9 ms·

Mozilla Foundation places two-page advocacy ad in The New York Times (2004)

95 points by samwillis 5y ago

skinkestek 5y ago
I remember that! Shortly after they had two extension competitions with large prizes. Some fantastic extensions was created and bootstraped the extension ecosystem. At its peak even what later became the ubiquitous developer tools across all modern browsers was just an extension to Firefox (Firebug).
- wackget 5y ago
  ...then they destroyed every extension by completely changing the extensions architecture.
  - _Algernon_ 5y ago
    ...while promising that they would implement new APIs to allow for the same extensions to be built. (still waiting)
  - kevincox 5y ago
    I think the new extension architecture is fantastic, and I think it is great that they encourage people to use it. However I don't think it was smart to kill the raw power of the old extension API. I would have loved for them to add scary warnings to the store, and ruthlessly break backwards compatibility. However they went so far to make it impossible for the average user to run these extensions. You need different versions of Firefox and you can't load them on the store.
hericium 5y ago
Currently I see Mozilla as existing only to appear there is no monopoly.
- the_other 5y ago
  Do you use it?
  - dima55 5y ago
    Not the person you're asking, but I use it. And I see zero reason not to. What am I missing?
  - hericium 5y ago
    Yes I do. It is a lesser evil when Mozilla is not changing my browser's default search engine to Google and when Mozilla isn't forcing my browser to open "We value your privacy" sites infected with Analytics or Tag Manager after updating.
- CabbageRice 5y ago
  Mozilla is controlled opposition funded by google themselves through their default search engine deal.
samwillis 5y ago
After the discussion yesterday I was thinking, and the passion that went into this full two page marketing campaign in the NY Times is what is needed to save Firefox. They need to get themselves back to this place mentally, get the community rooting for them again. And spend some money on a passion based marketing campaign. Edit: Just to add, back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers, basically making them use it. Google co-opted the same army just four years later with similar marketing to get everyone installing Chrome on their family’s and friends computers. They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take. I suspect the thing holding them back is the danger that attacking Google on privacy grounds in order to push themselves as better could damage the lucrative revenue that they receive from Google.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  Make it fast. I still try Firefox every few years, and then go right back to Chrome because the FF renderer doesn't feel as fast as Chrome's. Goosing performance would go a hell of a way towards piquing my interest again.
- skinkestek 5y ago
  > I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take. They are close to being best here. Fix extensions is on top of my personal list. But so far you get moderated (edit: for advocacy even, what an irony given the title of this post!) if you try to remind them about the parts they broke a few years ago, see all the hidden comments at the bottom of this bug for an example: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 Personally I am moving to LibreWolf these days (Firefox with minor fixes). LibreWolf can halfway expect to see donations this spring. If they also fix the extension API it will become a "must have" product for me.
- murderfs 5y ago
  > Just to add, back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers, basically making them use it. Google co-opted the same arm just four years later with similar marketing to get everyone installing Chrome on their family’s and friends computers. > They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take. This worked because, at the time, Firefox was genuinely, and more importantly, visibly better. You can't honestly say that about Firefox nowadays, and after Mozilla's management laid off tons of their engineering talent, there's been no plausible path for them to get there.
lanewinfield 5y ago
Found my name in the image, totally forgot I was a part of this. Fun memories.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hunterb123 5y ago
Brave is the spiritual successor to Firefox. Firefox is a glorified Google referral system first, a slow, bloated browser second. Mozilla has been ruined by highly paid executives draining the organization and the Google search referral income stream. How long will they be able to coast off of their organization's reputation?
- aokiji 5y ago
- openfuture 5y ago
  It's already over. They have a terrible reputation.
- arepublicadoceu 5y ago
  > Brave is the spiritual successor to Firefox. Well if Brave is the spiritual successor to firefox I'm done with the web. This is not a jab on you or Brave. I'm simply completely disenfranchised by the whole browser / web thing. Firefox keeps alienating me, Brave is not the answer as it never passed the smell test with all their crypto bullshit. The web itself is run by corporations trying to mine and sell our attention. More and more I feel like gemini is the only answer to these issues. I will keep the general web as a gateaway to email and bank accounts and forget that it exist.
jamesy0ung 5y ago
Mozilla needs to stop focusing on side projects like Pocket and get back to the actual browser.
- agumonkey 5y ago
  Honest question, what is there to fix in Firefox ? Web is getting increasingly integrated in real life so bridges and apps may take the spotlight (just a guess).
  - whywhywhywhy 5y ago
    >Honest question, what is there to fix in Firefox ? If it's not broken why do so many devs refuse to support it because things they code in Chrome don't work in it. Not that I condone that, but it's what I experience working with dev teams the past few years they all just complain that features are missing from Chrome so it will be too much work to test/support FF.
    - genezeta 5y ago
      > If it's not broken why do so many devs refuse to support it because things they code in Chrome don't work in it. You'll surely meet a lot of people doing what you mention. I would bet most of them are young enough to not have gone through the so-called "browser wars" [1], at least what they now call the first one, the one that ultimately led to the creation of Firefox. Their attitude does not mean at all that there's something actually broken in Firefox, just that it is so much easier -and lazier- supporting a single browser's quirks and ignoring the rest. Even if that means discarding standards and compatibility. Specially if it means that, because you will take advantage of those particularities. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars
      - whywhywhywhy 5y ago
        I was doing front end dev in the IE6/5.5 era so yeah it’s incredibly frustrating to hear it over and over when you’re right deep down it’s all excuses because supporting one browser is less effort.
PostOnce 5y ago
