I would guess a lot of Firefox's core users (the ones who evangelize it, install it for relatives, file bug reports, write plugins, etc.) stick around because this browser has been a hedge against uncomfortable trends in big tech, many of which were spawned from ad tech. Going the way of ads seems like a dangerous line to tinker with if Mozilla wants to maintain the trust of these users.
Maybe there is a way to do ads well that isn't intrusive and that adds value to the UX. Or maybe it will annoy people and damage the brand by de-differentiating Firefox from Chrome and Brave. I like to give Mozilla the benefit of the doubt, because it's important that they innovate, but getting into the ad business feels like it could be a deal with the devil. Maybe you make more money---but if you lose your soul then you're just another browser ready to be replaced by the next shiny thing.
Yep. It's way beyond anything I consider acceptable. I'm disgusted, really.
It's still pretty fresh, so it's possible my opinion softens later, but right now I'm thinking it's appropriate to consider Chrome and Firefox pretty much equivalent on 'ethical' (or whatever you want to call it) grounds.
Google is far more of a concern than Mozilla, but at this point it feels like Chrome is out to get you less than Firefox is.
I nearly acted on my impulse to start switching everything over to Chrome. The only thing that saved Firefox here is the memory of some concerns about adblocking on Chrome in the future. I haven't looked into it much, so I don't know how significant of a concern that is. But functionally no adblock is worse than being forced to turn off user-hostile options, so, here I remain. I guess. For now.
At the very least, they should have made it opt-in rather than opt-out. I don't like them quietly sneaking a pre-enabled advertising option into the configuration options.
And they know it's a potential privacy issue, since all the address bar suggestion options are already under the "Privacy & Security" settings.
I must ask those who are still sticking with Firefox over Chromium-based browsers, especially those who do so soley for the purpose of staying off a Google web monopoly, to what end? When and how do you think Mozilla will ever do anything to help the web? They integrate all of Google's non-standards just as quickly as Google does, take Google money, and then do adamantly anti-user stunts like this and the Pocket and the incessant VPN shilling. And it's significantly harder to make a good version of Firefox, you have to mess with userscripts or profiles or LibreWolf or cross your fingers and hope some nebulous omnipotent distro maintainers just take care of it. With chromium there are several builds with the spy and suck stripped out readily available because most of it is blobs or API keys, very easy to just exclude at build time. See https://chromium.woolyss.com. I make this comment partially because this is one of the more egregious things Mozilla has done recently but also because I've recently switched to Chromium myself and the whole experience is much faster and smoother so I recommend everyone do it. Happy to be debunked.
For me it's just a WAY better browser. It's faster in the newer versions and scales better (keeps FAR more tabs than Chrome). I have chrome running too for docs and Google properties but FF is my main browser.
My favorite is the address bar which is on a completely different level to chrome. I just type a vague memory and it finds what I'm looking for in my history. Amazing. As others said ad blocking is better, facebook container etc. Also removing anything related to google is a big plus especially after stuff like this: https://dev.to/codenameone/google-play-kafkaesque-experience...
Notice that in code we use CEF since there's no real alternative. I'm purely talking about the experience as a user.
Could I switch to _a_ Chromium based browser in the future? Sure.
But if I look at the candidates?
Chrome - Privacy issues with Google, e.g. linking browser sign ins to web page sign ins, FLOC, etc., no ublock on mobile, manifest v3 limits to adblocking
Vivaldi - Closed Source
Brave - I disapprove of their past actions regarding cryptocurrency, misleading users by holding donations in escrow, or the privacy implications of inserting their own referral codes
Opera - Their new owners have a poor track record.
Edge - Microsoft's actions with Windows 10 and pushing for sign ins and the Windows Store don't leave me trusting them much either.
ungoogled-chromium - Lacks features like browser sync, no android equivalent, etc., are they going to fork it to the extent of keeping the older adblocking APIs or stick close to upstream?
So like, if Vivaldi went open source, I'd be open to trying it, but until then, Firefox it is
One particular concern that always comes to mind for me, because I use Web Components at work, is that we would have gotten a much worse version of Web Components if not for Mozilla's opposition. That sort of opposition isn't possible from the vendor of a Chromium-fork.
> When and how do you think Mozilla will ever do anything to help the web?
