Mozilla To Begin Pushing Ads To The New Tabs Page

[V10lator]

"Someone" with 300M$ annually. Would be nice of him.

Meanwhile at Google:
"Hey man, why are we paying for Firefox when we have Chrome?"
"To control the competition, see they have us as starting page and default search engine"
"Can't we just let them die?"
"Yea,tell them we stop sponsering, they should use ads instead"

[erendorn]

This is disgusting. Someone fork it please.

"Someone" with 300M$ annually. Would be nice of him.

[ihatemichael]

This is disgusting. Someone fork it please.

[smitty3268]

There's only two way you are seeing that. 1) You haven't updated Chrome in a long time. 2) You explicitly re-enabled the Apps page in chrome://flags after Google disabled it.

The default new tab view in Chrome now is a list of your most-visited sites.

Well, i don't know what's going on, but it's chrome 32 and i definitely never enabled some chrome flag behind the scenes. It is on windows, so maybe that's different on linux, although i wouldn't think so.

I hardly ever use chrome, so there probably wouldn't be enough sites to even fill up the full list, but i do notice that a handful of sites i've gone to aren't showing up. So maybe there's something blocking that for some reason.

Anyway, if the current status is supposed to be that those google sites are there by default but get replaced by what sites you visit - that's exactly the same as what firefox is proposing.

[lelele]

I liked the opt-in idea. Seems better. Less backhanded.
I also think the it wouldn't hurt Firefox. Much. Only in the geek userbase. Probably gonna be pushed down to AUR in Arch. That sort of stuff. But for the lay people who use it, especially in poorer countries where people access internet in rundown net centers, it wouldn't matter much. They don't care about ads, nor what browser they're using. For all the complaints, America is still using IE for the most part, I doubt doing something like this would matter for the rest of the world. Point, click and surf the web.
But hey, but what do I know?

[Luke]

An ad-supported browser reminds me of Gator.

Phoronix: Mozilla To Begin Pushing Ads To The New Tabs Page

Mozilla will begin pushing sponsored ads/sites into the directory tiles when entering the new tabs page where traditionally it has showed the most frequently visited sites...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTYwMTY

Might be grounds to purge Firefox and install IceWeasel, I doubt Debian will tolerate sponsored anything. Sorry guys, I'll take legacy code or experimental code any time over ad-supported. If this was not a common opinion, Gator would still be selling ads on ad-supported Windows software! I've got Firefox 26 now, I will probably pin this until the cows come home or switch to Iceweasel.

I don't THINK this garbage would show up under an update, but it's one more thing you have to disable on a new install. I already remove the search engines, disable prefetch, keyword, social networking support and do this before a browser from a default install is permitted online. Then I install Ghostery and NoScript, removing most of NoScript's whitelists and adding code to further block social network sharing buttons. I do not like the direction Firefox is moving, if it wasn't for browser fingerprinting I would long ago have switched to Rekonq.

[bwat47]

It is correct to call them ads.



I will not use a browser that shows any kind of sponsored content.

Your website is where sponsored content belongs. Your search engine is where sponsored content belongs. The software running on my system is NOT where sponsored content belongs.

Sorry to burst your bubble buddy, but firefox already includes sponsored content. google search and default homepage, google pays mozilla for this.

[Bomyne]

Please spend a few minutes to re-read the article, not only the headline. Or maybe Mozilla blog which is linked.

It's wrong to calling it Ads.

It is correct to call them ads.

Mozilla will begin pushing sponsored ads/sites into the directory tiles when entering the new tabs page where traditionally it has showed the most frequently visited sites.

Many are upset over the news that came out on Tuesday that Mozilla will begin showing ads within the Firefox web-browser. A Mozilla.org blog post by Darren Herman explains, "Directory Tiles will instead suggest pre-packaged content for first-time users. Some of these tile placements will be from the Mozilla ecosystem, some will be popular websites in a given geographic location, and some will be sponsored content from hand-picked partners to help support Mozilla?s pursuit of our mission. The sponsored tiles will be clearly labeled as such, while still leading to content we think users will enjoy."

I will not use a browser that shows any kind of sponsored content.

Your website is where sponsored content belongs. Your search engine is where sponsored content belongs. The software running on my system is NOT where sponsored content belongs.

[bwat47]

Personally I don't think these default tiles can be called Ads.

Mozilla blog clearly indicates these are some pre-packaged sites on a New Tab. It's nothing like the dynamic ads you see on this website or any other places.

It's a handful feature for fresh users, just like what they have been doing in the Search Box: there are a bunch of search engines bundled.

Exactly. Its not even much different from google paying to be the default in the search box.

[lovenemesis]

Ads belong on websites, not in software. I will not be upgrading to a version of Firefox that has adware in it. I am currently using version 26.0 and that's likely to be the last version I use. I'll continue using this version from now until the end of time, even though using an old version of a web browser isn't safe.

The best way for you to make money, in my opinion, is to ask for donations.

Please spend a few minutes to re-read the article, not only the headline. Or maybe Mozilla blog which is linked.

It's wrong to calling it Ads.