If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Firefox VIAGRA set to add CANADIAN PHARMACY ads and sponsored AOL content to newly opened $316.84 DAILY browser tabs   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 63
    More: Interesting, Firefox VIAGRA, Firefox, AOL, Mozilla  
•       •       •

1729 clicks; posted to Geek » on 12 May 2014 at 1:21 AM (11 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



63 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-11 11:34:29 PM
So either Adblock and NoScript will be updated so as to make this irrelevant, our I will be switching to another browser. Getting real sick of Mozilla anyway.
 
2014-05-11 11:35:35 PM
OR. OR. NOT "OUR." Jeez, I really need to use "Preview."
 
2014-05-11 11:53:27 PM
Just in ttime for thier phone release too
 
2014-05-11 11:56:40 PM
Sure, Mozilla, why not piss off some more users, it's not like another browser recently knocked you into third place or anything.

cdn.arstechnica.net
 
2014-05-12 12:09:20 AM
It pains me to remember when Firefox was fast and useable. Now mine won't access a growing number of web sites that I need to use, presumably because of some setting I can't find.

Yes, I have the latest version... 29.0.1

/I still miss the old Firebird version (like FF v 0,5 or something)
 
2014-05-12 01:07:07 AM
Firefox Viagra. For when your penis (Not Responding).
 
2014-05-12 01:27:05 AM
If there's one thing people on the Internet can agree on, is that ads are annoying as crap. Why would people go out of their way to install something to make this worse when the other alternatives don't pull this crap? I'd rather use IE than ad supported Firefox.

/chrome anyway
 
2014-05-12 01:29:02 AM
Ugh, god damn it.

I HATE Chrome's interface.  Firefox is what I'm used to and is in many ways the best.  But if they do this I will have to stab them in the FACE.  Also, find another browser.
 
2014-05-12 01:34:20 AM

DemonEater: Ugh, god damn it.

I HATE Chrome's interface.  Firefox is what I'm used to and is in many ways the best.  But if they do this I will have to stab them in the FACE.  Also, find another browser.


The latest 29.01 update has made the user interface more Chrome-like.

If Firefox doesn't fix the (Not Responding) problems an the unresponsive script problems I might as well switch to Chrome full time since UI-wise that looks to be the direction Firefox is heading.
 
2014-05-12 01:36:37 AM
There's a button in the top right corner of the New Tab page that toggles the website thumbnails on and off. It looks like this.

img.fark.net

Just press it.
 
2014-05-12 01:38:18 AM

DemonEater: Ugh, god damn it.

I HATE Chrome's interface.  Firefox is what I'm used to and is in many ways the best.  But if they do this I will have to stab them in the FACE.  Also, find another browser.


Try Opera.  It moved to the Chromium rendering engine last year, so any site that works with Chrome will work with Opera, but I much prefer Opera's interface.  Plus, it comes with the capability to customize search bar shortcuts (I can type 't <search term>' in the address bar to automatically search for that term on YouTube for example) as well as some handy mouse gestures.
 
2014-05-12 01:43:25 AM

TuteTibiImperes: DemonEater: Ugh, god damn it.

I HATE Chrome's interface.  Firefox is what I'm used to and is in many ways the best.  But if they do this I will have to stab them in the FACE.  Also, find another browser.

Try Opera.  It moved to the Chromium rendering engine last year, so any site that works with Chrome will work with Opera, but I much prefer Opera's interface.  Plus, it comes with the capability to customize search bar shortcuts (I can type 't <search term>' in the address bar to automatically search for that term on YouTube for example) as well as some handy mouse gestures.


mouse gestures and navigation hotkeys are the cancer of the modern browser.
 
2014-05-12 01:53:43 AM
Firefox is open source. Anyone can just fork it without the new feature if they don't like it. It's really not a big deal.
 
2014-05-12 02:07:44 AM
I honestly think people who use Chrome are nuts. Most people already give so much of their lives to the great Google god as it is and adding chrome is like running around naked in a room full of women with razor blades slashing at you. I think that some of the things that Mozilla does are sketchy but until another browser comes along that can provide all the anti-tracking and privacy features I won't use anything else.
 
