded mostly by a competitor with a clear and present interest in making Firefox irrelevant.

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#292

Post by toni »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #288
conradk wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. I used to have Google Mail, Google Contacts, YouTube, Google Search, Google News, etc. I was feeling more and more dependent on one company's goodwill. A few months ago, I renewed my Fastmail [1] account for 3 more years, being very happy with the service. I use DuckDuckGo [2] as my main search engine and love it. I use Opera as my main browser. The only Google services I use regularly now are Android and…

How is Android without using Google services? Is there a significant impact on the experience?

A while back I flashed my Nexus 5 with a CyanogenMod 11 build. I didn't install the GApps package afterward.

One thing you will notice immediately is that the battery life lasts much much longer. With casual surfing, watching video clips, playing casual games and Wifi always on, the battery lasts for almost 24 hours. It looks as if this is what the original Nexus 5 should be. All those background Google services and "frameworks" constantly calling back home will drain the battery to the death pretty fast. That's also valid for some other apps. Not having Facebook app installed will increase the battery life too.

Sure you have no Google Play store installed but you can always use one of those (safe) apk downloaders like Raccoon[1] or such to login to Play store and download your previous apps. As for other Google services (Maps, YouTube, Translate, GMail, etc.), I can always visit their sites in incognito mode. You will actually realize you really don't need all those individual apps to use these services. They all work good enough in a browser window.

[1]http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2772436

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#293

Post by eitally »

threeseed wrote: post #115
pillowpants2 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When viewed through these lens, many of the seemingly ancillary Google business units start to make strategic sense. Android (control the device), Chrome (control the browser), Fiber (control the tubes). You forgot Google Glass (control the eyes).

From all indications Google Glass is being shifted towards being an enterprise product e.g. helping people pack shelves. So in this case it doesn't really apply.

As an enterprise dev mgr who has been thinking about prototyping an app to do exactly this (well, actually the opposite -- to guide warehouse staff in the kitting process for manufacturing), I'm curious: where have you seen indications of Glass evolving toward the enterprise? I haven't seen it anywhere, but Google has tons of AR competition in the industrial space already, many of which are FAR more capable than Glass, which is 1) fragile, 2) feature-limited, 3) low res crappy display, 4) not at all intended to work autonomously.

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#294

Post by glomph »

spikels wrote: post #277

Yikes I never realized Mozilla was so dependent on Google % of Revenue from Google Search Royalties: 2013 Not released yet (usually 11 months! after end of year) 2012 88% (90% of 304,539/311,005) 2011 84% (85% of 161,904/163,474) 2010 83% (84% of 121,109/123,206) 2009 84% (86% of 101,537/104,305) 2008 98% (91% of 83,600/77,737) 2007 80% (88% of 68,238,803/75,125,640) 2006 78% (85% of 61,561,496/66,840,850) 2005 91% (…

Where else did you imagine their money coming from?

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#295

Post by inikulin »

opinali wrote: post #148

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?

I'm completely against current behavior of the russian government and I use Google on daily basis. However, I can't see how Yandex should be considered to be the company "that practice large-scale censorship, they are instruments of repressive regimes"? This is a great company, which contributes both to open source and science (numerous collaborations with CERN, etc.). And it really tries to fight for the web freedom here in Russia, which involves a huge risk for their business. Speaking of censorship: I'm often see message regarding DMCA in Google search results, nearly never seen them in Yandex.

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#296

Post by drdaeman »

xorcist wrote: post #284
drdaeman wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, that's a pretty common misconception though. You surely can own a server (I do) but you just can't own a domain. You're merely leasing one from a registrar. You see, I strongly believe identity's an intrinsic property of a person, and if you need a provider for one there's something really wrong with the setup. I'm completely fine with asserting notaries, but not providers.

> you just can't own a domain. You're merely leasing one from a registrar. That is not true, in a very strict juridical sense.

I don't know about juridical sense and I'm not sure there's one applicable worldwide.

