Firefox, now with Ads!



  • Mozilla has apparently decided advertising on the "new tab" page is going to go over well with it's users .... http://www.techtimes.com/articles/3379/20140212/mozilla-to-deliver-ads-in-firefox-browser-if-you-cant-beat-em-join-em.htm



  • Assuming the Google deal is lost, they would need to make up the difference. In order to do that, they would need less than $1 per user per year on average. However, considering how people complain even having to pay that for mobile apps, I seriously doubt that would work. The trend seems to show that people would prefer seeing ads sometimes than having to pay even an unnoticable amount to avoid them.

    Besides, how distracting would it be to have ads on the new tab page? I rarely open a blank tab, since most new tabs for me are from links. Plus, it does nothing to block me from immediately opening whatever page I opened the tab for, so there's no real issue. I've seen dramatically worse approaches to includes ads in applications, so I'm perfectly fine with the way they plan to do it.



  • @rad131304 said:

    Mozilla has apparently decided advertising on the "new tab" page is going to go over well with it's users .... http://www.techtimes.com/articles/3379/20140212/mozilla-to-deliver-ads-in-firefox-browser-if-you-cant-beat-em-join-em.htm
     

    Already under discussion in the 'Pre-emptive fuck you to Mozilla' thread.

     



  • Mozilla has been overrun by people who think Marketing Gibberish is actual language.



  • @dhromed said:

    Mozilla has been overrun by people who think Marketing Gibberish is actual language.

    The writing was on the wall when the six week release cycle madness began. Takes a pretty strong belief in your own bullshit to run with lunacy like that.



  • @dhromed said:

    Mozilla has been overrun by people who think Marketing Gibberish is actual language.

    I wish they'd just come clean and say, "hey look, open source bullshit aside, we're basically a software company with literally ONE client who provides 95% of our income, and that situation sucks... making it worse, that one client already has a browser that does everything we do. If we don't diversify, we're dead in under 5 years. And hey guess what? Open source bullshit aside, all of us here at the Mozilla Foundation like getting paychecks."

    We all know what's going on.



  • @dhromed said:

    Mozilla has been overrun by people who think Marketing Gibberish is actual language.

    Does an organization exist whose PR arm doesn't believe this?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I wish they'd just come clean and say, "hey look, open source bullshit aside, we're basically a software company with literally ONE client who provides 95% of our income, and that situation sucks... making it worse, that one client already has a browser that does everything we do. If we don't diversify, we're dead in under 5 years. And hey guess what? Open source bullshit aside, all of us here at the Mozilla Foundation like getting paychecks."
     

    Yes.



  • @dhromed said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    I wish they'd just come clean and say, "hey look, open source bullshit aside, we're basically a software company with literally ONE client who provides 95% of our income, and that situation sucks... making it worse, that one client already has a browser that does everything we do. If we don't diversify, we're dead in under 5 years. And hey guess what? Open source bullshit aside, all of us here at the Mozilla Foundation like getting paychecks."
     

    Yes.

     

    If they start offering a Pro version with non-fucked-up UI and a blank newtab-page for, say, the $1 per year mentioned... I might just buy a license.

    Then again, I'm part of the minory that will not steal. For religious reasons. So I have paid for e.g. a copy of SlySoft AnyDVD, which I did in fact use for watching my legally bought DVDs, thankyouverymuch. ...Never needed to crack the pirated copies when I was a kid... 

    But I digress. Then we'd start seeing pirated copies of Firefox. Unless, of course, they start validating licenses upon updating. Which would be perfectly acceptable since, unlike a lot of other software, Firefox does indeed get used nearly exclusively for online activities. And the new rigorous short update cycle would fit this scheme perfectly, but I'm sure that's just coincidence.

     



  • @OldCrow said:

    @dhromed said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    I wish they'd just come clean and say, "hey look, open source bullshit aside, we're basically a software company with literally ONE client who provides 95% of our income, and that situation sucks... making it worse, that one client already has a browser that does everything we do. If we don't diversify, we're dead in under 5 years. And hey guess what? Open source bullshit aside, all of us here at the Mozilla Foundation like getting paychecks."
     

    Yes.

     

    If they start offering a Pro version with non-fucked-up UI and a blank newtab-page for, say, the $1 per year mentioned... I might just buy a license.

    Then again, I'm part of the minory that will not steal. For religious reasons. So I have paid for e.g. a copy of SlySoft AnyDVD, which I did in fact use for watching my legally bought DVDs, thankyouverymuch. ...Never needed to crack the pirated copies when I was a kid... 

    But I digress. Then we'd start seeing pirated copies of Firefox. Unless, of course, they start validating licenses upon updating. Which would be perfectly acceptable since, unlike a lot of other software, Firefox does indeed get used nearly exclusively for online activities. And the new rigorous short update cycle would fit this scheme perfectly, but I'm sure that's just coincidence.

