Firefox Users Bad For Advertisers 900
rocketjam writes "According to CNET, German advertising technology company Adtech reports that during the months of October and November, Internet Explorer users were more than four times as likely to click on ads than Firefox users were. During the period 0.5 percent of IE users clicked on ads compared to 0.11 percent of Firefox users. Speculation on reasons for the difference in click rates range from Firefox's integrated pop-up blocking to seeing the average Firefox user as more tech-savvy the average Internet Explorer user."
AdBlock (Score:5, Informative)
Hooray for extensions!
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Funny)
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
An extra button or shortcut labeled "help this site" wich opens all ads in background tabs ? I would use it.
Re:AdBlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Informative)
They make a great team.
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
When the advertisers look at their ROI and see that all of the traffic from site x is crap, they will pull the ads and the site you were trying to help will need to find another method to support itself.
Re:AdBlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Because people who have an extreme pet peeve for web sites that have the nerve to block all of the content with ads for a few seconds will never come back
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
Fraudlent Ad Clicking on /. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
Ads for sales vs. marketing (Score:5, Informative)
Sales is getting out (by whatever means) and getting people to open their wallet for you in response to your ads/pleas/whatever.
Marketing is creating an awareness, and hopefully "need" for whatever you're selling, but not trying to close the sale right there, or even in the near future. This is especially true for high dollar items like cars.
Tracking clicks is in a sense trying to track sales (usually the seller probably only gets some time from the clicker, not money, though) even though a lot of ads are clearly intended to create a marketing presence. You don't have to click on them for them to be effective-- you just have to see them (over and over) out of the corner of your eye while reading something else. Tracking views is what happens in the rest of advertising (how many people watch that show x how many times the ad appears). Eventually internet advertising will use a hybrid of clicks and views to track.
Re:Ads for sales vs. marketing (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't know where I heard that, or if I'm quoting it correctly, but that's the gist of it.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
But this may not good to the web, the web user and the advertisement business.
The web has been filled with a wrong idea, which is if I put whatever through the web, at large quantity, some people will click/reply it. The first case of this idea is spam, the second one is banner ad. In most case, those ads are't related with the contain of the pages showing them. Also those ads aren't visually compatible with the pages showing them. More and more of them are become annoying, they are hurting the viewers' eyes and wasting their time and bandwidth. They are diseases of the web and dark side of the advertisement business.
Advertisement should be useful and enjoyable to the viewers. Otherwise, it will harm the advertiser. Also, harm the advertisement business.
Thus for the good of web, web user and advertiser, those irrelevant banner advertisement should be stop.
New smart and useful advertisement will adapt the existance firefox and adBlock.
Alertbox column on online ads (Score:4, Interesting)
There was a recent AlertBox article [useit.com] in which Nielsen described the most hated forms of Web advertising and how much they hurt users and, in turn, the aggressive advertisers and the sites that use them. It's a small article and quite worth a read.
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Interesting)
But I've been thinking lately -- is this going to change the Internet dramatically? How many web sites rely on advertising revenue, and won't get it anymore when everybody is filtering banners?
For instance, I now read Slashdot with no ads, and I'm not a subscriber. Adblock decreases the value proposition of a Slashdot subscription.
Re:AdBlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Funny)
Re:AdBlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Take slashdot (as an example), if everyone blocks ads, how would they "adapt"? My guess would be A) they won't, or B) they'll be reduced to making paid subscriptions mandatory, and perhaps increasing the number of advertisements masqueraded as genuine stories (such as the recent Cannon printer promotion). Is that really a better alternative?
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Interesting)
Is it? The content provider is providing free content with a catch: you will view some ads. By removing the ads, you aren't holding up your end of this implicit contract. Don't like ads? Don't view the content.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Interesting)
What if I can't pay attention to the content because the ads are screaming for my attention? I get easily distracted by stuff moving in my peripheral vision, such that I can't concentrate on an article or whatever. It's not like magazines, where the ads just sit there, waiting patiently for your attention.
