6 ms·

> What I love about Firefox is that it really provides users with an alternative choice of a browser that is just genuinely designed for them they can't seriou

> What I love about Firefox is that it really provides users with an alternative choice of a browser that is just genuinely designed for them they can't seriously think this can they? who was asking for telemetry, mr robot, pocket, VPN ads, "use our email" (relay) ads, "check your accounts!!" (monitor) ads and built-in AI slop generators and soon, more built-in ads: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/ I don't think a single user wanted any of that at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface

jraph 2y ago
> at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface Of course, it doesn't need to. Google controls enough space in the web content itself. On Firefox there are options to disable that; at least it is a supported setting. For Google, you need third party extensions to take care of this. Not saying that I like that Firefox displays ads / is ad supported, but Chrome not displaying ads in its UI is hardly a positive against Firefox.
- robocat 2y ago
  “predatory pricing” or “cross-subsidization”. A strategy where a monopolist reduces the price (sometimes to zero) of a complementary product to increase demand for its primary product.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
  The parent comment was focused on the claim that Firefox is designed for browser users and not for Mozilla's purposes or the purposes of other, commercial entities. The commenter provided examples demonstrating Mozilla's interests in generating revenue and serving commercial entities on the web. This reply however focuses on comparing Firefox and Chrome. Yes, Firefox is better.^1 But the parent's comment is still valid. There is so much in Firefox's design that is not for browser users but for the benefit of others. Mozilla cares deeply about web advertisers and an online advertising "ecosystem". This is reflected in the design. 1. On average, but not in every respect. For example, in Chrome I can set the default search engine to any valid URL. I use a localhost-bound netcat that serves a useful web form^2 that I created in lieu of a "search engine". In Firefox, this is not possible. 2. It sends text clips from Chromebook Chrome to the "developer mode" (frecon) console stdout.
  - jraph 2y ago
    I just reacted to a sentence of the parent comment, rejecting one of its points where the parent commenter does compare Chrome with Firefox. I do agree with the parent commenter that some things in Firefox are not designed for the user, but for the adcertisers. Which is something I don't like about Firefox. > In Firefox, this is not possible You can implement OpenSearch (which is basically a small XML file describing your search engine to write), then you'll be able to add your local search enigne: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/OpenSearch https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/OpenSearch. It's a bit less straightforward than just a URL but if you implemented an actual search engine, it's nothing, and you probably want to handle suggestions, for which you need OpenSearch anyway. Though for your use case, the web shortcuts feature of firefox seems a bit more convenient. I guess you don't always want to direct your searches to your web console, just sometimes, so you currently have to temporarily switch search engines when you want to do this. With a web shortcut, you just prefix your text with a word (which can be one char long). This works by adding a bookrmark, and setting this word in the bookmark.
    - 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
      "I guess you don't want to drect your searches to your web console." The web form is for sending copied and pasted text to the frecon console. For various reasons, I do not use the Ctrl-Alt-T browser-based "console". I do not use a graphical web browser much. I do searches from the console. I type the search query on the command line or into a file if I am doing bulk searches. As such, when I set a localhost address as a custom default search engine I am doing so as a way of disabling searching from the address bar. It also functions as a shortcut to reach local HTML files served by a localhost-bound httpd/netcat. For example, if the default search URL is set to http://127.0.0.1/%s.html http://127.0.0.1/%s.html and the local HTML file is a web form called clip.html, then I type "clip" in the address bar to open the web form. Mozilla really wants to send everything that a user types in the address bar to a remote address, e.g., that of its business partner Google, before the user ever hits Enter. This desire, perhaps an implicit or explicit requirement of their contractual relationship, is reflected in the Firefox default settings, i.e., the design of Firefox.
qball 2y ago
>at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface Chrome actively prevents proper adblockers from working as it has removed the extension framework integral to their function, and most web ads are Google's to begin with.
esoleyman 2y ago
How else would you like for Mozilla and Firefox to diversify their revenue and remain relevant? You can’t complain about them advertising their own services while still producing a leading browser.
- blibble 2y ago
  simple: not being feckless over a 20 year period this is not some small charity, they were generating $500 MILLION a year from the search deals they should have shoved the the billions of dollars into an endowment from that they could have funded a medium sized team focusing on the browser in perpetuity but no, they blew it on obvious boondoggles (like Firefox OS)
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    Exactly. Look at Wikipedia for a counter-example, showing how to do things right. Sure, Wikipedia is frequently asking for donations, but in reality they have a large endowment and can go without new funding for ages, though they'd have to cut back on the unimportant stuff. Mozilla could have done the same thing if they had a little foresight and didn't just assume the piles of cash would keep flowing in forever.
    - tredre3 2y ago
      > but in reality they have a large endowment and can go without new funding for ages, though they'd have to cut back on the unimportant stuff. And that is why I'm very annoyed by the fact that every year the donation begging is more in my face. Bigger, louder, harder to block. Since they don't need the money that bad, why not keep it to a small banner and respect the users FFS.
  - Discordian93 2y ago
    Firefox OS was pretty cool and had it succeeded(Which it might well have if they'd stuck with Witch's plan of targeting the third world), Mozilla would be in a much stronger position to influence web standards and generate revenue nowadays.

