Slashdot Mirror


Google Returns As Default Search Engine In Firefox (techcrunch.com)

Mozilla today launched Firefox Quantum, which the company is calling "the biggest update since Firefox 1.0 in 2004." It brings massive performance improvements and a visual redesign. It also sets Google as the default search engine again if you live in the U.S., Canada, Hong Kong and Taiwan. TechCrunch reports: In 2014, Mozilla struck a deal with Yahoo to make it the default search engine provider for users in the U.S., with Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo and others as options. While it was a small change, it was part of a number of moves that turned users against Firefox because it didn't always feel as if Mozilla had the user's best interests in mind. Firefox Quantum (aka, Firefox 57), is the company's effort to correct its mistakes and it's good to see that Google is back in the default slot. When Mozilla announced the Yahoo deal in 2014, it said that this was a five-year deal. Those five years are obviously not up yet. We asked Mozilla for a bit more information about what happened here.

"We exercised our contractual right to terminate our agreement with Yahoo! based on a number of factors including doing what's best for our brand, our effort to provide quality web search, and the broader content experience for our users. We believe there are opportunities to work with Oath and Verizon outside of search," Mozilla Chief Business and Legal Officer Denelle Dixon said in a statement. "As part of our focus on user experience and performance in Firefox Quantum, Google will also become our new default search provider in the United States, Canada, Hong Kong and Taiwan. With over 60 search providers pre-installed as defaults or secondary options across more than 90 language versions, Firefox has more choice in search providers than any other browser."

11 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. Users' best interests... by ReluctantRefactorer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Surely if Mozilla really had users' best interests in mind they'd make DuckDuckGo the default search option?

    --
    RR
    1. Re:Users' best interests... by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If they had users' best interest in mind they wouldn't have made something like 90% of all the UI and feature-related changes they've made over the last decade...

      If you're not familiar with the specifics Yahoo contract*, it includes clauses for situations like the sale to Verizon where they get to keep all the payments without having to do anything for that money if they decide they don't like Yahoo's new owners for some reason. More probably than not they just decided use this part of the contract to get double income, Mayer deal money from Verizon and search money from Google.

      * https://www.recode.net/2016/7/...

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    2. Re:Users' best interests... by Quantum+gravity · · Score: 5, Informative

      Most people probably only know about Google, so like or not, it is the obvious default choice. DuckDuckGo is available and easily set as default if you want to. Personably I'm impressed by FF 57.

  2. Re:XUL & Ideology go together by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    There is no firefox only xul

  3. Re:Obligatory Google Flame by theweatherelectric · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fuck Google.

    I'd advise against it. Google doesn't cuddle, doesn't call, but creepily stalks you afterward.

  4. Re:Firefox 56 64bit, then 57 niether works by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Informative

    57 is disappointing. Default color scheme was horrible, but that's fixable. But it's now slower than it used to be for all the hype of being faster. And legacy extensions are disallowed with no replacement for noscript yet. Even more preference settings have vanished, and some preferences were changed on me. The new tabs page is horrid (was in 56 also) and you can't get the old style back (ie, I prefer my home page in new tabs). New icons are ridiculous looking. I normally never update this soon, waiting for a dot release instead, but I thought it would fix a problem I was having that turns out to be fault of an updated extension instead.

    So far, nothing is an improvement in any way. If they were smart, they'd add a "rollback" button.

  5. Is Google seriously that good? by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is kind of hurtful to recognise that it definitively is. Many of their policies are horrible, sell every bit they have about you, some of their products aren't that good lately, etc. But their search engine is certainly good. What is even worse: the competition (for a so juicy market!!) is quite weak or, at least, aren't doing all what is required to really beat Google.

    Some time ago, I wrote various posts here asking slashdotters about reliable alternatives to Google. I have been testing some of them during the last months and, so far, the best option has been startpage.com/ixquick.eu. Although I have found some problems, in general, the experience has been reasonable good. The main issue here is that the results are precisely provided by Google! A restricted (and theoretically respectful with your privacy) version of what you can find there.

    I have still to do proper tests with yandex.com (which looks quite nice, but as a Russia-based search engine might have some issues) and bing.com (whose performance in the past wasn't too good, but perhaps they are better now; on the other hand, as a Microsoft company might also have some issues). A so big and profitable market, so much available money and knowledge (no idea if in general, but if you give me enough resources and a reasonable time frame, I will certainly create something really good) and so much crap! How can this be possible? We are constantly reading articles about VCs throwing lots of money at virtually anything! This is one of the safest bets ever! And all what you need is money, doing things properly and some patience!

    --
    Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
  6. Re:WHERE NoScript??? by theweatherelectric · · Score: 5, Informative

    NoScript's current release state. It was going to be released today but now it's a couple of days away.

  7. Re:Firefox 56 64bit, then 57 niether works by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But it's now slower than it used to be for all the hype of being faster.

    You broke something. Nuke your profile and start again.

    Yes I am most definitely blaming the user here. If you think this is in any way slower than you have done something wrong.

  8. Re:XUL & Ideology go together by Wootery · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Keep pretending the "champion of the Internet", it's part of your act.

    They are, though. The fact is that Google is the best search engine out there, and putting anything but Google as the default search engine does nothing but annoy users. Mozilla have to be pragmatic and pick their battles.

    It's like with EME. If Firefox supports it, people like you call them traitors to their ideology. If Firefox doesn't support it, people mock Firefox for being the only browser that doesn't.

  9. Re:XUL & Ideology go together by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I mean, they could just ask people when they install the thing which search engine they wanted to use. Default to no search engine unless they explicitly select something. I don't even use the search bar that much. I usually just actually go to Google (or whichever search engine) if I want to actually search something.

    My biggest annoyance about them going with Yahoo a few years back was that they made the change to existing installs. I had already chosen a search engine on all my machines. Why would they change the search engine I'm using because of a software upgrade. I hope they aren't doing the same thing again. If somebody has already made the choice to go with Bing, Yahoo, Duck Duck Go, or whatever other search engine, I don't think that Firefox should go around changing it on people.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.