4 ms·

Mozilla to deliver ads in its Firefox browser

56 points by tanglesome 13y ago

AaronMT 13y ago
These will only be visible for empty history thumbnails on new profiles for new users. There are example mockups here: https://twitter.com/clarkbw/status/433333066514198528 https://twitter.com/clarkbw/status/433333066514198528
- pferde 13y ago
  That thumbnails page is the first thing I disable in my Firefox, so I am mostly unconcerned. Then again, "first they came to add ads to thumbnail tiles, I didn't speak up because I don't use thumbnail tiles..."
  - DanBC 13y ago
    I'm pretty sure that thumbnail ad tiles isn't going to lead to a Holocaust.
- cbhl 13y ago
  This reminds me very strongly of the Opera web browser...
  - callahad 13y ago
    Safari also has a similar pre-filled splash screen, last time I checked. I wonder if IE still defaults to showing msn.com?
    - clarkbw 13y ago
      Most other browsers do this and collect some revenue from it. Either showing just in-house ads (G/M) or sponsored ads from partners (O).
robinhoodexe 13y ago
Let's see how long it'll take for someone to fork it and revert the change.
- fotbr 13y ago
  Hopefully iceweasel will not be so stupid as to follow this decision in the first place.
ivraatiems 13y ago
This seems like a massive amount of hypocrisy on the part of Mozilla. "We don't want you to ever have to see ads in your browser -- except our ads!" I had an angry knee-jerk reaction to this, and while in practice it probably won't be annoying, it's a step in the complete wrong direction.
- sheetjs 13y ago
  I switched to SRWare Iron (https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php) a long time ago and never looked back. EDIT: guess I shouldn't be surprised that proposing a browser that actually cares about privacy and security would be downvoted
- abrowne 13y ago
  "We don't want you to ever have to see ads in your browser -- except our ads!" When has Mozilla said/done anything like this? It's not like they ship Adblock Plus, and supporting Do Not Track isn't anti-ad, it's just anti-tracking.
  - ivraatiems 13y ago
    If you're blocking third-party ad cookies by default, and at the same time supplying your ads, that seems pretty clear to me. (1) (1) http://adage.com/article/digital/iab-fight-mozilla-privacy-move/240246/ http://adage.com/article/digital/iab-fight-mozilla-privacy-m...
- chc 13y ago
  What is the right direction for an organization like Mozilla that needs to keep its lights on and pay a sizeable host of highly skilled developers?
  - ivraatiems 13y ago
    Well, what are they doing now? Obviously it's been successful in keeping them open. Is there evidence they are actually in financial trouble and need this help?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
s0me0ne 13y ago
Google pays FF to have it in the list of search engines, not sure if they pay to have the default spot anymore or if they ever did for that specifically I don't see anything wrong with it, its just setting defaults, not exactly ads, most browser companies get paid some money for adding in default bookmarks
goldfeld 13y ago
Wherein Mozilla starts to look like Canonical.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
rocky1138 13y ago
I don't have a problem with this.
lasr21 13y ago
Firefox will NOT include ads - Stop the misinformation!! currently the default new tab page on a NEW installation is mostly empty: http://i.imgur.com/z71I89i.jpg http://i.imgur.com/z71I89i.jpg What will happen is that it will be pre-filled with sites that are popular in your locale, organizations that Mozilla likes, and sponsored sites: http://cl.ly/image/3I172o2f202k http://cl.ly/image/3I172o2f202k The pre-filled sites disappear and are replaced by your own top sites as you start using the browser.
- dave5104 13y ago
  To me, "sponsored sites" is just another word for "ads".
  - esw 13y ago
    Ads that you'll see once.
    - AlexMax 13y ago
      So, ads.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    In that case Ff has included "ads" for years by taking money from Google to have Google as a default page.
  - mhurron 13y ago
    It depends, if it is like the OP posted then no, it's not really an ad any more than this is - http://www.yahoo.com http://www.yahoo.com. On the other hand, if you saw this - http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/files/2009/09/yahoo-ad-campaign-2.png http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/files/2009/09/yahoo-ad-campa... then ya, it's an ad. /unfortunately no, I am not getting paid by yahoo.
  - chrismorgan 13y ago
    By that token, the pre-installed search sites are ads. There's big money associated with those things, yet I haven't heard anyone complaining about them. I like the look of this new feature—I think it will be more useful to beginning users, it produces a nicer first-run user experience, and it gets out of the way very quickly. I'm not sure if people think that Google Chrome has ads like this or not—to my view, the whole product is laced with ads for Google products, far more intrusive, obnoxious and anticompetitive than anything Firefox has been able to produce. (You might guess that I'm a Mozilla fan. That perception would be accurate.)
avolcano 13y ago
Honestly, if Mozilla wants to continue surviving, and wants to break their scary dependence on Google, I don't know what non-advertising alternatives they can explore. (maybe a Wikipedia-style pledge drive on the new tab page? Of course, I bet people would be far more annoyed by that)
- throwaway_yy2Di 13y ago
  Looks like Mozilla's budget is ~6x that of Wikipedia. $300 M/year figure FTA, vs. $49 M/year from https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Budget https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Budget
  - Aaronn 13y ago
    Except a huge part of that money comes from Google, and avolcano specifically mentions that Mozilla is trying to break away from Google
- KnightHawk3 13y ago
  They already have that right? I remember seeing a "if everyone paid $3" ad at one point.
  - padenot 13y ago
    That was for the Mozilla Foundation, not the Mozilla Corporation. Firefox, Firefox for Android, FirefoxOS are made by the Mozilla Corporation.
  - Aaronn 13y ago
    on Mozilla? I don't think so...
    - callahad 13y ago
      That was indeed one of the `about:home` snippets during Foundation's year-end fundraising.
- 13y ago
tn13 13y ago
This is a very sensible thing on part of Mozilla. Community needs an open source browser to exist and thrive for number of reasons and hence Mozilla needs to figure out different ways to make money. Mozilla is one brand I really trust for various reason. I am willing to rely more on Mozilla than on say Google for all my online existence. One good business model for Mozilla could be to provide a subscription version of browser which is tightly integrated with more services of Mozilla including Webmail, Calendar, Photo and File Storage. Mozilla could charge me a monthly sum + show me ads on these services. Currently I use Zoho for many such services.
adrianlmm 13y ago
This is the kind of decisions that can kill a Project no matter how big it is.
- Aaronn 13y ago
  What else can they do?
  - mverwijs 13y ago
    Ask for donations, same as wikipedia?
Apocryphon 13y ago
Why not? If this is what it takes to break Mozilla free of Google, this is worth it. If there is an alternative to directly donate to the Foundation in order to have the ads disappear, that wouldn't be a bad idea, either. The price of freedom from surveillance isn't free.
agapos 13y ago
https://twitter.com/dherman76/status/433320156496789504 https://twitter.com/dherman76/status/433320156496789504 "the first of our user-enhancing programs" I repeat: first. There is more to come.
skimmas 13y ago
Even know this title is an exageration I just would like to state to Mozilla that: if you want to make money from me, just ask and I'll probably pay.
mverwijs 13y ago
How about just asking me if I want to become a paying customer? Please accept my money on the conditions that you keep the web open and provide an ad-free service
- kybernetikos 13y ago
  In particular, it'd be easy to add a 'firefox supporter' edition in the android play market, perhaps a slightly different icon, and you pay $3 for it. I'd be fine with that.
cromwellian 13y ago
What is they say? If you're not the [paying] customer, you're the product? :)
whoopdedo 13y ago
But presumably not in Iceweasel.