Firefox, too, is beholden to the ad industry. That's the problem. They could get popular fast by blocking ads by default, but of course, they'd have no income then. Nevertheless, there's a bunch of other stuff they could do to help their popularity that they aren't currently doing, I'm sure. I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
- BoxOfRain 5y ago
  I still think if Chrome hobbles ad blockers it'll be a great day for Firefox. Whenever I set up a new machine for family members an ad blocker is one of the first things I install. It's not just to get rid of the digital pollution that most sites engage in now, it's also a security improvement to block ads.
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  It's a problem indeed, but what is the solution? I mean the alternative to free and ad-driven is a paid service; what could a browser offer to make people (companies, consumers) pay for a browser? Ideally a subscription fee. I can think of a few things. The big one: Highly efficient, network-level ad blocking by default, as well as other nuisance blockers (newsletter sign-ups, cookie opt-in, etc). This one would be very popular since it removes 80% of the bulk and annoyances of the modern internet, but it would likely become problematic as they would get blocked by websites everywhere. Built-in VPN / TOR. Difficult because those get blocked a lot. I wouldn't want my computer to be used as a TOR exit node either if I paid a monthly subscription for my browser, putting me at risk for investigations by local law enforcement. Access to other services like e.g. youtube premium, again in the name of an ad free experience. That would require Google being on board with it though, and since their income is mainly ads they would be quite antagonistic.
zabil 5y ago
I remember this! My name's in there too. I don't use Firefox anymore, but I remember it being the best alternative browser when this ad came out.
- mariusmg 5y ago
  >it being the better browser It still is :)
  - zabil 5y ago
    Sorry, edited the comment. Didn't mean it in a bad way. I meant at that time it was way ahead in terms everything (developer tools, browsing experience etc) Browsers have since levelled the playing by working closely on standards and implementing features.
- openfuture 5y ago
  I have spent years advocating for mozilla and firefox but now I do the opposite. They are a blight that needs to be put down. I honestly think they are worse than the googlopoly at this point because of the manipulation and dishonesty involved in trying to keep some semblance of "moral high ground" when all they do is work against the common interest of the FOSS community. Fuck mozilla.
graycat 5y ago
Memo: To: Mozilla Subject: The Popularity of Firefox Dear Mozilla: Just saw the headline, "Mozilla Foundation places two-page advocacy ad in The New York Times (2004)" Okay, I will respond with some feedback intended to be helpful. I'm a long time Firefox user. Until recently Firefox was my "default" Web browser. I'm trying to remain a good and happy Firefox user, trying REALLY hard, but Mozilla is trying even harder to have me quit using Firefox. Mozilla has already in the last few weeks finally gotten me to tell Windows that my default browser is Chrome and no longer Firefox. I WANT Firefox back as my default Web browser, but for that Mozilla has to stop working so incredibly hard to have me quit using Firefox. "Mozilla, NO, greater than 99 44/100% of the time I do NOT want a proctology exam, an unanesthetized root canal procedure, a piercing for a nose ring, a tattoo, a Firefox update, a popup window, a popup window announcing another Firefox update, or the Firefox update that enabled those 10s of thousands of popup windows I have gotten in the last few months. A Firefox popup window is where Mozilla believes that it has some information for my eyes, attention, and work more important to me than the Web page the popup window is covering and that I was trying to read, and that belief is nearly always badly WRONG. A popup window is where Firefox stops and refuses to continue until I stop what I'm doing, pay attention to why my computer has stopped, move my hand, and click on NO once more of the tens of thousands of times recently. I can be patient, but somewhere on the way to > 20,000 times, I can become infuriated. I HATE, to be more clear, deeply, profoundly, bitterly HATE and despise, am outraged and infuriated by, unwanted updates and popups. In the last few months I have declined Firefox updates announced in popup windows literally, conservatively > 20,000 times. To be fully clear, did I mention, I HATE nearly all updates and popups." Here is some feedback on some of the current disaster: From some Firefox update, that I did not, NOT, N.O.T. approve, my current version of Firefox is badly broken. Why: When I try to have Firefox display a Web page, from a URL on the Internet, a tree name on Windows, or the Web site that has my email, I get a popup that says that Firefox is not my default Web browser, which was false, or a popup saying that Firefox is starting in "safe mode", which from all I could tell was inappropriate. Then I get another popup window announcing that a Firefox update is available. My suggestions: (1) Cut WAY back on the popup windows. If there is a really serious computer security problem, then announce that via a popup window. Announce it no more than three times. On average, there should be less than one such serious problem a year. (2) Restore the option that permits a user to decline updates and also decline announcements of updates. (3) Document your work. There is a lot to usage of Firefox -- DOCUMENT that work in TEXT in high quality technical writing. (4) For options, be willing to write the option values to a text file with a simple syntax, a file that a user can edit with a standard text editor and then specify to Firefox as the options to be used. (5) Instead of icons, use text.
vegai_ 5y ago
I already pay premium for some things for the sake of not being a part of the ad economy. Sam Harris's podcast being one example. How about selling a premium version of Firefox, with polished versions of uMatrix and uBlock included? I might pay a small renewing subscription for that and for other things like that. Firefox apparently has less than 200 million users left. 0.1% of those taking part of such a thing (say $5/mo) would mean a monthly revenue of 10 million. That would make some sort of a dent in their finances and if they communicated this clearly, it would be harmonious with their mission.
sega_sai 5y ago
As I user of Firefox for ~ 13 years who switched to Chrome a few years ago, I think the ultimate question is what would the users want, what would distinguish Firefox from Chrome and how many actual users would care about that. In my opinion privacy focus of firefox is important, but I doubt it'll be enough to bring large number of users from Chrome. I.e. have ublock, but I also use a lot of google products so the inconvenience of changing the browser, installing new extensions etc is not worth some hard-to-measure increase in privacy. Back in the day the reason why I liked firefox is because of so many extensions for everything, but when they broke many of them 4-5 years ago, that was a moment I switched to chrome.

