Advertisement in the official FF 1.0 de-DE! Officially? Why?

Discussion of general topics about Mozilla Firefox
Locked
User avatar
Gingerbread_Man
Posts: 470
Joined: October 5th, 2004, 6:28 pm

Post by Gingerbread_Man »

_hb_ wrote:WHY shouldn't it be good to have some revenues from ebay / google et.al ? moziilla.org mozilla_europe . .they all need money to keep things working !


That doesn't actually explain anything, which was my original request :-s I was under the impression that it didn't take more than time and effort to get a project like Firefox together. People aren't so much complaining that Moz is making money off searches--assuming that's true--but that they didn't inform anyone. There's also a huge difference between data mining (spyware) and simple referrals. I thought open source was against commercialism, spyware and all that crap. Remember the advertising images? They read, "Firefox, the browser you can trust" :cry:
Gingerbread Man's posts, 2004-10-06 through 2005-08-12.
michaell522
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 4th, 2002, 4:47 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Post by michaell522 »

In practice, I don't see why this is an issue. It's just changing the way that ebay gets the information. Even if it went straight to ebay.de, they can still track you. Why is it such a big problem if you give your information to some third party, rather than you giving your information to ebay who gives it to a third party? The result is the same.

If this kind of thing is a problem, then the solution should be to remove ebay, amazon, yahoo and, following all the way, I guess Google, from the interface altogether until the user specifically adds the engine(s) they feel they can trust with their information.

GingerbreadMan wrote:There's also a huge difference between data mining (spyware) and simple referrals.

What is the difference in terms of the transaction between the browser and the server? I can't think of one.
pariah
Posts: 7
Joined: November 17th, 2004, 5:27 am

Post by pariah »

utah wrote:But I think there are lots of people who feel that Mozilla shouldn't do this because it's a violation of what people think is the ethics of the project

Yup.
utah wrote:(Can't we all blame it on Dubya, please?!)


Yup also. You <I>know</I> it's true.
utah
Posts: 20
Joined: September 20th, 2003, 1:50 pm
Location: Germany

Post by utah »

Well, _hb_, I don't think you can convince me.
Had they told me before, I would've acted otherwise.
And I guess this is why they haven't, as I know there are lots of people who think this way.
But I don't want to add fuel to the flames. I think that those differing ideas about what Mozilla should or shouldn't do can in fact co-exist, if there is, as you said, complete transparency.
michaell522
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 4th, 2002, 4:47 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Post by michaell522 »

utah wrote:I think that those differing ideas about what Mozilla should or shouldn't do can in fact co-exist, if there is, as you said, complete transparency.

Transparency is good. However, given two options:
1. Having a build on November 9th with the ebay URL redirect via some other site
2. Having no build until this discussion is finished and everyone (including ebay.de) is agreed

would you still choose to delay the release for a few weeks rather than just changing it?
User avatar
guest123
Posts: 300
Joined: March 16th, 2004, 1:51 pm

Post by guest123 »

michaell wrote:
utah wrote:I think that those differing ideas about what Mozilla should or shouldn't do can in fact co-exist, if there is, as you said, complete transparency.

Transparency is good. However, given two options:
1. Having a build on November 9th with the ebay URL redirect via some other site
2. Having no build until this discussion is finished and everyone (including ebay.de) is agreed

would you still choose to delay the release for a few weeks rather than just changing it?


Firefox 1.0 has already been realesed. What devs can do is change and come with 1.01 or something for the german version only.

But more important is they *officially* disclose their plans and make the things more transparent. Either defend their position or apologize; but they need to do something ASAP, before the blogs all over the net is filled with the gossip of Firefox being a spyware.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 Firefox/1.0.7
utah
Posts: 20
Joined: September 20th, 2003, 1:50 pm
Location: Germany

Post by utah »

michaell wrote:Transparency is good. However, given two options:
1. Having a build on November 9th with the ebay URL redirect via some other site
2. Having no build until this discussion is finished and everyone (including ebay.de) is agreed

would you still choose to delay the release for a few weeks rather than just changing it?

The ebay.de searchplugin has been around on Mycroft for ages, and ebay didn't object, so what's the problem? As far as I understood, ebay approached the FF.de-guys and asked for a "partner programme or the like". That's a difference!
User avatar
Gingerbread_Man
Posts: 470
Joined: October 5th, 2004, 6:28 pm

Post by Gingerbread_Man »

michaell wrote:What is the difference in terms of the transaction between the browser and the server? I can't think of one.


