Live data from Hacker News

Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

bugzilla.mozilla.org

1–10 of 196 posts

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#2
This bug report is not really clear. Does the submitter consider it bloat, or a privacy violation, or what? It should be obvious that the way it appears in Developer Edition (two releases ahead of "release") is not the way it will appear in the final version. This report should be about the way the feature is explained to the user, or about how hard it is to disable the feature, so that it can be improved.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#3
post #2

This bug report is not really clear. Does the submitter consider it bloat, or a privacy violation, or what? It should be obvious that the way it appears in Developer Edition (two releases ahead of "release") is not the way it will appear in the final version. This report should be about the way the feature is explained to the user, or about how hard it is to disable the feature, so that it can be improved.

"Mozilla's recent integration with Pocket, a proprietary third-party service, is a mistake."

This seems perfectly clear. The obvious improvement is to remove it.

What is wrong with Mozilla at the moment?

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#5
It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed.

Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bundling stuff like Pocket and Hello with Firefox is just ridiculous. Why not make it an official extension? That way users can easily disable or remove it.

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#6
post #3
post #2

This bug report is not really clear. Does the submitter consider it bloat, or a privacy violation, or what? It should be obvious that the way it appears in Developer Edition (two releases ahead of "release") is not the way it will appear in the final version. This report should be about the way the feature is explained to the user, or about how hard it is to disable the feature, so that it can be improved.

"Mozilla's recent integration with Pocket, a proprietary third-party service, is a mistake." This seems perfectly clear. The obvious improvement is to remove it. What is wrong with Mozilla at the moment?

I guess I'm just missing the point. The recommended action is to move Pocket to an extension that might even be shipped with the browser. I just don't see how it's different from "integrating" with the browser in that case. If the privacy implications were better explained and it was easier to disable, what would the problem be?

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#7

It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed. Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bund…

Is there a practical difference between disabling the features and just ignoring them?

Re: Firefox Bugzilla: Remove Pocket Integration

#10
post #7

It is so unlike Mozilla to introduce something like that, I ran a virus scan and checked what programs had been installed recently -- I assumed it had been put there in the same way that IE users used to get the Ask Toolbar installed. Exactly how I felt. What the hell were they thinking? I'm generally very supportive of Mozilla, I even supported their initiative to put advertisements on Firefox's start page. But bund…

Is there a practical difference between disabling the features and just ignoring them?

Memory and CPU utilization for starters
Post reply on HN