Mozilla Decides Against Ads In The New Tab Page

[NothingMuchHereToSay]

To all the people worried that Mozilla is even THINKING about putting PRE-PINNED SITES on the new tab page for NEW USERS as another form of income: how about you donate to them? And while you're at it, why don't you donate the several hundred thousand dollars per year that this would generate, possibly allowing them to put a privacy-oriented search back as default (Startpage/DDG) instead of Google?

I don't understand how this many people could misread a god damned article. 1. Not ads, pre-pinned sites. Super easy to get rid of, and if you're lazy about it they go away by themselves as you browse... 2. they only affect NEW INSTALLS. Current users don't see a damned thing.

I installed Nightly on Friend's computer yesterday, and there were "suggested sites" on the new tab page. And you know what? I was grateful. A few of them were frequently visited by him, so I was able to simply pin the items already there (which had recognizable icons instead of thumbnails) instead of having to browse around and manually click and drag.

Sounds like the Amazon lenses on Ubuntu, except it's in your browser. Honestly why do people want to fight money-making schemes where it's justified?

[Luke]

Those of us without jobs cannot donate-and some of us remember Gator

To all the people worried that Mozilla is even THINKING about putting PRE-PINNED SITES on the new tab page for NEW USERS as another form of income: how about you donate to them? And while you're at it, why don't you donate the several hundred thousand dollars per year that this would generate, possibly allowing them to put a privacy-oriented search back as default (Startpage/DDG) instead of Google?

I don't understand how this many people could misread a god damned article. 1. Not ads, pre-pinned sites. Super easy to get rid of, and if you're lazy about it they go away by themselves as you browse... 2. they only affect NEW INSTALLS. Current users don't see a damned thing.

I installed Nightly on Friend's computer yesterday, and there were "suggested sites" on the new tab page. And you know what? I was grateful. A few of them were frequently visited by him, so I was able to simply pin the items already there (which had recognizable icons instead of thumbnails) instead of having to browse around and manually click and drag.

Not everyone has a job! As for the vendors of ad-supported software, I don't want their shit on my machines. I still remember working to keep Gator and all software monetized by them off of Pentium II/Windows 98 boxes at a public computer center I helped out with in the 2003-2005 period. That meant using Ad-aware to find the infestations, then stripping out monetized filesharing programs like Kazaa. No commercial music or movie file was worth Gator's shit.

Gator/Claria was an ugly ad-supported software monster that allowed vendors of "free" but popular software to bundle it with their tracking software that tracked browsing and served "relevant" ads in pop-up windows. It was supposed to uninstall itself if the offending top level applications were removed, but if uninstalled by itself those apps would automatically reinstall it. What we needed was a tool to auto-block installation of any program bundled with Gator. Finally the public outrage forced Gator to shut down their servers and Claria to find another business model. At that point all the ad-supported software continued to function, stripped of the ads.

Before I would tolerate adware, I would limit myself to only programs I could write myself on BARE HARDWARE, just as I do not permit Windows or any paid operating system on any machine I control. Just because I am not employed for wages paid by others does not mean I am adverse to doing work, in fact I prefer the sweat equity model to all others. Were I a farmer this would mean withdrawing from unreliable markets and growing subsistance crops of reliable value.

[psychoticmeow]

Not everyone has a job! As for the vendors of ad-supported software, I don't want their shit on my machines. I still remember working to keep Gator and all software monetized by them off of Pentium II/Windows 98 boxes at a public computer center I helped out with in the 2003-2005 period. That meant using Ad-aware to find the infestations, then stripping out monetized filesharing programs like Kazaa. No commercial music or movie file was worth Gator's shit.

Gator/Claria was an ugly ad-supported software monster that allowed vendors of "free" but popular software to bundle it with their tracking software that tracked browsing and served "relevant" ads in pop-up windows. It was supposed to uninstall itself if the offending top level applications were removed, but if uninstalled by itself those apps would automatically reinstall it. What we needed was a tool to auto-block installation of any program bundled with Gator. Finally the public outrage forced Gator to shut down their servers and Claria to find another business model. At that point all the ad-supported software continued to function, stripped of the ads.

Before I would tolerate adware, I would limit myself to only programs I could write myself on BARE HARDWARE, just as I do not permit Windows or any paid operating system on any machine I control. Just because I am not employed for wages paid by others does not mean I am adverse to doing work, in fact I prefer the sweat equity model to all others. Were I a farmer this would mean withdrawing from unreliable markets and growing subsistance crops of reliable value.

It's like you didn't read the article or the comment your replying to, in what was is this even possibly related to "Gator"? Hint: it isn't.

We're talking about default sites in the speed dial feature, they are not pinned, you do not have to click on them, you will not even see them unless you do a fresh install with a new profile, they go away as you browse and Firefox learns what sites you like, or can be removed at the click of a button.

How about raging against this, what they were actually proposing, instead of whatever horror fantasy you think you'd getting instead?

[FLHerne]

Makes this look very interesting, not tried it yet.

http://www.qupzilla.com/

I used it for a couple of years, definitely the best Qt browser and IMO better than Firefox for actual browsing.
The main downside was the lack of extensions and developer tools, so I'm back with FF now.

[kpedersen]

I don't understand how this many people could misread a god damned article. 1. Not ads, pre-pinned sites. Super easy to get rid of, and if you're lazy about it they go away by themselves as you browse... 2. they only affect NEW INSTALLS. Current users don't see a damned thing..