95 points by samwillis 5y ago

I remember that! Shortly after they had two extension competitions with large prizes. Some fantastic extensions was created and bootstraped the extension ecosystem. At its peak even what later became the ubiquitous developer tools across all modern browsers was just an extension to Firefox (Firebug).

wackget 5y ago
...then they destroyed every extension by completely changing the extensions architecture.
- _Algernon_ 5y ago
  ...while promising that they would implement new APIs to allow for the same extensions to be built. (still waiting)
- kevincox 5y ago
  I think the new extension architecture is fantastic, and I think it is great that they encourage people to use it. However I don't think it was smart to kill the raw power of the old extension API. I would have loved for them to add scary warnings to the store, and ruthlessly break backwards compatibility. However they went so far to make it impossible for the average user to run these extensions. You need different versions of Firefox and you can't load them on the store.

hericium 5y ago

Currently I see Mozilla as existing only to appear there is no monopoly.

the_other 5y ago
Do you use it?
- dima55 5y ago
  Not the person you're asking, but I use it. And I see zero reason not to. What am I missing?
- hericium 5y ago
  Yes I do. It is a lesser evil when Mozilla is not changing my browser's default search engine to Google and when Mozilla isn't forcing my browser to open "We value your privacy" sites infected with Analytics or Tag Manager after updating.
CabbageRice 5y ago
Mozilla is controlled opposition funded by google themselves through their default search engine deal.

samwillis 5y ago

After the discussion yesterday I was thinking, and the passion that went into this full two page marketing campaign in the NY Times is what is needed to save Firefox. They need to get themselves back to this place mentally, get the community rooting for them again. And spend some money on a passion based marketing campaign. Edit: Just to add, back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers, basically making them use it. Google co-opted the same army just four years later with similar marketing to get everyone installing Chrome on their family’s and friends computers. They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take. I suspect the thing holding them back is the danger that attacking Google on privacy grounds in order to push themselves as better could damage the lucrative revenue that they receive from Google.