I personally like the Firefox/Mozilla extention "Click to Play" for Flash movies (though I'd like it to have a whitelist option). Also, the semi-hidden "image.animation_mode once" [google.com] configuration tweak'
Re:AdBlock (Score:4, Insightful)
Repeat after me: THE STANDARD DOES NOT SPECIFY HOW CLIENTS RENDER
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Adblocking is no different than picking up a paper labeled "free" and shaking out the advertising inserts.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Take slashdot (as an example), if everyone blocks ads, how would they "adapt"?
Maybe they'll run on top of some torrent-like software. Perhaps the individual comments could be passed around separately. Instead of 'articles', we could have broad groupings to put news in. We could even designate some computers as servers so they aggregate most of the comments, which we could then read at our leisure.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Interesting)
We do know that some of the people are annoyed of the ads, but for the most part they are OK.
In case he ad revenue is gone, well, people have to pay. Simple enough. Our newspaper is the most successful in the country so we will survive even if people have to pay for net access.
But we don't want to chardge. We love to provide a really good newssite for free and the ads let us d
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock - will cause evolutionary 'Arms Race' (Score:5, Interesting)
e.g.: Take a page at url mysite.com/index.html . This page just consists of a bunch of iframes, which contain the page content, and the ads. The source of those iframes are from apparently random URLs that all look like mysite.com/?2pg904a82n84 . These content/ad URLs also change with each page reload. How do block the ads next time?
The only reason that a small 'elite' percentage of net users are able to surf Ad-free is that they're not yet a statistically significant group. Whey they become signficant, things will change. Enjoy the Ad-free content while you can!
Re:AdBlock - will cause evolutionary 'Arms Race' (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, like you said in your title, it might because a "arm race", but it's a race there is no point for a website/advertiser to try to win. Because let's face it, if someone is determined to race you,
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not how ads work (Score:5, Insightful)
You're assuming the point of advertising is to make you click. Strangely, many "new economy" ad execs sold their wares the same way. "Yeah, the users will CLICK and GO to your WEBSITE and BUY THINGS!!!11 ON THE SPOT!!!!111"
Bzzzt! Wrong, Slick.
The point of advertising is (say it with me) brand recognition. You aren't going to buy a Coke* on line when you get thirsty, but if all the sites you visit regularly have a Coke banner, the next time you're in the MiniMart, you might just say, "Hmmm, if I get a Coke then some hottie will hang off me, and there will be dancing and music and lots of sweat!" Then you fork over your dollars for one.
Why do you think there are billboards, and they are successful (in terms of getting companies to pay Viacomm and ClearChannel)? Because they build that brand recognition, not because you are going to run out that minute and buy a Hummer. Why are there ads in magazines? You gonna "click" on one of those, hah? Why does your 1 hour TeeVee show have 40 minutes of "content" (to be very generous) and 20 minutes of ads? You can't buy anything on the spot, so why are they trying to hawk "Hot Pockets"?
Now, it is possible for advertising to adapt to the web, but that won't happen until the ad execs actually figure out why and how the web works. I've sat in enough advert planning meetings (the "token" tech guy) to permanently lose all feeling below my neck due to lack of oxygen, and I can tell you that they don't get it yet. Maybe the current generation needs to die. I dunno.
*Yes, we're all aware that you can buy your dork-related goods [thinkgeek.com] on-line by clicking on the ads. We're talking about the average person here, who isn't interested in a new case, binary clock, or t-shirt that says, "Got Root? [please get me a girlfriend]".
Re:That's not how ads work (Score:3, Interesting)
If brands do become completely irrelevant, then what?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Interesting)
Its not a for-profit business model you need to consider. Its the model where a bunch of people want to communicate with each other.
There is a lot of good information/advice in the slashdot comments and no one is paying posters anything.
There are gigs and gigs of stuff on p2p and binary newsgroups and, again, no commerical benefit to those that post them.
