Slashdot Mirror


Ubuntu Moves To Yahoo For Default Firefox Search

An anonymous reader writes "Starting in Ubuntu's Lucid Lynx release, Firefox's default search engine will be switched from Google to Yahoo. The switch was made after Canonical 'negotiated a revenue sharing deal with Yahoo.' Google will still be available as a choice. Since Yahoo search is now powered by Microsoft's Bing, this would seem to mean that Microsoft will be paying people for using Ubuntu."

6 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Great gauge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seems like a decent way for MS to track Ubuntu's growth.

  2. Re:Even More Money by sopssa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And if one uses Bing Cashback, one is being paid by Microsoft to use Ubuntu and giving them money to shop online using it, perhaps to buy a Linux-friendly netbook and the cycle continues.

    Actually, in neither case is Microsoft actually paying anything.

    With Bing Cashback, what users are paid are covered by affiliate commissions send to Microsoft from the participating sites.
    With paying Ubuntu, Yahoo/Microsoft is actually paying Ubuntu a share from ad clicks.

    In both cases Microsoft isn't losing anything. Actually, they're generating more revenue.

  3. Re:Question by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not quite. It was actually more like this:

    • Mozilla: Hey, dudes, all you have to do is to ask "Can we use your trademarks on our modified distribution?. It'll totally won't be a problem for you guys, we're cool with you. Love your work!
    • Debianz: Graaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
    • Mozilla: Errr....?
    • Debianz: RAAAAAAH GRAAARRRRRR! AAAARRGH! RRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRR!

    You know, just so we're clear.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  4. Re:Doesn't matter by Americano · · Score: 5, Funny

    OHNOES, an anonymous coward on slashdot is going to "stop using Ubuntu" and "stop recommending it to family, friends, employer, etc." Looks like Ubuntu is done for.

    Just when I was starting to believe that 2010 was the year of the Linux desktop, too. :(

  5. Re:If you want privacy, you are doing it wrong. by Bragador · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As of yet, none.

    https://ixquick.com/eng/protect-privacy.html

    European Privacy Seal: On July 14th 2008 Ixquick received the first European Privacy Seal from European Data Protection Supervisor Mr. Peter Hustinx. The Seal officially confirms the privacy promises we make to our users. It makes Ixquick the first and only EU-approved search engine. Both EU Commissioner Viviane Reding and Dr.Thilo Weichert, German Privacy Commissioner complemented Ixquick on its privacy achievements.

    Certified Secure, a leading Certification Authority, has certified Ixquick's Privacy procedures. The CS Privacy Certificate has been awarded after an extensive audit.

    Ixquick has been registered with the Dutch Data Protection Authority (CBP) under number M 1346973. This Authority supervises the fair and lawful use and security of your personal data, to ensure your privacy today and in the future.

  6. Re:Question by swillden · · Score: 5, Informative

    Funny, but for anyone who wants to really understand the issue, it's much more nuanced and more sensible than that.

    Mozilla told Debian that Debian could not distributed modified versions of Firefox with the Mozilla trademarked names and images. Debian developers habitually patch upstream software in various ways to make it fit into the Debian system better, to fix bugs, etc. One solution would have been for Debian to ship only the exact versions released by Mozilla. Another solution would have been for Debian to get Mozilla to approve each modified version that Debian wanted to release. A pain, but doable.

    However, the discussion highlighted another, deeper problem: If Debian can't modify FF and redistribute the result without infringing on Mozilla's trademarks, that means neither can anyone else. Under Debian's Free Software guidelines, it must be possible for users of Debian to modify and redistribute software at will, [i]without[/i] needing to acquire any additional permissions, or else the software is non-free. That meant that FF is non-free software.

    That's not a huge problem; Debian distributes lots of non-free software. So a solution to the problem might have been to get Mozilla's permission to distribute the modifications, and then put FF in the non-free repository. Per the Debian Social Contract, however, non-free software cannot be essential to the operation of the system. So FF couldn't be the default browser on the system.

    But Debian [i]wanted[/i] FF to be the default browser, and so did Mozilla. It's a fine browser, perhaps even the best around, free, non-free or proprietary. And Debian really didn't have another good option -- Seamonkey is in the same boat, Dillo sucked, Konqueror is tied to KDE, etc.

    Debian's other option, obviously, was to simply ignore their own rules, and ship non-free software as a core system component. That would have been a huge compromise to their principles, and would have opened up all sorts of questions about why *other* non-free software couldn't be in the base system as well. Big can of worms there.

    So, what Debian did was to recognize that it was only the trademarked names and artwork which were non-free. The code was under the MPL, which is a Free Software license. Their best option, then, was to distributed the code without the trademarks. Iceweasel, Icedove, etc. are Free Software, per Debian's guidelines, but they have all the functionality of the Mozilla products, and are fully compatible with them.

    It wasn't a perfect solution, but it was the best available.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.