shadowgovt 5y ago
Make it fast. I still try Firefox every few years, and then go right back to Chrome because the FF renderer doesn't feel as fast as Chrome's. Goosing performance would go a hell of a way towards piquing my interest again.
skinkestek 5y ago
> I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take. They are close to being best here. Fix extensions is on top of my personal list. But so far you get moderated (edit: for advocacy even, what an irony given the title of this post!) if you try to remind them about the parts they broke a few years ago, see all the hidden comments at the bottom of this bug for an example: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447 Personally I am moving to LibreWolf these days (Firefox with minor fixes). LibreWolf can halfway expect to see donations this spring. If they also fix the extension API it will become a "must have" product for me.
murderfs 5y ago
> Just to add, back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers, basically making them use it. Google co-opted the same arm just four years later with similar marketing to get everyone installing Chrome on their family’s and friends computers. > They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take. This worked because, at the time, Firefox was genuinely, and more importantly, visibly better. You can't honestly say that about Firefox nowadays, and after Mozilla's management laid off tons of their engineering talent, there's been no plausible path for them to get there.

lanewinfield 5y ago

Found my name in the image, totally forgot I was a part of this. Fun memories.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

hunterb123 5y ago

Brave is the spiritual successor to Firefox. Firefox is a glorified Google referral system first, a slow, bloated browser second. Mozilla has been ruined by highly paid executives draining the organization and the Google search referral income stream. How long will they be able to coast off of their organization's reputation?

aokiji 5y ago
openfuture 5y ago
It's already over. They have a terrible reputation.
arepublicadoceu 5y ago
> Brave is the spiritual successor to Firefox. Well if Brave is the spiritual successor to firefox I'm done with the web. This is not a jab on you or Brave. I'm simply completely disenfranchised by the whole browser / web thing. Firefox keeps alienating me, Brave is not the answer as it never passed the smell test with all their crypto bullshit. The web itself is run by corporations trying to mine and sell our attention. More and more I feel like gemini is the only answer to these issues. I will keep the general web as a gateaway to email and bank accounts and forget that it exist.

jamesy0ung 5y ago

Mozilla needs to stop focusing on side projects like Pocket and get back to the actual browser.

agumonkey 5y ago
Honest question, what is there to fix in Firefox ? Web is getting increasingly integrated in real life so bridges and apps may take the spotlight (just a guess).
- whywhywhywhy 5y ago
  >Honest question, what is there to fix in Firefox ? If it's not broken why do so many devs refuse to support it because things they code in Chrome don't work in it. Not that I condone that, but it's what I experience working with dev teams the past few years they all just complain that features are missing from Chrome so it will be too much work to test/support FF.
  - genezeta 5y ago
    > If it's not broken why do so many devs refuse to support it because things they code in Chrome don't work in it. You'll surely meet a lot of people doing what you mention. I would bet most of them are young enough to not have gone through the so-called "browser wars" [1], at least what they now call the first one, the one that ultimately led to the creation of Firefox. Their attitude does not mean at all that there's something actually broken in Firefox, just that it is so much easier -and lazier- supporting a single browser's quirks and ignoring the rest. Even if that means discarding standards and compatibility. Specially if it means that, because you will take advantage of those particularities. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars
    - whywhywhywhy 5y ago
      I was doing front end dev in the IE6/5.5 era so yeah it’s incredibly frustrating to hear it over and over when you’re right deep down it’s all excuses because supporting one browser is less effort.

PostOnce 5y ago

Firefox, too, is beholden to the ad industry. That's the problem. They could get popular fast by blocking ads by default, but of course, they'd have no income then. Nevertheless, there's a bunch of other stuff they could do to help their popularity that they aren't currently doing, I'm sure. I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.

BoxOfRain 5y ago
I still think if Chrome hobbles ad blockers it'll be a great day for Firefox. Whenever I set up a new machine for family members an ad blocker is one of the first things I install. It's not just to get rid of the digital pollution that most sites engage in now, it's also a security improvement to block ads.
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
It's a problem indeed, but what is the solution? I mean the alternative to free and ad-driven is a paid service; what could a browser offer to make people (companies, consumers) pay for a browser? Ideally a subscription fee. I can think of a few things. The big one: Highly efficient, network-level ad blocking by default, as well as other nuisance blockers (newsletter sign-ups, cookie opt-in, etc). This one would be very popular since it removes 80% of the bulk and annoyances of the modern internet, but it would likely become problematic as they would get blocked by websites everywhere. Built-in VPN / TOR. Difficult because those get blocked a lot. I wouldn't want my computer to be used as a TOR exit node either if I paid a monthly subscription for my browser, putting me at risk for investigations by local law enforcement. Access to other services like e.g. youtube premium, again in the name of an ad free experience. That would require Google being on board with it though, and since their income is mainly ads they would be quite antagonistic.