2014-05-12 02:16:03 AM
FTFA :He said the tests were designed to understand what the users find helpful and what parts they ignore or disable on the browser. "These tests are not about revenue and none will be collected. Sponsorship would be the next stage once we are confident that we can deliver user value."

Huh? No ads. No ads is user value. I would bet that most Firefox users use it specifically for ad avoidance like adblock and noscript. Way to totally misunderstand the user base. That being said, putting a simple image ad on the currently blank new tab screen wouldn't really bother me, especially not once I figured out how to block it.
 
2014-05-12 02:31:55 AM
wraith95:That being said, putting a simple image ad on the currently blank new tab screen wouldn't really bother me, especially not once I figured out how to block it.

The problem is that it never stays just that. People like to ignore ads, so they stop paying for non intrusive ads. Fark used to only have text ads, now you have to be careful which link you're opening. Those picture ads will start autoplaying video within two years.
 
2014-05-12 02:54:37 AM
Is this a kind of payback for forcing out the prop 8 guy?
 
2014-05-12 03:29:08 AM
How long until Mozilla unknowingly green lights an ad that pushes some piece of malware?  I've gotten malware warnings from ads on all sorts of legitimate sites, Fark included.  Mozilla won't be immune.

And I still want to beat the tar out of whomever created the swat-the-fly ad from a few years back.
 
2014-05-12 03:34:31 AM
I wonder when software companies will figure out that people don't like their interface constantly changing for no appreciable benefit.
 
2014-05-12 04:06:53 AM
I never use the new tab page on purpose anyway.
 
2014-05-12 04:12:50 AM
State_College_Arsonist
How long until Mozilla unknowingly green lights an ad that pushes some piece of malware? I've gotten malware warnings from ads on all sorts of legitimate sites, Fark included. Mozilla won't be immune.


If they're (only) going the sponsorship route, Firefox could be immune:
IF they don't load that crap dynamically, but include it during the build in a "Firefox 42 is brought to you by $logo" way, they don't get the problem of ad networks with a chain of affiliates where one black sheep in the chain can insert crap.
 
2014-05-12 05:08:47 AM
Firefox degraded so badly for me over time that I finally switched to Chromium last year. I still miss some of the features that Firefox had given me, as Chrome isn't quite as customizable, but that's more than made up for by the speed and stability. Which is a shame, as those were once the hallmarks of Firefox. Whatever they've been doing over at Mozilla, they've been doing it wrong.
 
2014-05-12 06:05:34 AM

swahnhennessy: Firefox degraded so badly for me over time that I finally switched to Chromium last year. I still miss some of the features that Firefox had given me, as Chrome isn't quite as customizable, but that's more than made up for by the speed and stability. Which is a shame, as those were once the hallmarks of Firefox. Whatever they've been doing over at Mozilla, they've been doing it wrong.


This.  Loved Firefox when I first got it, but then started running into problems with the thing either running so slowly it may as well have crashed or refusing to open sites at all.  I'd go into Task Manager and see that although I have exactly one window open in Firefox, there are actually five or six going and they're chewing up enough CPU power to slow down my whole machine.  Firefox tech support was worse than useless, so I went to Chrome and have never looked back.  YMMV, of course.
 
2014-05-12 06:05:57 AM
I`ll be using whichever is the last browser to be ad free.

lewismarktwo: I wonder when software companies will figure out that people don't like their interface constantly changing for no appreciable benefit.


When it costs them money rather than making them money...
 
2014-05-12 06:52:26 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: Firefox is open source. Anyone can just fork it without the new feature if they don't like it. It's really not a big deal.


Back in high school, my friends used to fork Firefox all the time.
 
2014-05-12 06:56:33 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Sure, Mozilla, why not piss off some more users, it's not like another browser recently knocked you into third place or anything.

[cdn.arstechnica.net image 640x480]




To be fair, that doesn't represent users who chose one browser over another.
Many just don't know or care to switch when explorer is good enough.

Most folks just can't be bothered to get involved in the browser wars.
 
2014-05-12 07:08:09 AM
cdn.pearltrees.com
 
2014-05-12 07:21:50 AM

Izicata: There's a button in the top right corner of the New Tab page that toggles the website thumbnails on and off. It looks like this.