The Internet will change, but it doens't have to be a for-profit model.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Interesting)
There sure as hell is a commercial benefit, just not a direct one. By posting items to p2p/ng, one encourages others to post items to p2p/ng. The more items on p2p/ng, the less one has to pay (music, movies, tv, apps, games, etc.). So, yes, no one is making money by p2p/ng, but they are, theoretically, "saving money".
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Informative)
Blocking adverts benefits advertisers. (Score:3, Interesting)
When something is advertised by banner/popup/flash monstrosity/whatever is shoved in my face, at best its a waste of the advertisers paid for bandwidth. At worst, if its a product I'm interested in and they manage to get a brand name over to me then I'll check out their competitors first.
Essentially banner adverts & popups tell me "Low grade company, low grade product, probably a scam", and I'll no more consider following such advert
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
But some of these epileptic-fit-inducing ads just make me work all the harder to eliminate them.
This is all part of capitalism. Adapt or die.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Informative)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually it really makes no difference, since I won't click on the non-annoying ads either.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly - by filtering _all_ ads you're destroying the current structure of the internet. IMHO filtering excessively annoying ads (flash, animated gifs, popups, etc) is fair enough, but don't you want to encourage the advertisers to use non-intrusive text only ads?
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
We must always have the right of what to view and what not to view, business models built on denying that choice deserve to be undermined whether its /., CNN, or any ot
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Despite its faults and follies, it's a great site and one of my primary sources of news. In fact, I like to see the ads and there have been several times when I've clicked through and purchased stuff, too.
And coming back to answer your question - simple non-intrusive methods like Google will make money out of ads, and eventually websites will find a way of getting through the ad-block.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Interesting)
The ads are small, suit the page style, and are 100% connected to the site's content. (Pocket PC games). Why do poeople block them? It's OK in my book to block pop-ups, but I think reading a website and deliberately blocking its adverts is akin to going into a shop, reading their newspaper, and putting it back on the shelf.
We've gone from havi
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Insightful)
Also if I don't like the site I'm on, I will typically block as many ads as I can (like weather.com), but I don't bother with most ads on slashdot.
I just hate really intrusive ads. Unfortunately, the intrusive ads are the ones that get the attention, and thus the clicks, of the users. Maybe if the advertisers actually offered something I wanted, they would see more success.
Re:AdBlock (Score:5, Informative)
While I love the thought of using the weather underground for weather reporting (it seems like Open Source Weather Forecasting,) I haven't yet mustered up the energy required to figure a proxomitron filter to block the dozens of ads that litter their site. Until I do, the NOAA is still my first choice.
Re:AdBlock-Exactly (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
I know advertisers and sites will try to get around this as much as possible, now that Firefox has enough of a user base to start paying attention. I know that most advertisers won't take a clue, and rather than backing off so they don't alienate their reader base, they will get more intrusive and alienate even more people.
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:AdBlock (Score:3, Informative)
Just cut and paste the following into a text file and then import it into adblock.
[Adblock]
/\D\d{2,3}x\d{2,3}\D/
goog lesyndication
us.yimg.com/a/
/\/buy_assets\//
/ [\W\d_](top|bottom|left|right|)?banner(s|id=|\d|_) [\W\d]/
/[\W\d](double|fast)click[\W\d]/
/[\W\d] click(stream|thrutraffic|thru|xchange)[\W\d]/
/[\ W\d]value(stream|xchange|click)[\W\d]/
/[\W\d]dim e(xchange|click)[\W\d]/
/[\W\d](onlineads?|ad(ban ner|click|-?flow|frame|ima?g(es?)?|_id|js|log|serv (er|e
more than four times as likely to click on ads (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the reasons we use Firefox is because it blocks pop-up ADDS. So why would a firefox user go and proactively click on adds after going to all that troubl???
Sheesh, go figure...