zabil 5y ago

I remember this! My name's in there too. I don't use Firefox anymore, but I remember it being the best alternative browser when this ad came out.

mariusmg 5y ago
>it being the better browser It still is :)
- zabil 5y ago
  Sorry, edited the comment. Didn't mean it in a bad way. I meant at that time it was way ahead in terms everything (developer tools, browsing experience etc) Browsers have since levelled the playing by working closely on standards and implementing features.
openfuture 5y ago
I have spent years advocating for mozilla and firefox but now I do the opposite. They are a blight that needs to be put down. I honestly think they are worse than the googlopoly at this point because of the manipulation and dishonesty involved in trying to keep some semblance of "moral high ground" when all they do is work against the common interest of the FOSS community. Fuck mozilla.

graycat 5y ago

Memo: To: Mozilla Subject: The Popularity of Firefox Dear Mozilla: Just saw the headline, "Mozilla Foundation places two-page advocacy ad in The New York Times (2004)" Okay, I will respond with some feedback intended to be helpful. I'm a long time Firefox user. Until recently Firefox was my "default" Web browser. I'm trying to remain a good and happy Firefox user, trying REALLY hard, but Mozilla is trying even harder to have me quit using Firefox. Mozilla has already in the last few weeks finally gotten me to tell Windows that my default browser is Chrome and no longer Firefox. I WANT Firefox back as my default Web browser, but for that Mozilla has to stop working so incredibly hard to have me quit using Firefox. "Mozilla, NO, greater than 99 44/100% of the time I do NOT want a proctology exam, an unanesthetized root canal procedure, a piercing for a nose ring, a tattoo, a Firefox update, a popup window, a popup window announcing another Firefox update, or the Firefox update that enabled those 10s of thousands of popup windows I have gotten in the last few months. A Firefox popup window is where Mozilla believes that it has some information for my eyes, attention, and work more important to me than the Web page the popup window is covering and that I was trying to read, and that belief is nearly always badly WRONG. A popup window is where Firefox stops and refuses to continue until I stop what I'm doing, pay attention to why my computer has stopped, move my hand, and click on NO once more of the tens of thousands of times recently. I can be patient, but somewhere on the way to > 20,000 times, I can become infuriated. I HATE, to be more clear, deeply, profoundly, bitterly HATE and despise, am outraged and infuriated by, unwanted updates and popups. In the last few months I have declined Firefox updates announced in popup windows literally, conservatively > 20,000 times. To be fully clear, did I mention, I HATE nearly all updates and popups." Here is some feedback on some of the current disaster: From some Firefox update, that I did not, NOT, N.O.T. approve, my current version of Firefox is badly broken. Why: When I try to have Firefox display a Web page, from a URL on the Internet, a tree name on Windows, or the Web site that has my email, I get a popup that says that Firefox is not my default Web browser, which was false, or a popup saying that Firefox is starting in "safe mode", which from all I could tell was inappropriate. Then I get another popup window announcing that a Firefox update is available. My suggestions: (1) Cut WAY back on the popup windows. If there is a really serious computer security problem, then announce that via a popup window. Announce it no more than three times. On average, there should be less than one such serious problem a year. (2) Restore the option that permits a user to decline updates and also decline announcements of updates. (3) Document your work. There is a lot to usage of Firefox -- DOCUMENT that work in TEXT in high quality technical writing. (4) For options, be willing to write the option values to a text file with a simple syntax, a file that a user can edit with a standard text editor and then specify to Firefox as the options to be used. (5) Instead of icons, use text.

vegai_ 5y ago

I already pay premium for some things for the sake of not being a part of the ad economy. Sam Harris's podcast being one example. How about selling a premium version of Firefox, with polished versions of uMatrix and uBlock included? I might pay a small renewing subscription for that and for other things like that. Firefox apparently has less than 200 million users left. 0.1% of those taking part of such a thing (say $5/mo) would mean a monthly revenue of 10 million. That would make some sort of a dent in their finances and if they communicated this clearly, it would be harmonious with their mission.

sega_sai 5y ago

As I user of Firefox for ~ 13 years who switched to Chrome a few years ago, I think the ultimate question is what would the users want, what would distinguish Firefox from Chrome and how many actual users would care about that. In my opinion privacy focus of firefox is important, but I doubt it'll be enough to bring large number of users from Chrome. I.e. have ublock, but I also use a lot of google products so the inconvenience of changing the browser, installing new extensions etc is not worth some hard-to-measure increase in privacy. Back in the day the reason why I liked firefox is because of so many extensions for everything, but when they broke many of them 4-5 years ago, that was a moment I switched to chrome.