Posted on 04/09/2014 10:58:45 PM PDT by ari-freedom
The chairwoman of Mozilla Foundation, the non-profit that funds the development of Firefox, last week defended the decision to pursue in-browser ads, saying that it's important to generate revenue.
"To explicitly address the question of whether we care about generating revenue and sustaining Mozilla's work, the answer is yes," Mitchell Baker, former CEO of Mozilla Corp., the subsidiary responsible for Firefox, and now the chair of the parent foundation, wrote on a blog Thursday. "In fact, many of us feel responsible to do exactly this." Mitchell Baker Mitchell Baker, chairwoman of Mozilla Foundation. (Image: Mozilla.)
Baker was responding to questions and concerns raised earlier in the week after Mozilla announced "Directory Tiles," an under-development Firefox feature that would display sponsored thumbnails -- advertisements -- in the New Tabs page of new users of the browser.
In her post, Baker acknowledged that Firefox users in general, and those more intimately involved with Mozilla -- employees and code contributors -- were by nature suspicious of any connection to commercial or business needs, including producing revenue. Browser wars
"Pretty much anytime we talk about revenue at Mozilla people get suspicious," she said. "Mozillians get suspicious, and our supporters get suspicious. There's some value in that, as it reinforces our commitment to user experience and providing value to our users."
(Excerpt) Read more at computerworld.com ...
Thanks for the tip!
I, for one.
Thanks, but I was the first one to post two days ago on how to change the user agent string.
new post from Pale Moon
http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=4163
Pale Moon defaults with duckduckgo search
“YOU MUST DECONTAMINATE PALE MOON. IT REPORTS TO WEBSITES THAT IT IS MOZILLA (Firefox). BUT THE FIX IS SIMPLE:”
Done. Now let’s see if the web doesn’t fall apart on me now :)
I had been wondering about that, thanks.
“She understood what Eich could bring to the company and she got scared. It was too easy to cruise along on the Google Welfare train than to do something creative with entrepreneurship so it was “off with his head”.
Even without the gay controversy, mozilla’s going downhill fast. They are behind in keeping up with webkit/blink on web standards. Most web developers have already embraced Chrome. Chrome has all the mindshare and supporting firefox is like supporting IE. No fun but just part of the job.
Mozilla’s other biggest asset was its customizable UI but instead of doing what’s best for the user, they are just copying Chrome and IE. (I’m also surprised that Opera also killed a great thing with their new dumbed down browser)
I put up with these issues because I trusted Eich and thought mozilla.org was a cause worth supporting. But now? No, it’s just another Chrome clone.
I’m not talking about the selection in the navigation toolbar. Yes, there Pale Moon defaults to Duck Duck Go, which is OK but it isn’t much good for image searches.
But if you search from the Pale Moon default start page...
...you get Google, and if you don’t use a blocker, you get a bunch of Google ads.
Just as with Firefox (if you use the Firefox default start page).
The first thing I do with any browser is make it open with a blank page, but many people don’t bother with that.
If the Pale Moon folks really think DDG is the way to go, why didn’t they put it into the start page? Maybe DDG doesn’t pay like Google does.
I have nothing against Pale Moon as a product, in some ways it works better than Firefox and the price is the same.
I’m just not convinced that they’d be any more tolerant than Mozilla was if one of their people did something in violation of the standards of political correctness.
I don’t have a problem with subsidizing a free browser. I do have a problem with subsidizing an organization that pushed out someone for having conservative views. People who use firefox should know how mozilla is making money off their use so that they can shut off its revenue stream.
Pale Moon is produced by one guy. Read what he has to say about it: http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4178
bkmk
So, if Pale Moon is really all the work of one guy, then he doesn’t have anyone to fire for a non-PC opinion.
That being the case, he can give all the lip service he wants to tolerance and freedom of speech because the situation at Mozilla could never happen at his Moonchild Enterprises.
Sorry, but liberals lie, and they’re also hypocrites. It’s part of being a liberal.
I don’t trust them.
LOL! ari-freedom, I “decontaminated” because, frankly, the duckduckgo was very slow and really not very good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.