[img.fark.net image 32x27]

Just press it.


dude, this is fark - you're trying to pitch  'the solution is right infront of you, here's an intructable' to people who still can't W8 to work 'right', because it's not XP/7??

Pretty brave.
 
2014-05-12 08:00:45 AM
So, new tab homepage addon, problem solved.
 
2014-05-12 08:09:46 AM

uttertosh: dude, this is fark - you're trying to pitch 'the solution is right infront of you, here's an intructable' to people who still can't W8 to work 'right', because it's not XP/7??


WHERE IS MY START MENU I PRESS THE THING IN THE LOWER LEFT AND IT JUST TAKES ME BACK TO THE UGLY SQUARES
 
2014-05-12 08:13:36 AM

dready zim: I`ll be using whichever is the last browser to be ad free.

lewismarktwo: I wonder when software companies will figure out that people don't like their interface constantly changing for no appreciable benefit.

When it costs them money rather than making them money...


How does Firefox make Mozilla money in the first place?
 
2014-05-12 08:24:53 AM
Comments suggesting disgruntled Firefox users ditch it for Chrome are amusing. Because Chrome doesn't include any features designed to increase revenue for its parent company?

There are specs for what the sponsored tiles will look like. Single, static images, no sales pitches:

"The brand image may consist of a centered logo, wordmark, or both, on a solid colored background. Companies may not use sponsored tiles for sales pitches, discounts, dollar amounts or sales according to Mozilla's specification.

"So, what you won't get here are dynamic ads, media ads, ads that are loaded from remote servers, or any other form of advertisement that is not static in nature. In essence, this is just a web link to a web service with a thumbnail attached to it."


i293.photobucket.com
 
2014-05-12 08:28:35 AM

Naesen: dready zim: I`ll be using whichever is the last browser to be ad free.

lewismarktwo: I wonder when software companies will figure out that people don't like their interface constantly changing for no appreciable benefit.

When it costs them money rather than making them money...

How does Firefox make Mozilla money in the first place?


"The majority of Mozilla's revenue is generated from search and commerce functionality included in our Firefox product through all major search partners including Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Amazon, eBay and others. Mozilla's reported revenues also include very important individual and corporate donations and grants, which are growing significantly, as well as other forms of income from our investable assets."

Source: Mozilla 2012 financial FAQ. More financial documents here.

For the nitty-gritty, check out their Form 990, which every nonprofit is required to file with the IRS. Because Mozilla is a nonprofit, anyone can take a pretty close look at its financials.
 
2014-05-12 08:31:18 AM

TuteTibiImperes: DemonEater: Ugh, god damn it.

I HATE Chrome's interface.  Firefox is what I'm used to and is in many ways the best.  But if they do this I will have to stab them in the FACE.  Also, find another browser.

Try Opera.  It moved to the Chromium rendering engine last year, so any site that works with Chrome will work with Opera, but I much prefer Opera's interface.  Plus, it comes with the capability to customize search bar shortcuts (I can type 't <search term>' in the address bar to automatically search for that term on YouTube for example) as well as some handy mouse gestures.


I cannot trust Opera's creators as a company. They've always been pretty skeevy.

First they started with a paid browser (which there's nothing wrong with,) but when the competitors were all free they switched to using an extremely obnoxious ad panel on the toolbar that took a good quarter of your screen real estate.

Then when the big push against IE being bundled with windows came around they were possibly the biggest backer ( and were fighting to keep the option only being between Opera and IE.)

They're freaking scumbags and it's a shame because the browser itself is decent.
 
2014-05-12 08:48:45 AM

bbqsandwich: Naesen: dready zim: I`ll be using whichever is the last browser to be ad free.

lewismarktwo: I wonder when software companies will figure out that people don't like their interface constantly changing for no appreciable benefit.

When it costs them money rather than making them money...

How does Firefox make Mozilla money in the first place?

"The majority of Mozilla's revenue is generated from search and commerce functionality included in our Firefox product through all major search partners including Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Amazon, eBay and others. Mozilla's reported revenues also include very important individual and corporate donations and grants, which are growing significantly, as well as other forms of income from our investable assets."

Source: Mozilla 2012 financial FAQ. More financial documents here.