This is true in practice, though. "Your" domain can be seized, blocked or transferred to a third party, its lease terms can be changed to make it unaffordable - and generally there's nothing you can do to prevent this before this happen, since anything of this can happen without involving you at all. That is, because you never possessed this domain, it was merely provided to you. You may just seek the legal remedy after the fact.

On the contrary, identity is something you possess. It can't be revoked by anyone. Your passport (notary assertion) may be stolen, seized or revoked, but your friends won't stop recognizing you as a person. It's just that you won't be able to prove "I'm recognized as $legal_name by government" anymore.

You just won't wake up and see your password set is blocked so you can't login anywhere. Yeah, you can be forced to disclose your credentials, but it's a different story.

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#297

Post by EdSharkey »

mbrubeck wrote: post #151
enneff wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is why Google built Chrome. Seriously? Do you remember what browsers were like before Chrome?

I'm a Firefox user and contributor, but I'm happy to agree that Chrome advanced (and continues to advance) the state of the art in all sorts of ways. But that still doesn't explain why Google thinks that building a web browser is an important business for Google to be in, especially at an annual cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. To answer that question, you do need to look at how it intersects with Google's ot…

The browser is the operating environment one develops GUI applications for now. (A situation akin to developing apps for windows 3 running on DOS). I think any company would like to own the delivery platform, I'm sure Google loves Chrome.

As to why Google and why Chrome, it makes a ton of sense, c. 2004, 2005, when Google was butting heads with Microsoft that they would formulate plans to undermine Microsoft's platform dominance. The OS being the vulnerable foundation of the MS pyramid.

It still impresses me how much Microsoft got snookered software delivery-wise in so many arenas by Google.

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#298

Post by pidg »

twic wrote: post #159
geekam wrote: post #116

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),…

Like others, I use Fastmail's calendar now. I also run my own Baikal[1] server for CardDAV/contacts (though I guess I could run my calendar on it too, since it does CalDAV).

[1] http://baikal-server.com/

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#299

Post by drdaeman »

Yoric wrote: post #287
drdaeman wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right. But still, DNT is snake oil that only makes things worse by providing a false sense of privacy while not resolving any issue. And some fingerprinting issues that can't be solved by lone users could be solved by browser vendors. Let's at least start by doing something with those overlong User-Agent headers. And, say, limiting JavaScript capabilities on introspecting the environment.

Well, for one thing, this would Break The Web (tm). I assume that users of, say, TorBrowser would not mind, but I strongly doubt the greater public would accept that. For another thing, these two measures would only force the trackers to switch to other fingerprinting mechanisms that are harder to turn off (ETags, canvas 2d/3d fingerprinting, CSS fingerprinting, etc.), so I don't think this would achieve what you hop…

It won't break the web any more than not supporting tag or deprecating SHA-1 certificates anymore. It would affect a tiny minority of sites that try to do weird things. Seriously, we had a lot of JS APIs being gradually deprecated (and, yeah, breaking the web), and we're still alive. And for the last ten years every web developer was constantly told to not depend on User-Agent headers and do capability checks instead of UA detection. If there are still some sites doing that, and a reason for a change exists - it's good time to break them and only make work with some compatibility mode.

And those were just the examples. Sure, the trackers will switch. ETags and CSS fingerprinting and any other tracking methods can be worked around too. We just have to start value privacy a bit more than dancing bunnies.

(But, sure thing, users want dancing bunnies, not privacy)

Re: New Search Strategy for Firefox

#300

Post by drdaeman »

wodenokoto wrote: post #239
drdaeman wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As usual, with credentials. It's just that credential must be something you can handle by yourself and not require a third party to provide to you. A third party may assert some aspect of your identity by providing a statement that the person who's in possession of the certain credentials has been verified by this notary to indeed have certain properties. But if me and some website are starting to become acquainted w…

Remembering your face is what a cookie can do for you. You log-in via a trusted 3rd party (that may be owned by you) and you receive a cook for use next time. If you change your face the next time you walk in, like say you visit from your iPhone instead of you PC, they cant recognize you and will of course need strong verification, after which you may receive a cooking.

This is a workaround. A completely different topic.

My issue with Persona is about its very concepts, not some particular implementation issues.

Post reply on HN