The difference is that the information goes directly to the site you signed up for, and it uses that information according to the terms of service to which you agreed. Sending it to a third party site, known for data mining is quite different in my opinion :?
If there is indeed no difference, then eBay.de should implement a browser ID tag in the URL, like Google. It's also being pointed out that no other eBay sites redirect your search, so I don't see why eBay.de should be any different. :doubt:
Gingerbread Man's posts, 2004-10-06 through 2005-08-12.
Cyberevil
Posts: 11
Joined: September 29th, 2004, 7:38 pm

Post by Cyberevil »

All this simply boils down to: People should have been told about it and presented a choice if they wish to participate in this cash revenue for the devs or not.

Cyber
User avatar
guest123
Posts: 300
Joined: March 16th, 2004, 1:51 pm

Post by guest123 »

Cyberevil wrote:All this simply boils down to: People should have been told about it and presented a choice if they wish to participate in this cash revenue for the devs or not.

Cyber


I will modify it a bit:

All this simply boils down to: People should have been told about it and presented a choice if they wish to *redirect their search through a third party known to be a dataminer in past* or not.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 Firefox/1.0.7
User avatar
KrisM2
Posts: 432
Joined: November 9th, 2004, 5:45 pm
Location: Boston

Post by KrisM2 »

Damned anoying!

slightly OT, I download a HOSTS file from http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

I also happen to use the "nohttpd" module from http://www.cdhk.de/buck/nohttpd/nohttpd.php

This prevents most garbage from ever getting on my computer.

I use CookieCuller to clear junk cookies on FF startup.

I also run AdAware and Spybot S&D every week or 2.

I use Avast antivirus, KerioPersonalFirewall, and I sit behind a DSL modem firewall.

End of OT.

Because of this thread I have become much more aware of the contents of my searchplugins folder.

Damned anoying!
Kristi
Last edited by KrisM2 on November 17th, 2004, 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-- ThinkPad P15s-Gen1-20T4-002KUS, i7-10510U, UEFI/GPT, 16GB, Sammy 970 EVO Plus 500GB M.2.
- others -
-laserjets: HP M254dw color, HP P1606dn. Epson Perfection 2480 flatbed scanner -
User avatar
wong888
Posts: 1512
Joined: September 22nd, 2004, 5:10 pm

Post by wong888 »

kristiQ wrote:Damned anoying!

Because of this thread I have become much more aware of the contents of my extensions.

Damned anoying!
Kristi


this thread has nothing to do with extensions. :)

it is the built in search plugin/engine.
User avatar
KrisM2
Posts: 432
Joined: November 9th, 2004, 5:45 pm
Location: Boston

Post by KrisM2 »

oop sorry - it was the searchplugins folder I was looking in... blush! (edited!)
Thanks
Kristi
-- ThinkPad P15s-Gen1-20T4-002KUS, i7-10510U, UEFI/GPT, 16GB, Sammy 970 EVO Plus 500GB M.2.
- others -
-laserjets: HP M254dw color, HP P1606dn. Epson Perfection 2480 flatbed scanner -
User avatar
Gingerbread_Man
Posts: 470
Joined: October 5th, 2004, 6:28 pm

Re: Changelog for localization

Post by Gingerbread_Man »

Chakka wrote:It came to my mind that it might be helpful to have some sort of changelog officially residing on the Mozilla.org page or some appropriated place on the net else.


There is an unofficial one at Squarefree.com which I consider semi-official, since it's linked from this forum.
Gingerbread Man's posts, 2004-10-06 through 2005-08-12.
User avatar
technomage
Posts: 1106
Joined: November 16th, 2003, 11:05 am

Post by technomage »

GingerbreadMan wrote:I was under the impression that it didn't take more than time and effort to get a project like Firefox together.

Then you are naive. Let's assume (and this is a big assumption) that none of the mozilla devs want to get compensated monetarily for the time they spend on mozilla. And I don't mean "make the big bucks," I mean just paid for the vast number of hours they spend working so that all of us benefit. Because let's be honest--time is money.

Even if you exclude the amount of money that would reasonably compensate the devs for their work, mozilla still needs a ton of money to pay for a) their many web domains, b) the outrageous amount of bandwidth they use, c) for web hosting or servers, d) I don't even know what else.

And of course the devs should be compensated if they desire. Why? Because with their skill, they could easily abandon this "non-profit" cause for a better paying, for-profit one. But they don't. And I think they should be rewarded for that.

In the end, this is an extremely expensive endeavor that has for a long time relied heavily on voluntary donations. I'm not surprised that they had to add to that paying sponsorship or some sort. I think they should have disclosed what they were doing, but I don't fault them for doing something to keep this great organization from going belly-up. It's either that.... or make people pay for their firefox.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4
Mozilla Thunderbird version 1.5.0.4 (20060516)
Desktop: WinXP Pro | AthlonXP 1700+ | 512MB DDR | ATI Radeon 9000
Laptop: WinXP Home | Intel Centrino Solo 1.66 GHz | 1024 MB DDR2 | Intel GMA 950 Graphphi
Locked