The users... (Score:5, Interesting)
Skewed (Score:5, Insightful)
One and the Same (Score:3, Insightful)
(And, aside from that, they can stop most all of the ad-blocking problems by just having the website proxy all advertisement images on it, so they really shouldn't bitch about something with a fairly simple technological solution.)
Cant' see any ads (Score:5, Funny)
Browser ID spoofing (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd be curious to see the figures on that.
take 2 coinsiding facts and obscure the link (Score:3, Insightful)
This is one of those things where things have got confused. These 2 facts coinside:
- If you've used your computer for longer then you are likely to have discovered a new browser.
- If you've used your computer for only a short time you are experiencing run away popups and all that you get when you click an AD.
^ combine these 2 and remove how you made the connection and you can make it seem like firefox users are just tight.
Don't descriminate against firefox users! I expect the same could be said to any non-windows browser, and any browser that isn't installed already with PCs you buy at Walmart and PC world.
Another thought (Score:5, Insightful)
Many adverts don't display correctly on firefox (Score:5, Insightful)
Many adverts aren't rendering correctly on firefox, including some flash/dhtml combos and some dhtml ads.
I don't expect this is the main reason, but it doesn't help.
Also, click through rates and conversion rates are different issues. Probably many more IE users accidentily click on ads or click on them and lose interest than firefox users who are much more likely to only click through on an advert if they are interested in buying. (this is a guess we don't breakdown by browser type at the moment)
Re:Many adverts don't display correctly on firefox (Score:4, Interesting)
Probably many more IE users accidentily click on ads or click on them and lose interest than firefox users who are much more likely to only click through on an advert if they are interested in buying. (this is a guess we don't breakdown by browser type at the moment)
Your guess holds true with me, at least. When I see an ad, I only click on it if I think it's something that interests me and that I stand a good (50%) chance of buying. Tech stuff appeals to me, as do some t-shirts. So ThinkGeek ads tend to get clickthroughs from me.
Re:Many adverts don't display correctly on firefox (Score:5, Informative)
In that case you aren't writing compliant code, end of discussion.
There are a number of factors... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it's important to consider which pages are most popular for IE and Firefox users; it's not a matter of browser but more a matter of the interests of the user. This click-ratio metric would only be relevant if we compared visitors to the same website, and know that the users have the same interests and are just as likely to click. This would be more accurately done in a controlled environment than using pagelogs.
That said, I do accept that Firefox and IE users have different attitudes towards internet use, but the point in TFA about IE users thinking the banner is a system notification made me laugh :)
Next battlefield: Rise of inline popups? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've seen a few of these in Firefox. They were actually advertisements for big-name movie releases. They were pretty intrustive and were usually animated, sailing across the page I was trying to view. They were relatively well-behaved, at least, offering a tiny "Close [x]" button in some corner of the ad. Of course there's no guarantee that future ads will be so generous.
Since they don't launch in separate windows, obviously current popup-blocking technology can't touch them. I wonder if this will be the next "big thing" since users and browsers are becoming more successful at blocking popups or tuning them out.
I also wonder how easy they'll be to block. Sadly, I didn't bother to look at the source, but I have a hunch they're served up via a Javascript include file that's hosted on the ad company's servers. If that's how they were done, I guess they would be easy to block... just filter out
They're very simple to create. (Score:5, Informative)
<div class=ad>
<img src=".../banner.jpg">
</div>
Even if you disable JS, the only thing you disable is the close button. I've seen pages with this, but not the ads. The ads are still caught by the image filter, but I have to close the empty css layer.
Re:Next battlefield: Rise of inline popups? (Score:3, Informative)
Experience; only themselves to blaim... (Score:5, Funny)
Begining IE: Ooooo! A button! Why yes, my computer does run slowly!
During IE: Grr...you wouln't lie to me again, would you? *click!*
Experienced with IE: Liars! Every last one of you!
Begining Firefox: I can block those liars? Wo-ho!
