Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's already the default in Europe from what I've seen.
Depends on where and which countries you consider "Europe".
When I say Europe I mean "Western Europe minus the islands to the north"
Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
131–140 of 154 posts
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
A fellow adherent to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster#Pirat... . Praise His noodly appendage!
You realize I'm addressing the premise introduced by the person I responded to, right? That I'm not the one introducing it? Also, it's possible to really believe in something but still be honest about its faults. I mean, I formed my harshest criticisms of Mozilla when I was still involved. I point this out, because there's another trend I've noticed, which is the one where you show up in tons of threads that are crit…
We must be reading different comments, because this one of yours:
> If you look at the lifetime of Firefox, in the second half there's a negative correlation between (product popularity + contributor experience) and (revenue + company size).
Contains nothing relevant to the comment it's replying to, while simultaneously fabricating data in order to support an argument that yet still reduces to fallaciously conflating correlation and causation. You accuse me of flippant non-retorts, to which I say: garbage in, garbage out, my good friend. :)
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say they're using the best for the financial viability of Mozilla. Which in turn is for the best of their users.
I don't disagree. But that doesn't change the fact that the parent post's idea that they "choose the best search engine" is completely false. Mozilla has been paid for search settings consistently since 2004.
The feedback in the responses leads me to believe my ear may have been too close to the loudspeaker, but here is a quote attributed to Mozilla Marketing leader Asa Dotzler in 2009: “Firefox users have their choice of several built-in and popular search services including Google’s number 1 competitor and the second most popular, Yahoo!. Google is the default for most Firefox locales because it’s the best search service available for the largest number of Firefox users (and was years before there was any revenue associated with default status).”
https://searchengineland.com/will-bing-finally-be-admitted-i...
I also think I remember Firefox’s default search engine in Japan regularly being used as an example of doing right by users.
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been out of reading news about it are they still shuffling cash to Mozilla?
I suspect so. Not very impressed that Mozilla failed to mention the money question, when it's obviously going to be a matter of concern for anyone who thinks the Mozillian way. Could be an interesting tension if so. Mozilla were involved in a recent event promoting awareness of data/privacy concerns. They weren't shy about mentioning Google by name as a big bad. https://theglassroom.org/
Mozilla has always disclosed financial matters in their financial reports, bringing it up in a release announcement would send a strange message.
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your right on a privacy front from an absolute perspective. But, it's almost certain that Google paid for this change. A stronger Mozilla (financially speaking) is good for privacy and free software. Also, normal users expect Google. So, having it in the default provides a more familiar experience for them to possibly switch to Firefox.
> A stronger Mozilla (financially speaking) is good for privacy and free software. While I understand exactly what you mean, surely there's a point at which accepting money from privacy-violating organisations (and bundling a privacy-violating extension, and who knows what else is coming?) means that Mozilla is no longer good for privacy?
Definitely true. It's a balancing act. Granted, that means that some people are going to think you're compromising too much on your ideals (or to little).
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realize I'm addressing the premise introduced by the person I responded to, right? That I'm not the one introducing it? Also, it's possible to really believe in something but still be honest about its faults. I mean, I formed my harshest criticisms of Mozilla when I was still involved. I point this out, because there's another trend I've noticed, which is the one where you show up in tons of threads that are crit…
We must be reading different comments, because this one of yours: > If you look at the lifetime of Firefox, in the second half there's a negative correlation between (product popularity + contributor experience) and (revenue + company size). Contains nothing relevant to the comment it's replying to, while simultaneously fabricating data in order to support an argument that yet still reduces to fallaciously conflating…
Responding point-by-point to a comment like yours would be as worthwhile as trying to correct any other intellectually dishonest Gish gallop. The things I referenced are quantifiable and quantified.
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your right on a privacy front from an absolute perspective. But, it's almost certain that Google paid for this change. A stronger Mozilla (financially speaking) is good for privacy and free software. Also, normal users expect Google. So, having it in the default provides a more familiar experience for them to possibly switch to Firefox.
Keeping Firefox alive also helps assuage anti-trust concerns with regard to Chrome’s position in their ecosystem.
In that case presumably Google would continue to fund Mozilla even if they go to another default search engine?
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google used to be the default search engine in Russia too (though I can't comment on whether they were paying for that). When it became clear that Yandex generally delivered better search results for queries in Russian, Mozilla switched to Yandex.
Are you 100% sure Yandex has not provided any funding to Mozilla? "Following our review in 2014, Google remained the default provider outside the US, Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Turkey, China, and other regions where we had search agreements."
> Are you 100% sure Yandex has not provided any funding to Mozilla?
I am 100% sure it has. But the point is that all search engines are willing to create these funding deals, so that leaves the freedom to pick the ones that you think are best for users.
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keeping Firefox alive also helps assuage anti-trust concerns with regard to Chrome’s position in their ecosystem.
In that case presumably Google would continue to fund Mozilla even if they go to another default search engine?
I think Google was still giving them money when they were defaulting to Yahoo, just less than the terms of this new deal.
Re: Firefox Features Google as Default Search Provider in the U.S.
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still, Firefox could automatically switch to e.g. Duckduckgo whenever the user is in incognito mode.
I love the idea. Would you mind mind filing a bug on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ ?
One more idea - any chance you guys are making a Firefox Focus for the desktop? It's great on mobile, would love a desktop version too!