56 points by tanglesome 13y ago

These will only be visible for empty history thumbnails on new profiles for new users. There are example mockups here: https://twitter.com/clarkbw/status/433333066514198528 https://twitter.com/clarkbw/status/433333066514198528

pferde 13y ago
That thumbnails page is the first thing I disable in my Firefox, so I am mostly unconcerned. Then again, "first they came to add ads to thumbnail tiles, I didn't speak up because I don't use thumbnail tiles..."
- DanBC 13y ago
  I'm pretty sure that thumbnail ad tiles isn't going to lead to a Holocaust.
cbhl 13y ago
This reminds me very strongly of the Opera web browser...
- callahad 13y ago
  Safari also has a similar pre-filled splash screen, last time I checked. I wonder if IE still defaults to showing msn.com?
  - clarkbw 13y ago
    Most other browsers do this and collect some revenue from it. Either showing just in-house ads (G/M) or sponsored ads from partners (O).

robinhoodexe 13y ago

Let's see how long it'll take for someone to fork it and revert the change.

fotbr 13y ago
Hopefully iceweasel will not be so stupid as to follow this decision in the first place.

ivraatiems 13y ago

This seems like a massive amount of hypocrisy on the part of Mozilla. "We don't want you to ever have to see ads in your browser -- except our ads!" I had an angry knee-jerk reaction to this, and while in practice it probably won't be annoying, it's a step in the complete wrong direction.

sheetjs 13y ago
I switched to SRWare Iron (https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php) a long time ago and never looked back. EDIT: guess I shouldn't be surprised that proposing a browser that actually cares about privacy and security would be downvoted
abrowne 13y ago
"We don't want you to ever have to see ads in your browser -- except our ads!" When has Mozilla said/done anything like this? It's not like they ship Adblock Plus, and supporting Do Not Track isn't anti-ad, it's just anti-tracking.
- ivraatiems 13y ago
  If you're blocking third-party ad cookies by default, and at the same time supplying your ads, that seems pretty clear to me. (1) (1) http://adage.com/article/digital/iab-fight-mozilla-privacy-move/240246/ http://adage.com/article/digital/iab-fight-mozilla-privacy-m...
chc 13y ago
What is the right direction for an organization like Mozilla that needs to keep its lights on and pay a sizeable host of highly skilled developers?
- ivraatiems 13y ago
  Well, what are they doing now? Obviously it's been successful in keeping them open. Is there evidence they are actually in financial trouble and need this help?