Your assumption that people complaining have all "misread" the article is incorrect at best. Perhaps we just see a deeper problem that you are simply overlooking? As for it not being a problem because "current" users are not affected is downright ignorant of the fact that much of the technical / OSS community reinstall their OS (and Firefox) on an almost weekly basis. Perhaps Mozilla should add online activation (DRM) to their browser because once a current user is activated they don't have to care anymore? (Answer = NO!).

another form of income: how about you donate to them? And while you're at it, why don't you donate the several hundred thousand dollars per year that this would generate, possibly allowing them to put a privacy-oriented search back as default (Startpage/DDG) instead of Google?

Or... if they cannot do the task that needs to be done with the correct budget, they can go home and get out of the way of a project that *can*. This sounds harsh (and I do prefer Mozilla over almost any other browser provider) but if they need so much money to keep a mature browser maintained, they are seriously doing something wrong. If Mozilla wants the support of the "free as in freedom" community. They need to act like a "free as in freedom" browser.

[psychoticmeow]

Your assumption that people complaining have all "misread" the article is incorrect at best. Perhaps we just see a deeper problem that you are simply overlooking? As for it not being a problem because "current" users are not affected is downright ignorant of the fact that much of the technical / OSS community reinstall their OS (and Firefox) on an almost weekly basis.

What. No seriously, what? Why would you do that? Are you whiping your user profile, bookmarks and all? Because that'd be stupid, and the only way this'd be a problem.

Perhaps Mozilla should add online activation (DRM) to their browser because once a current user is activated they don't have to care anymore? (Answer = NO!).

Perhaps you could talk about the issue at hand instead of inventing ridiculous straw man arguments?

Or... if they cannot do the task that needs to be done with the correct budget, they can go home and get out of the way of a project that *can*. This sounds harsh (and I do prefer Mozilla over almost any other browser provider) but if they need so much money to keep a mature browser maintained, they are seriously doing something wrong. If Mozilla wants the support of the "free as in freedom" community. They need to act like a "free as in freedom" browser.

Many open source projects of a similar scale actually need money in order to function, they do act as a "free as in freedom" and "free as in beer" project.

So what exactly is this "deeper problem" that we're overlooking?

[kpedersen]

What. No seriously, what? Why would you do that? Are you whiping your user profile, bookmarks and all? Because that'd be stupid, and the only way this'd be a problem.

Bookmarks are imported into firefox when I first launch it (with a fresh profile). The behaviour I experience when running Firefox is that the sites that come up in the "new tab" page are not related to bookmarks (They are primarily recent pages). So it doesnt matter if bookmarks are migrated, I will still see a load of adware clutter.
If you are saying these bookmarks will replace the "advert sites" completely then I doubt this will benefit Mozilla enough to make it worthwhile for them anyway.

The problem still remains. No-one wants open-source to be littered with adware. For existing users or new users alike. For that, they can go and use that tacky Android crap if they want *everything* to be monetized.

So what exactly is this "deeper problem" that we're overlooking?

http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html

Perhaps have a read why these distros are not endorsed by the GNU project. Then relate them to how firefox is potentially being handled. This pretty much sums up my reasoning why I disagree with Mozilla's future plans (if they are one day taken forward).

[psychoticmeow]

Bookmarks are imported into firefox when I first launch it (with a fresh profile). The behaviour I experience when running Firefox is that the sites that come up in the "new tab" page are not related to bookmarks (They are primarily recent pages). So it doesnt matter if bookmarks are migrated, I will still see a load of adware clutter.
If you are saying these bookmarks will replace the "advert sites" completely then I doubt this will benefit Mozilla enough to make it worthwhile for them anyway.

The data is all part of your user profile stored on disk, I don't know how you're backing up, but it would seem to be odd to only backup your bookmarks. I think if you have a problem with this it comes down to your own mistake.

The problem still remains. No-one wants open-source to be littered with adware. For existing users or new users alike. For that, they can go and use that tacky Android crap if they want *everything* to be monetized.

There's a huge difference between adware and what has been proposed.

Perhaps have a read why these distros are not endorsed by the GNU project. Then releate them to how firefox is potentially being handled. This pretty much sums up my reasoning why I disagree with Mozilla's future plans (if they are one day taken forward).
http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html

I'm sorry, I don't see what any of that has to do with the situation at hand, you'll need to explain further.

[Adarion]

I disabled the entire newtab crap completely long ago. I hate it regardless what style of mess there is. Plain about:blank, that's best (for me).
For pages you like there are bookmarks, if you want also a history.

[Luke]

ALL ad-supported software reminds me of Gator

It's like you didn't read the article or the comment your replying to, in what was is this even possibly related to "Gator"? Hint: it isn't.

We're talking about default sites in the speed dial feature, they are not pinned, you do not have to click on them, you will not even see them unless you do a fresh install with a new profile, they go away as you browse and Firefox learns what sites you like, or can be removed at the click of a button.

How about raging against this, what they were actually proposing, instead of whatever horror fantasy you think you'd getting instead?

Accepting money to place an ad-grubbing, anti-privacy shit site like Facebook to a default tabs page is selling an ad in the software. If Mozilla ever started down this road, who can say how far they would go? My guess is next up would have been tracking use of those tiles by default, unless disabled in "data preferences" where I recommend disabling all auto-reporting if privacy is a concern.

Gator was the first vendor of ad-supported software I ever saw, and what I saw sickened me. They spoke of "keeping software free" when they actually kept it worthless, I made it a point to strip all their shit and everything it supported out of those old Pentium II machines I worked on ten years ago.

What Mozilla proposed would have been like a vendor of dumb phones selling them with every speed-dial button programmed for a paying merchant's phone number unless changed by the owner of the phone. I would never have accepted such a phone, even as a freebie. I invoked Gator because so many remember what a disaster they were and I wanted to remind Mozilla just how bad this could get