jraph 2y ago

> at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface Of course, it doesn't need to. Google controls enough space in the web content itself. On Firefox there are options to disable that; at least it is a supported setting. For Google, you need third party extensions to take care of this. Not saying that I like that Firefox displays ads / is ad supported, but Chrome not displaying ads in its UI is hardly a positive against Firefox.

robocat 2y ago
“predatory pricing” or “cross-subsidization”. A strategy where a monopolist reduces the price (sometimes to zero) of a complementary product to increase demand for its primary product.
1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
The parent comment was focused on the claim that Firefox is designed for browser users and not for Mozilla's purposes or the purposes of other, commercial entities. The commenter provided examples demonstrating Mozilla's interests in generating revenue and serving commercial entities on the web. This reply however focuses on comparing Firefox and Chrome. Yes, Firefox is better.^1 But the parent's comment is still valid. There is so much in Firefox's design that is not for browser users but for the benefit of others. Mozilla cares deeply about web advertisers and an online advertising "ecosystem". This is reflected in the design. 1. On average, but not in every respect. For example, in Chrome I can set the default search engine to any valid URL. I use a localhost-bound netcat that serves a useful web form^2 that I created in lieu of a "search engine". In Firefox, this is not possible. 2. It sends text clips from Chromebook Chrome to the "developer mode" (frecon) console stdout.
- jraph 2y ago
  I just reacted to a sentence of the parent comment, rejecting one of its points where the parent commenter does compare Chrome with Firefox. I do agree with the parent commenter that some things in Firefox are not designed for the user, but for the adcertisers. Which is something I don't like about Firefox. > In Firefox, this is not possible You can implement OpenSearch (which is basically a small XML file describing your search engine to write), then you'll be able to add your local search enigne: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/OpenSearch https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/OpenSearch. It's a bit less straightforward than just a URL but if you implemented an actual search engine, it's nothing, and you probably want to handle suggestions, for which you need OpenSearch anyway. Though for your use case, the web shortcuts feature of firefox seems a bit more convenient. I guess you don't always want to direct your searches to your web console, just sometimes, so you currently have to temporarily switch search engines when you want to do this. With a web shortcut, you just prefix your text with a word (which can be one char long). This works by adding a bookrmark, and setting this word in the bookmark.
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
    "I guess you don't want to drect your searches to your web console." The web form is for sending copied and pasted text to the frecon console. For various reasons, I do not use the Ctrl-Alt-T browser-based "console". I do not use a graphical web browser much. I do searches from the console. I type the search query on the command line or into a file if I am doing bulk searches. As such, when I set a localhost address as a custom default search engine I am doing so as a way of disabling searching from the address bar. It also functions as a shortcut to reach local HTML files served by a localhost-bound httpd/netcat. For example, if the default search URL is set to http://127.0.0.1/%s.html http://127.0.0.1/%s.html and the local HTML file is a web form called clip.html, then I type "clip" in the address bar to open the web form. Mozilla really wants to send everything that a user types in the address bar to a remote address, e.g., that of its business partner Google, before the user ever hits Enter. This desire, perhaps an implicit or explicit requirement of their contractual relationship, is reflected in the Firefox default settings, i.e., the design of Firefox.

qball 2y ago

>at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface Chrome actively prevents proper adblockers from working as it has removed the extension framework integral to their function, and most web ads are Google's to begin with.

esoleyman 2y ago

How else would you like for Mozilla and Firefox to diversify their revenue and remain relevant? You can’t complain about them advertising their own services while still producing a leading browser.

blibble 2y ago
simple: not being feckless over a 20 year period this is not some small charity, they were generating $500 MILLION a year from the search deals they should have shoved the the billions of dollars into an endowment from that they could have funded a medium sized team focusing on the browser in perpetuity but no, they blew it on obvious boondoggles (like Firefox OS)
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  Exactly. Look at Wikipedia for a counter-example, showing how to do things right. Sure, Wikipedia is frequently asking for donations, but in reality they have a large endowment and can go without new funding for ages, though they'd have to cut back on the unimportant stuff. Mozilla could have done the same thing if they had a little foresight and didn't just assume the piles of cash would keep flowing in forever.
  - tredre3 2y ago
    > but in reality they have a large endowment and can go without new funding for ages, though they'd have to cut back on the unimportant stuff. And that is why I'm very annoyed by the fact that every year the donation begging is more in my face. Bigger, louder, harder to block. Since they don't need the money that bad, why not keep it to a small banner and respect the users FFS.
- Discordian93 2y ago
  Firefox OS was pretty cool and had it succeeded(Which it might well have if they'd stuck with Witch's plan of targeting the third world), Mozilla would be in a much stronger position to influence web standards and generate revenue nowadays.