Firefox helps the web. MDN helps the web. Mozilla SSL Configuration Generator helps the web. Mozilla has helped the web and continues to do so in so many ways. I think they'd be on the short list of who has helped the web the most.
Almost all of my favourite browser extensions come to Chrome years later (or not at all), Firefox handles extremely high tab counts very well, it provides more access to "here be dragons" configuration options, session restoration is much more reliable.
Probably loads more reasons I can't think of off the top of my head. Firefox is just by far a better user experience for me.
That's a fair question, in practical terms I don't think it's doing much. I'm worried we'll end up in a state where only one browser engine is able to access the web, so google will have absolute control over web standards like microsoft did in the IE6/7 days. That's kind of already the case and seems inevitable, but using firefox feels like a small thing I can do to register my dislike for a browser monoculture.
Also what others said about the better addons (adblockers and tree style tabs). Firefox may be more annoying to get into a good state but at least it's still possible.
Personally, I stick to Firefox because of multi-account containers, which Chrome doesn’t have (no, profiles don’t count). It’s a really sticky feature.
The biggest thing for me is engine diversity. There is Gecko (Firefox), Blink (Chrome, Edge, Brave, etc) and WebKit (Safari). Since Safari is only available on Apple products it only leaves an engine controlled by Google and Firefox. I don't like the idea of Google basically controlling the path of every browser so I use Firefox. I know there are some alternatives like KHTML, but almost nobody uses them.
I don't think Pocket is bad. I think browsers do need an external footprint on the web, or integrated features that make it more than just a window to run sites on. Google Docs, Office 365, Pocket, Brave Rewards/Search/Talk/News, Vivaldi's integrated notes app, mail/rss features. It's just the reality nowadays.
The VPN service is a bit iffy as said in the essay, in that it derives its value from other actors being shitty rather than providing value by itself, but Pocket is genuinely the sort of stuff a browser maker should have. It makes the web browsing experience better and helps combat link rot by giving you hard copies of things you come across.
Of course, most vocal Firefox users don't want it, they seem to want a utopian FOSS browser ran purely on donations, but the amounts of money probably just aren't there.
Google removed a feature I was using daily and replaced it with a different method that was 100% incompatible with my use case. Firefox works how I want with this, so I use Firefox.
I've been using Firefox for like over 10 years I guess.
It's just the best browser for me, I can hack the browser UI, freely arrange the buttons and bars, and I keep 10s of plugins installed to comfortably browse, learn and work.
I've been a Firefox user since the days when it was still called Firebird. So far, none of the changes Mozilla made to Firefox has annoyed me enough to look for alternatives.
Install firefox, enable permanent private mode, turn off all the suggestions, set new tab to blank page, set duckduckgo as default search, install ublock origin and https everywhere.
Mozilla, please, allow us to donate money in a way that we can be sure it will be used for *developing Firefox* and not for some nonsensical Mozilla Foundation project.
Seems an automatic update has led to a downgrade in functionality (newly on-by-default ads), and doesn't seem like a win for users.
Is there a truly open source browser, meaning the project collaborates with the community, and is driven by / accepts pull request contributions? A browser developed completely in the open without a corporation whose primary income is derived from said browser?
I have the latest version of Firefox (93.0) but don't have this option. Was this an A/B test or was it removed in the latest version? (the OP said they were using version 92)
Firefox seems to be following the same path of aging products like Cable TV and newspapers. It is loading the product with ad monetization until only the people who don't care about it are left. I have a hard time sympathizing when they have been paid hundreds of millions of dollars a year for over a decade. Yes, they want to diversify away from Google's payments but I don't believe it takes that much money to make a web browser, even if they are massively complicated. I also believe only a tiny fraction of that money goes towards Firefox development.
A lot of people defend Mozilla here but we have needed a decent alternative since Firefox added Pocket integration. I have used Firefox since release many years ago, and this is the last straw.
Firefox is still "lesser of the evils" when it comes to "modern" (as defined by Google, who essentially controls the Web now) browsers, but it's sad to see its decline.