(Yep, I know that you can block adds in IE...it's just not integrated or as well done.)
Who's fault is it anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
I blame the advertisers themselves. Ads kept getting more and more intrusive, abusing pretty much everything they could. In response, users started blocking pop-ups, keeping an anti-ad hosts file and generally ignore advertisements altogether. Firefox is merely another thing that makes it easier to get rid of ads. If they'd remained the nice, standard non-moving/flashing/whatever banners, users might not hate them this much.
Don't block ads, block popups , Flash, Anims, etc (Score:5, Interesting)
But I do have pop-ups blocked and I have installed flashblock(great plugin), which stops all annoying flash from playing, and I have shut down animated gifs. So my screen doesn't look like the all singing all dancing crap of the universe.
After the above settings I do use adblock plugin, to block something crappy that does sneak through. I have about 3 lines in my adblock file. One of them is *newegg* after some hideous unkillable flash they had annoyed me. Newegg doesn't sell to Canada anyway.
Lately I see more Ads flowed in the middle of text I am trying to read. These I generally just use nuke anything to get out of my way. Bother me enough and I will adblock the server.
Simple Rule guys: keep your ads from ruining my experience or I will. If you want me to even see your adverts, you better play nice.
My experience with Google Adsense ads (Score:3, Interesting)
However...
Nearly all of my pay comes from clicks on my article about legal music downloading [goingware.com]. The ads are almost always for p2p apps, and I'm dismayed they often claim what they do is legal. But there is a clickthrough rate of over 20%, which is quite unheard of in web advertising.
Most of the site has more technical articles. My article on C++ style [goingware.com] is my second most popular (after the music downloading article), and gets ads for obviously useful and legitimate things like software development tools and training courses, but it has a clickthrough rate of just 0.1%. Rates for other technical articles are similar. In the three months I've published adsense ads, I've made only $10 from the ads in the C++ style article.
My experience running ads on other sites is that a typical response rate is 0.5% - 1%, so it seems technically-inclined readers click ads far below the average.
In between are some articles on marketing, web design and such, that get about a 1% response rate.
Although the ads on my music article pay well, I don't like what they're advertising, and feel they call my credibility into question. I've started approaching the manufacturers of mp3 players directly, to offer them ad space on the page, but have had no takers yet.
I don't think I could come up with another high-response article very easily, so my plan is actually to write more technical articles, with the hope that by posting new content regularly, I can encourage repeat visitors. It is very hard to get someone totally new to visit a website, but I don't think it's so hard to get a visitor to come back for a second time.
Also I'm going to completely change the page design to use a very nice CSS/XHTML design my wife Bonita made for me. Right now my pages look very homemade, and I expect some visitors hit the back button because my pages look so poor. Here's a peek [goingware.com] at the new design, I think once I have it up all over my site I will get more repeat visitors.
Re:My experience with Google Adsense ads (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
They Should Read Jakob Nielsen's latest Alertbox (Score:3, Informative)
And I quote:
"Summary:
Studies of how people react to online advertisements have identified several design techniques that impact the user experience very negatively.
Advertising is an integral part of the Web user experience: people repeatedly encounter ads as they surf the Web, whether they're visiting the biggest portals, established newspapers, or tiny personal sites. Most online advertising studies have focused on how successful ads are at driving traffic to the advertiser, using simple metrics such as clickthrough rates.
Unfortunately, most studies sorely neglect the user experience of online ads. As a result, sites that accept ads know little about how the ads affect their users and the degree to which problematic advertising tricks can undermine a site's credibility. Likewise, advertisers don't know if their reputations are degraded among the vast majority of users who don't click their ads, but might well be annoyed by them.
Now, however, we have data to start addressing these questions. At my recent User Experience 2004 conference, John Boyd from Yahoo! and Christian Rohrer from eBay presented a large body of research on how users perceive online advertising. Here, I offer a few highlights from their presentation (my comments on their findings are solely my responsibility)."