     

     Instead of seeing pirated copies, someone else would just start
    releasing builds that didn't require a subscription. Mozilla would have
    to ditch open source completely for a forced subscription model to
    succeed, which is highly unlikely. Even then, there would be probably be a group that would just fork the latest open source version and start their own group supporting that version. Sadly there isn't a very good (meaning without loopholes) way for Mozilla to guarantee they will get the money required to support development without another corporate sponsor like Google or adding advertisements. Clearly they are planning for the worst case and including ads in case they don't get corporate sponsorship, which I can't really blame them for under the circumstances.

     



  •  only way to fix firefox is to dump mozzila and start over from 3.6 (the last decent version)



  • @redfox646 said:

    Besides, how distracting would it be to have ads on the new tab page?
     

    I have problem with them, not because they are distracting, but because they'll certainly have to phone home, and send lots of data that'll change over time.

    One of the reasons I use Firefox is because it does not phone home... As I already said, I have to search for a browsr that is not concerned with grumpy cats.



  • @ratchet freak said:

    ;only way to fix firefox is to dump mozzila and start over from 3.6 (the last decent version)

    Grab those wooden shoes! CLOG THE MACHINES!



  • Re: Firefox, now with Aids!

    I keep misreading the subject, so I thought it's probably better to go with it than to fight it.



  • @redfox646 said:

    Clearly they are planning for the worst case and including ads in case they don't get corporate sponsorship, which I can't really blame them for under the circumstances.
     

    Or they could fire all their executives, PR, marketing, upper management, middle management, lower management, 'experience experts' and 90% of their feature coders.  The only reason all those positions exist is to create "projects" like Aurorialiscyst to justify the existence of those positions.

    Jettison all those people, and you save millions per year in salaries.  Go back to a core group of programmers, testers, a team lead/project manager. Focus on the core product instead of reams and reams of useless changes and unwanted "features".

    For fuck's sake, what's the point of being an open source project unless you're going to take advantage of the best (only) good feature of such-- a massive userbase intensely interested in contributing. Documentation, patches, bugfixes-- hell, running and maintaining the forums and bug tracker. 

    The solution isn't ads to pay for Mozilla's runaway expenses. They're a non-profit organization. They shouldn't be looking to make a profit just to pay for it's out of control salary bloat.  If you have cancer that is spreading through your body, the solution isn't "exponentially grow extra body tissue for the cancer to spread into instead of vital organs". You blast that shit with radiation & poison, lop off whatever body part you need to to survive, and stop taking your smoke breaks inside a nuclear power plant's sewer.



  • @boomzilla said:

    @dhromed said:
    Mozilla has been overrun by people who think Marketing Gibberish is actual language.

    Does an organization exist whose PR arm doesn't believe this?

     

    It's already a problem when the PR people start beliving in what they say, but it's an unsurmountable problem when the rest of the organization does the same.



  • @Lorne Kates said:

    The solution isn't ads to pay for Mozilla's runaway expenses. They're a non-profit organization. They shouldn't be looking to make a profit just to pay for it's out of control salary bloat.
    For several years now, they've had buttloads of free money rolling in. $900 Million in the last 3 years. Literally the only thing they have to do to get that money is put a Google search box in their browser.**

    After a while, buttloads of free money become the expected norm and you get comfortable feeling that you can do anything you want, regardless of whether or not it actually makes sense. That's why their LinkedIn page says they have more than 500 employees and the Mozilla Foundation spends more than $10 Million a year just for rent on office space.



  • @DaveK said:

    @rad131304 said:

    Mozilla has apparently decided advertising on the "new tab" page is going to go over well with it's users .... http://www.techtimes.com/articles/3379/20140212/mozilla-to-deliver-ads-in-firefox-browser-if-you-cant-beat-em-join-em.htm
     

    Already under discussion in the 'Pre-emptive fuck you to Mozilla' thread.

     

    So I'm TRWTF, neh? Oh well, won't be the last time that happens.



  • @Mcoder said:

    @redfox646 said:

    Besides, how distracting would it be to have ads on the new tab page?
     

    I have problem with them, not because they are distracting, but because they'll certainly have to phone home, and send lots of data that'll change over time.

    As presented, I get the impression that it would be doing no such thing - they'd be default things to put on there if Firefox (locally) hadn't figured out which of your most frequently visited sites to put there yet. Once it had figured it out (using whatever random algorithm they're using at the moment) you wouldn't see any ads there at all.



  • @PJH said:

    As presented, I get the impression that it would be doing no such thing - they'd be default things to put on there if Firefox (locally) hadn't figured out which of your most frequently visited sites to put there yet. Once it had figured it out (using whatever random algorithm they're using at the moment) you wouldn't see any ads there at all.
     

    If I had a gif that conveyed a condescending  "Really? Really, that's what you think they'll do in the end? Really?" I'd post it. But I don't, so I guess you get away without a good telling-to.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.