I wish more web developers would stick with basic HTML and CSS so that their content could be accessible with the various other minority browsers out there. Instead we have the constant churn of an immensely complex ecosystem of frameworks and "standards" controlled by a single megacorp whose ultimate goal is to make everyone use --- and remain eternally dependent on --- none other than its spyware-infused browser. In other words, to fight Google's monopoly, we must first refuse its desire for continual change, and that is unfortunately difficult for many.
Looks like you can set browser.urlbar.suggest.quicksuggest.sponsored to false to remove sponsored suggestions. Searching about:config for "sponsor" brings up a few items.
"Enabled for US users only" because they'd go bankrupt due to GDPR violations otherwise.
I had disabled search suggestions because I didn't want a key logger in my address bar and Mozilla most certainly did not get my consent or notify me of any changes to the privacy policy before they helpfully enabled this "feature" for me.
Looks like a nothing here. Mozilla is within their right to add features to monetize their product and provide clear opt-outs for users who prefer “how it used to be”.
[+] [-] ramblenode|4 years ago|reply
Maybe there is a way to do ads well that isn't intrusive and that adds value to the UX. Or maybe it will annoy people and damage the brand by de-differentiating Firefox from Chrome and Brave. I like to give Mozilla the benefit of the doubt, because it's important that they innovate, but getting into the ad business feels like it could be a deal with the devil. Maybe you make more money---but if you lose your soul then you're just another browser ready to be replaced by the next shiny thing.
[+] [-] foerbert|4 years ago|reply
It's still pretty fresh, so it's possible my opinion softens later, but right now I'm thinking it's appropriate to consider Chrome and Firefox pretty much equivalent on 'ethical' (or whatever you want to call it) grounds.
Google is far more of a concern than Mozilla, but at this point it feels like Chrome is out to get you less than Firefox is.
I nearly acted on my impulse to start switching everything over to Chrome. The only thing that saved Firefox here is the memory of some concerns about adblocking on Chrome in the future. I haven't looked into it much, so I don't know how significant of a concern that is. But functionally no adblock is worse than being forced to turn off user-hostile options, so, here I remain. I guess. For now.
[+] [-] _ofdw|4 years ago|reply
There isn't.
[+] [-] greenyoda|4 years ago|reply
At the very least, they should have made it opt-in rather than opt-out. I don't like them quietly sneaking a pre-enabled advertising option into the configuration options.
And they know it's a potential privacy issue, since all the address bar suggestion options are already under the "Privacy & Security" settings.
[+] [-] aasasd|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bejelentkezni|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] invalidname|4 years ago|reply
My favorite is the address bar which is on a completely different level to chrome. I just type a vague memory and it finds what I'm looking for in my history. Amazing. As others said ad blocking is better, facebook container etc. Also removing anything related to google is a big plus especially after stuff like this: https://dev.to/codenameone/google-play-kafkaesque-experience...
Notice that in code we use CEF since there's no real alternative. I'm purely talking about the experience as a user.
[+] [-] Macha|4 years ago|reply
But if I look at the candidates?
Chrome - Privacy issues with Google, e.g. linking browser sign ins to web page sign ins, FLOC, etc., no ublock on mobile, manifest v3 limits to adblocking
Vivaldi - Closed Source
Brave - I disapprove of their past actions regarding cryptocurrency, misleading users by holding donations in escrow, or the privacy implications of inserting their own referral codes
Opera - Their new owners have a poor track record.
Edge - Microsoft's actions with Windows 10 and pushing for sign ins and the Windows Store don't leave me trusting them much either.
ungoogled-chromium - Lacks features like browser sync, no android equivalent, etc., are they going to fork it to the extent of keeping the older adblocking APIs or stick close to upstream?
So like, if Vivaldi went open source, I'd be open to trying it, but until then, Firefox it is
[+] [-] rossy|4 years ago|reply
They don't. They are still publicly opposed to the most egregious Google "standards." See https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/
One particular concern that always comes to mind for me, because I use Web Components at work, is that we would have gotten a much worse version of Web Components if not for Mozilla's opposition. That sort of opposition isn't possible from the vendor of a Chromium-fork.
[+] [-] fletchowns|4 years ago|reply
Firefox helps the web. MDN helps the web. Mozilla SSL Configuration Generator helps the web. Mozilla has helped the web and continues to do so in so many ways. I think they'd be on the short list of who has helped the web the most.