Change the way you advertise (I prefer text ads myself, I'm 100% more likely to click on one of them then any sort of graphical ad) and you'll see more people clicking on ads.
Probably Not Good News for Firefox (Score:3, Insightful)
Stop Thinking! (Score:4, Funny)
Interesting. People thoughtful enough to select a browser rather than having a browser chosen for them also seem disinclined to click on anything that blinks.
The solution is obvious. Ban thinking now. Our economy depends on it.
Bad thing? (Score:3, Interesting)
Is this a "bad" thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Getting back on track here... it's simple Mr. Advertiser. If I want to buy a product, I will. You don't need to MAKE me buy it with your ad, you just need to get it into my head that it might do what I want. If I don't choose to buy it, TOO BAD!! Stop trying to justify your existence by pouring money into advertising and marketing and put that money into research and development to make a better product. Remember, the real hierarchy of the consumer/advertiser/producer relationship is this:
1. The producer only exists to serve the consumer
2. The advertiser is simply a notification agent (hmmm... could be replaced with a small shell script)
3. The consumer is the monarch in this relationship and should have little to do other than make a decision about where to spend their money.
4. The stockholders are the least important as they should be happy to even get a cent from this deal.
But it's all screwed up today and people are slowly being zombified by the current corrupted version of capitalism. Resist folks. Resist. You'll be better off for it.
Bad metric (Score:4, Insightful)
Comparing Percantages (Score:5, Interesting)
Advertisers should concentrate on what they are doing that only gets 0.5% of the most used broswer out there to click on their ads. Make the ads better (from the point of view of the *consumer*) and more people will click, regardless of the browser.
Haven't read every post, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Users *WANT* Ad Blocking. (Score:3, Interesting)
I also refuse to install Flash, it is a tool that has been abused by marketers. Transparent animation over page text was the last straw, that went WAY over the line for intrusion. Whenever I visit a Flash-only website, I complain to the webmaster for a non-Flash page. It usually gets results.
For some, ad-blocking is an ergonomic issue (Score:3, Insightful)
I wish advertising people would realise that they are totally alienating some potential customers.
Re:A different way of advertising... (Score:5, Insightful)
if someone goes to the effort of ignoring ads, working around their measures is more likely to piss them off than get their business.
Re:A different way of advertising... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:A different way of advertising... (Score:3, Informative)
blocking Google ads (Score:3, Insightful)
127.0.0.1 adservices.google.com
127.0.0.1 googleadservices.com
127.0.0.1 pagead.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 pagead1.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 pagead3.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 www.googleadservices.com
Re:What next? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think what this really should do is tell advertisers that if they get a click-through from a Firefox user, then it's a lot more meaningful in terms of potential sale than a click-through from an IE user. A Firefox user is far more likely to "mean it" if they click on an ad. An IE user's click is probably statistically close to indistinguishable from a random click :-)
Re:What next? (Score:4, Insightful)
I remember reading somewhere that most of them were people like housewives and retired folks, looking to make a quick buck. In which case, it's far more likely that those folks will use IE than Firefox.
Perhaps you could have a ratio of sorts - 50 clicks of IE is worth 1 click of Firefox
Re:most sites i go to (Score:3, Informative)
http://gauret.free.fr/adshare/adshare.php [gauret.free.fr]
Re:Ya' think? (Score:3, Interesting)
I've had several people ask my if I was sure it wasn't spelled 'Enternet', since its icon is a big blue E... sigh...
Re:Is Firefox unethical? (Score:3, Interesting)
Advertisers have to accept that only a small portion of their ads are seen. If that is channel surfers or ad-blockers, so be it.
The market will find a way. TV has survived years of channel flippers. The internet will find a way as well.
Re:Is Firefox unethical? (Score:3, Interesting)
Providing content funded by advertising revenue is a dying business, webmasters need to face that. When the web began there was little if any advertising, perhaps we're heading back that way.
However, if you want to talk ethics, l