For the nitty-gritty, check out their Form 990, which every nonprofit is required to file with the IRS. Because Mozilla is a nonprofit, anyone can take a pretty close look at its financials.


I'll readily admit that while I'm a tech expert, I'm no financial expert. After reading your linked sources, there's a big "duh" on the grants and such, but does their main revenue stream basically boil down to "every time a user uses the integrated search bar in our browser to specifically search from Google, Yahoo, Bing (etc), the company we "referred" them to gives us a kickback" ?
 
2014-05-12 09:01:01 AM
All that ad revenue is eventually going to the illuminati anyway, no matter which browser you use.
 
2014-05-12 09:03:03 AM

Naesen: bbqsandwich: Naesen: dready zim: I`ll be using whichever is the last browser to be ad free.

lewismarktwo: I wonder when software companies will figure out that people don't like their interface constantly changing for no appreciable benefit.

When it costs them money rather than making them money...

How does Firefox make Mozilla money in the first place?

"The majority of Mozilla's revenue is generated from search and commerce functionality included in our Firefox product through all major search partners including Google, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Amazon, eBay and others. Mozilla's reported revenues also include very important individual and corporate donations and grants, which are growing significantly, as well as other forms of income from our investable assets."

Source: Mozilla 2012 financial FAQ. More financial documents here.

For the nitty-gritty, check out their Form 990, which every nonprofit is required to file with the IRS. Because Mozilla is a nonprofit, anyone can take a pretty close look at its financials.

I'll readily admit that while I'm a tech expert, I'm no financial expert. After reading your linked sources, there's a big "duh" on the grants and such, but does their main revenue stream basically boil down to "every time a user uses the integrated search bar in our browser to specifically search from Google, Yahoo, Bing (etc), the company we "referred" them to gives us a kickback" ?


Mozilla's main source of revenue (90%) comes from a deal with Google to have Google be the default search engine in the search bar and on the "about:home" home page.

They get revenue from other sources, including T-shirt sales and volunteer contributions. But obviously, having 90% of your revenue come from a single source isn't well-diversified. So to me -- and I am not a Mozilla employee -- it makes sense for them to branch out where they can, including this deal with the new tabs.
 
2014-05-12 09:06:32 AM
Chrome (Little to no bloat, fast, easily accessible/usable anonymous mode, standard ad/script block plugins)

Opera (slightly heavier, awkward but possible to add ad/script blocking, best default interface of any browser by light-years)

Internet Explorer (No ad/script block short of messing with things you shouldn't mess with, but very stable, decent performance, bloat somewhat irrelevant since if you're on a windows machine it's running in one capacity or another anyhow)

Safari (Average-ish, nothing exceptional but won't usually crash anything important either)

Lynx (You know you want to.  Do it.  Dooooooo it.   Come at me, Bro.)


... seriously, it isn't like even the younger users of the internet have never seen a browser crash, burn, and become non-viable before.  Hell, I remember being annoyed when Netscape became the shiatty browser and I had to learn the new hands-down-best browser, Internet Explorer 3 (or whichever number it was at the time).

Just grab another piece of software that's not shiate and continue with your life.  That's the whole point of software, you can swap it out pretty much as you please.
 
2014-05-12 09:43:50 AM

Dufus: It pains me to remember when Firefox was fast and useable.


This.  It was designed to be a fast, lightweight alternative to their lumbering flagship.

Now it is their lumbering flagship.
 
2014-05-12 09:45:11 AM

picturescrazy: If there's one thing people on the Internet can agree on, is that ads are annoying as crap. Why would people go out of their way to install something to make this worse when the other alternatives don't pull this crap? I'd rather use IE than ad supported Firefox.

/chrome anyway


If it's one thing that Internet companies can agree on, it's that their revenue comes almost entirely from ads, and their users are just eyeballs.
 
