4 ms·

It's got Facebook in the name to ride the hate wave? I'm so glad Mozilla hired a Marketing team... /s

Blaaguuu 9y ago
IIRC, this was just one engineer's side project to take their existing container tech, which might be too 'advanced' for most users, and make a one-off addon that more users might be interested in. Do you think that Mozilla's marketing of Firefox as more privacy focused is a bad thing?
- cptskippy 9y ago
  > Do you think that Mozilla's marketing of Firefox as more privacy focused is a bad thing? Not at all. This just strikes me as desperation, jumping on the hate train against Facebook because it's easy. Instead I'd like to see them actually develop their container functionality into a mainstream feature for the browser that might gain enough attention to make people start asking why Chrome, Safari, or Edge don't do the same. I could see it very easily existing somewhere between the "New Window" and "New Private Window" menu options. They'd just need to rebrand it as something other than "containers" for the masses to understand it. "Private Window" would have been good but unfortunately that's been taken, in hindsight they should have gone with something that more clearly convey's the "burned after reading" forgetful nature of the private window because I think private conveys secret/isolated without the self destruction that comes with a Private/Incognito window.. People understand the Private/Incognito window, it wouldn't be hard to explain that a container window exists somewhere between a regular window and Private/Incognito. They could also easily surface or suggest sites you might want to containerize.
laumars 9y ago
Up until now I hadn't heard of their containers feature despite being a Firefox user so at least one techy has benefited from this update. Though I doubt I am alone.
atonse 9y ago
It's smart – my only complaint when seeing this is "how come nobody's focusing on Google?"
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Mozilla is paid by Google. WHy would they antagonize their own parent company?
  - dao- 9y ago
    Mozilla and Google have a business contract with a well-defined scope. Google has a similar contract with Apple. Google isn't Mozilla's parent company just as it isn't Apple's.
    - dingo_bat 9y ago
      Apple makes 97% of its revenue from Google? Because Mozilla does. Your comparison is not valid. Source: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/
      - dao- 9y ago
        What I said is perfectly valid. Parent company is a well-defined term that doesn't apply here. Now, may Google try to put pressure on Mozilla? Sure. Would Mozilla obey? Possibly...? None of this means that this has actually happened or will happen. Stop spreading conspiracy theories.
        dingo_bat 9y ago
        > Now, may Google try to put pressure on Mozilla? Sure. There is an implicit pressure when the existence of the company depends on one entity. > Would Mozilla obey? Possibly...? Would they rather put 100s of people out of a job? Close down shop? Because 97% reduction in revenue can cause that.

IIRC, this was just one engineer's side project to take their existing container tech, which might be too 'advanced' for most users, and make a one-off addon that more users might be interested in. Do you think that Mozilla's marketing of Firefox as more privacy focused is a bad thing?

cptskippy 9y ago
> Do you think that Mozilla's marketing of Firefox as more privacy focused is a bad thing? Not at all. This just strikes me as desperation, jumping on the hate train against Facebook because it's easy. Instead I'd like to see them actually develop their container functionality into a mainstream feature for the browser that might gain enough attention to make people start asking why Chrome, Safari, or Edge don't do the same. I could see it very easily existing somewhere between the "New Window" and "New Private Window" menu options. They'd just need to rebrand it as something other than "containers" for the masses to understand it. "Private Window" would have been good but unfortunately that's been taken, in hindsight they should have gone with something that more clearly convey's the "burned after reading" forgetful nature of the private window because I think private conveys secret/isolated without the self destruction that comes with a Private/Incognito window.. People understand the Private/Incognito window, it wouldn't be hard to explain that a container window exists somewhere between a regular window and Private/Incognito. They could also easily surface or suggest sites you might want to containerize.

laumars 9y ago

Up until now I hadn't heard of their containers feature despite being a Firefox user so at least one techy has benefited from this update. Though I doubt I am alone.

atonse 9y ago

It's smart – my only complaint when seeing this is "how come nobody's focusing on Google?"

dingo_bat 9y ago
Mozilla is paid by Google. WHy would they antagonize their own parent company?
- dao- 9y ago
  Mozilla and Google have a business contract with a well-defined scope. Google has a similar contract with Apple. Google isn't Mozilla's parent company just as it isn't Apple's.
  - dingo_bat 9y ago
    Apple makes 97% of its revenue from Google? Because Mozilla does. Your comparison is not valid. Source: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/
    - dao- 9y ago
      What I said is perfectly valid. Parent company is a well-defined term that doesn't apply here. Now, may Google try to put pressure on Mozilla? Sure. Would Mozilla obey? Possibly...? None of this means that this has actually happened or will happen. Stop spreading conspiracy theories.
      - dingo_bat 9y ago
        > Now, may Google try to put pressure on Mozilla? Sure. There is an implicit pressure when the existence of the company depends on one entity. > Would Mozilla obey? Possibly...? Would they rather put 100s of people out of a job? Close down shop? Because 97% reduction in revenue can cause that.