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

s0me0ne 13y ago

Google pays FF to have it in the list of search engines, not sure if they pay to have the default spot anymore or if they ever did for that specifically I don't see anything wrong with it, its just setting defaults, not exactly ads, most browser companies get paid some money for adding in default bookmarks

goldfeld 13y ago

Wherein Mozilla starts to look like Canonical.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

rocky1138 13y ago

I don't have a problem with this.

lasr21 13y ago

Firefox will NOT include ads - Stop the misinformation!! currently the default new tab page on a NEW installation is mostly empty: http://i.imgur.com/z71I89i.jpg http://i.imgur.com/z71I89i.jpg What will happen is that it will be pre-filled with sites that are popular in your locale, organizations that Mozilla likes, and sponsored sites: http://cl.ly/image/3I172o2f202k http://cl.ly/image/3I172o2f202k The pre-filled sites disappear and are replaced by your own top sites as you start using the browser.

dave5104 13y ago
To me, "sponsored sites" is just another word for "ads".
- esw 13y ago
  Ads that you'll see once.
  - AlexMax 13y ago
    So, ads.
- DanBC 13y ago
  In that case Ff has included "ads" for years by taking money from Google to have Google as a default page.
- mhurron 13y ago
  It depends, if it is like the OP posted then no, it's not really an ad any more than this is - http://www.yahoo.com http://www.yahoo.com. On the other hand, if you saw this - http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/files/2009/09/yahoo-ad-campaign-2.png http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/files/2009/09/yahoo-ad-campa... then ya, it's an ad. /unfortunately no, I am not getting paid by yahoo.
- chrismorgan 13y ago
  By that token, the pre-installed search sites are ads. There's big money associated with those things, yet I haven't heard anyone complaining about them. I like the look of this new feature—I think it will be more useful to beginning users, it produces a nicer first-run user experience, and it gets out of the way very quickly. I'm not sure if people think that Google Chrome has ads like this or not—to my view, the whole product is laced with ads for Google products, far more intrusive, obnoxious and anticompetitive than anything Firefox has been able to produce. (You might guess that I'm a Mozilla fan. That perception would be accurate.)

avolcano 13y ago

Honestly, if Mozilla wants to continue surviving, and wants to break their scary dependence on Google, I don't know what non-advertising alternatives they can explore. (maybe a Wikipedia-style pledge drive on the new tab page? Of course, I bet people would be far more annoyed by that)

throwaway_yy2Di 13y ago
Looks like Mozilla's budget is ~6x that of Wikipedia. $300 M/year figure FTA, vs. $49 M/year from https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Budget https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Budget
- Aaronn 13y ago
  Except a huge part of that money comes from Google, and avolcano specifically mentions that Mozilla is trying to break away from Google
KnightHawk3 13y ago
They already have that right? I remember seeing a "if everyone paid $3" ad at one point.
- padenot 13y ago
  That was for the Mozilla Foundation, not the Mozilla Corporation. Firefox, Firefox for Android, FirefoxOS are made by the Mozilla Corporation.
- Aaronn 13y ago
  on Mozilla? I don't think so...
  - callahad 13y ago
    That was indeed one of the `about:home` snippets during Foundation's year-end fundraising.
13y ago

tn13 13y ago

This is a very sensible thing on part of Mozilla. Community needs an open source browser to exist and thrive for number of reasons and hence Mozilla needs to figure out different ways to make money. Mozilla is one brand I really trust for various reason. I am willing to rely more on Mozilla than on say Google for all my online existence. One good business model for Mozilla could be to provide a subscription version of browser which is tightly integrated with more services of Mozilla including Webmail, Calendar, Photo and File Storage. Mozilla could charge me a monthly sum + show me ads on these services. Currently I use Zoho for many such services.

adrianlmm 13y ago

This is the kind of decisions that can kill a Project no matter how big it is.

Aaronn 13y ago
What else can they do?
- mverwijs 13y ago
  Ask for donations, same as wikipedia?

Apocryphon 13y ago

Why not? If this is what it takes to break Mozilla free of Google, this is worth it. If there is an alternative to directly donate to the Foundation in order to have the ads disappear, that wouldn't be a bad idea, either. The price of freedom from surveillance isn't free.

agapos 13y ago

https://twitter.com/dherman76/status/433320156496789504 https://twitter.com/dherman76/status/433320156496789504 "the first of our user-enhancing programs" I repeat: first. There is more to come.

skimmas 13y ago

Even know this title is an exageration I just would like to state to Mozilla that: if you want to make money from me, just ask and I'll probably pay.

mverwijs 13y ago

How about just asking me if I want to become a paying customer? Please accept my money on the conditions that you keep the web open and provide an ad-free service

kybernetikos 13y ago
In particular, it'd be easy to add a 'firefox supporter' edition in the android play market, perhaps a slightly different icon, and you pay $3 for it. I'd be fine with that.

cromwellian 13y ago

What is they say? If you're not the [paying] customer, you're the product? :)

whoopdedo 13y ago

But presumably not in Iceweasel.