2014-05-12 09:46:28 AM
firefox staff are too full of themselves, eg, on an asus android tablet (slow device) firefox version 26 doesnt gimme the option to disable javascript or images. i rarely need to do that, but wanted to try it on a slow website to see if i could get to articles quicker. i couldnt understand the lack of choice. found an article by a mozilla staffer who snottily/condescendingly said the option doesnt exist cuz its for the benefit of the user...websites might not load right. well, duh.

firefox is quite slow on that asus. ive done a few comparisons of fat websites, timing firefox vs the little-known 'Superfast' browser. firefox takes 2-4 times as long to finish loading. to be fair, i have Ghostery on firefox, but the load time delta was similar pre Ghostery.

i'd like to (1) use the same browser on all platforms (win7 pc, android phone and tablet) and (2) avoid google. firefox is too slow and crashprone to make this possible.

i dont "get" firefox adding ads and wonder about the viability of a company with their current strange revenue model. in firefoxs defense on the technical side, websites have gotten crazy big. its not uncommon to see a megabyte of javascript on a news site, and that shiat kills slow devices like my asus. even some mobile sites are wicked bloated, like m.imdb.com
 
2014-05-12 09:50:11 AM
Wanted to stick with FF because I dislike Google controlling so much of the internet. Sadly FF is too slow.

I tried Opera, and it is actaually really fast/light weight. Seems to be a happy medium of speed and not being a data grabber. Just a complete lack of plugins  --- sigh.
 
2014-05-12 09:52:52 AM

sendtodave: If it's one thing that Internet companies can agree on, it's that their revenue comes almost entirely from ads, and their users are just eyeballs.


I have no problem with any ads that:

(1) Don't directly interfere with the ability to read the page and

(2) Don't increase the total load time of the page past 1 second (pages that have otherwise negligible load times) or an imperceptible amount (pages with perceptible load times, such as video/streaming).

I also have no problem whatsoever with sidebar ads on video (so long as I can maximize over them) or break-ads equivalent to non-prime-time TV/radio ad breaks.  If you make me watch a 45-second beer ad to see a 15-second youtube clip, however, I will watch neither.

// I don't think I'm unusual in this.  If ad tolerance was actually universally zero there would be no point in advertising at all.
 
2014-05-12 10:35:02 AM
I don't know how the advertisement based internet stays afloat. Who the hell is clicking on these ads and actually buying anything. Plus more than half the ads are scams to begin with. I have never once, purposely at least, clicked on a Google ad.
 
2014-05-12 10:56:56 AM

That Guy What Stole the Bacon: OR. OR. NOT "OUR." Jeez, I really need to use "Preview."


I just thought you were a Brit.
 
2014-05-12 11:25:02 AM

NETSCAPE NAVIGATOR FOR LIFE, YO!

/not really
//Alta Vista for life, yo.
///Still not really.
 
2014-05-12 11:46:25 AM
I tend to use IE by default, but keep Chrome and Firefox installed for those instances that IE shiats the bed. Don't really have an opinion as to one being superior to another, just habit to use IE most often.
 
2014-05-12 11:53:51 AM

big pig peaches: I don't know how the advertisement based internet stays afloat. Who the hell is clicking on these ads and actually buying anything. Plus more than half the ads are scams to begin with. I have never once, purposely at least, clicked on a Google ad.


Some ads are impression ads which means IIRC that one only has to see the ad, not click it.  Which is why some sites are putting pleas for people to turn off ad-blocking software.
 
2014-05-12 11:56:48 AM

Wasilla Hillbilly: I tend to use IE by default, but keep Chrome and Firefox installed for those instances that IE shiats the bed. Don't really have an opinion as to one being superior to another, just habit to use IE most often.


Firefox on my Linux partition most often, but I've also added Chromium that I use on occasion. On Windows, I'm moving more towards Chrome since Firefox crashes on that a lot, but I do have IE there as well.  On my smartphone, I use Chrome since the mobile Firefox is too slow.
 
2014-05-12 12:18:27 PM

47 is the new 42: Wasilla Hillbilly: I tend to use IE by default, but keep Chrome and Firefox installed for those instances that IE shiats the bed. Don't really have an opinion as to one being superior to another, just habit to use IE most often.

Firefox on my Linux partition most often, but I've also added Chromium that I use on occasion. On Windows, I'm moving more towards Chrome since Firefox crashes on that a lot, but I do have IE there as well.  On my smartphone, I use Chrome since the mobile Firefox is too slow.


Ah yeah, on my tablet it's pretty much just Chrome, but occasionally Dolphin.
 
Displayed 50 of 63 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report