[+] [-] sellyme|4 years ago|reply
Probably loads more reasons I can't think of off the top of my head. Firefox is just by far a better user experience for me.
[+] [-] kbrackbill|4 years ago|reply
Also what others said about the better addons (adblockers and tree style tabs). Firefox may be more annoying to get into a good state but at least it's still possible.
[+] [-] dkulchenko|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xzcvczx|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _-david-_|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nunez|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] soundnote|4 years ago|reply
This essay puts forth good arguments, I think: http://dpldocs.info/this-week-in-d/Blog.Posted_2021_09_06.ht...
The VPN service is a bit iffy as said in the essay, in that it derives its value from other actors being shitty rather than providing value by itself, but Pocket is genuinely the sort of stuff a browser maker should have. It makes the web browsing experience better and helps combat link rot by giving you hard copies of things you come across.
Of course, most vocal Firefox users don't want it, they seem to want a utopian FOSS browser ran purely on donations, but the amounts of money probably just aren't there.
[+] [-] achooie|4 years ago|reply
[0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta...
[+] [-] frogcoder|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JohnFen|4 years ago|reply
Personally, it's not that Mozilla is so great, it's that they're the lesser of the available evils.
[+] [-] mackal|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m9731526|4 years ago|reply
It's just the best browser for me, I can hack the browser UI, freely arrange the buttons and bars, and I keep 10s of plugins installed to comfortably browse, learn and work.
[+] [-] krylon|4 years ago|reply
This time might be different, though.
[+] [-] reportgunner|4 years ago|reply
Install firefox, enable permanent private mode, turn off all the suggestions, set new tab to blank page, set duckduckgo as default search, install ublock origin and https everywhere.
Done and it stays like that.
[+] [-] davidgerard|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] worble|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ls15|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sebow|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] chovybizzass|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gaius_baltar|4 years ago|reply
Mozilla, please, allow us to donate money in a way that we can be sure it will be used for *developing Firefox* and not for some nonsensical Mozilla Foundation project.
[+] [-] someotherperson|4 years ago|reply
It’s enough to the point that the CEO is having their seven figure salary doubled in the last five years.
Any money you want to give to Mozilla is just going to be a waste: there are plenty of other open source projects worth supporting instead.
[+] [-] 2muchcoffeeman|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TrevorFSmith|4 years ago|reply
Also, I have it turned on but I can't seem to actually get it to show me an ad. Has anyone seen an ad in their suggestions?
[+] [-] TrevorFSmith|4 years ago|reply
Their site uses the word "privacy" a lot but
[+] [-] jaytaylor|4 years ago|reply
Is there a truly open source browser, meaning the project collaborates with the community, and is driven by / accepts pull request contributions? A browser developed completely in the open without a corporation whose primary income is derived from said browser?
[+] [-] na85|4 years ago|reply
When will Mozilla stop making boneheaded decisions like this?
[+] [-] zargon|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] blibble|4 years ago|reply
https://imgur.com/E9vHjaW
pretty obnoxious in dark mode
edit: you can get rid of this in about:config by clearing the value of browser.privatebrowsing.vpnpromourl
[+] [-] amanzi|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] indymike|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] errantmind|4 years ago|reply
A lot of people defend Mozilla here but we have needed a decent alternative since Firefox added Pocket integration. I have used Firefox since release many years ago, and this is the last straw.
[+] [-] userbinator|4 years ago|reply
I wish more web developers would stick with basic HTML and CSS so that their content could be accessible with the various other minority browsers out there. Instead we have the constant churn of an immensely complex ecosystem of frameworks and "standards" controlled by a single megacorp whose ultimate goal is to make everyone use --- and remain eternally dependent on --- none other than its spyware-infused browser. In other words, to fight Google's monopoly, we must first refuse its desire for continual change, and that is unfortunately difficult for many.
[+] [-] temp0826|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] peanut_worm|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] omar_kha|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stebalien|4 years ago|reply
I had disabled search suggestions because I didn't want a key logger in my address bar and Mozilla most certainly did not get my consent or notify me of any changes to the privacy policy before they helpfully enabled this "feature" for me.
[+] [-] cV6WB|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] funOtter|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] deflox|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] koziserek|4 years ago|reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ye18aMVD7Q