Google Returns As Default Search Engine In Firefox (techcrunch.com) 136
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."
"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."
XUL & Ideology go together (Score:2, Insightful)
It was only a couple days ago [archive.org] when Firefox was quoting Vogue Culture News for this:
Whatever Mozilla. Keep pretending the "champion of the Internet", it's part of your act.
Re: (Score:3)
Hush. They finally fixed this (an annoyance every time I install Firefox / load up a new Linux install), and that's a good thing.
Now if they could find themselves a leader...someone who doesn't think that Apple or Google or Microsoft are the people they should be copying / working for, then maybe FF will have a future.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:XUL & Ideology go together (Score:5, Funny)
There is no firefox only xul
Re:XUL & Ideology go together (Score:5, 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.
Re:XUL & Ideology go together (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Because the people that care are in the minority, so why inconvenience everyone with an additional step?
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Because the people that care are in the minority, so why inconvenience everyone with an additional step?
I see a "First World Problem" meme being made out of that.
"Installed FireFox...
"Needed one more click than I could accept."
Re: (Score:1)
Users' best interests... (Score:5, Insightful)
Surely if Mozilla really had users' best interests in mind they'd make DuckDuckGo the default search option?
Re:Users' best interests... (Score:5, Interesting)
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/... [recode.net]
Re:Users' best interests... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm liking FF 57 myself. Going to miss a couple of plugins that haven't updated yet, but hopefully that is just around the corner. Holy crap where is noscript?! OK, need to go look that up right quick.
Anyway, regarding another post in this thread, I love FF at least leaves the "save page" option under the first click menu, instead of being way buried like in Chrome. Annoys me to no end when I use Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Google dominates search because they have the best search engine.
Google dominates search because they give people the results they want. This can be good because it helps you find what you're actually looking for. It can be bad because it feeds you news and articles that agree with your biases or biases Google wants you to have.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If that's where it gets it search results from, then it is garbage too, and I wouldn't use it.
Google dominates search because they have the best search engine.
Sure. Until you search for torrents. Try the following (with quotes) in Google, and then in Bing.
+magnet +torrent +"Oz the great and powerful"
I tried that last night on google and bing. Google returned 3 results, none of which were a link to a page that had the torrent. Bing's first 5 results were all valid.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure I want to click the 1st result, since google censors such things, the shit floats to the top.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
filetype:torrent +"Oz the great and powerful" [google.be] 6020 results.
I'm genuinely curious... how many results do *you* get with my search term? 'cos I just did it again and still only got four.
Re: Users' best interests... (Score:1)
I get none using your term, with it automatically removing quotes to give results.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So then you adjust the search term. That is what I did. I am not looking for sites that have the file. I am looking for the file itself.
I don't need to "adjust" the search term - my intention was clear and other search engines have no problem with it.
Terrible anymore (Score:2)
Google is terrible anymore. More than half the time it strikes out the key words I have typed in and brings me common search results. I used those specific words for a reason. So then I have to go back and put quotes around those words so they aren't ignored. Once I was looking for documentation on the Pelco camera RS232 protocol and Google changed "Pelco" to "Arduino".
Re: (Score:2)
Google is terrible anymore. More than half the time it strikes out the key words I have typed in and brings me common search results. I used those specific words for a reason. So then I have to go back and put quotes around those words so they aren't ignored. Once I was looking for documentation on the Pelco camera RS232 protocol and Google changed "Pelco" to "Arduino".
I remember when Google came out one of the big advantages was it assumed a Boolean "and" for each search term, where Altavista would require a +.
Then they started doing Boolean synonyms, but you could correct it with +. Now it searches whatever it wants, and to try and get Boolean and you need to use quotes, so you're using twice as many characters.
Re: (Score:2)
People keep spreading lies about such a great company [duckduckgo.com], who constantly give a lot back to open source projects, privacy, and other freedom organisations [duckduckgo.com].
Most people here have clearly never used ddg, otherwise they would know that ddg don't discriminate in their results; thus unlike google, they don't narrow your world view and only feed you left-wing or right-wing content (i.e. they don't bubble you [ted.com]). Thus, their search results come from hundreds of sources, including their own bot, and sometimes from yahoo,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do we know they don't track history other than them saying so?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I've just commented, but you could try Startpage [startpage.com] the search engine that is based on google instead of bing like duckduckgo.
Re: (Score:2)
DuckDuckGo isn't based solely on bing, they use hundreds of sources [duck.co], including their own bot, and sometimes Yahoo, Bing, and Yandex.
Oh, and they also fight for your rights [duckduckgo.com].
Re: (Score:2)
DuckDuckGo isn't based solely on bing, they use hundreds of duck.
^My misread of your comment somehow still made sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But the fact is, it's a bad search engine. Google eats it for breakfast.
Ideologically, I want to like DuckDuckGo, but it's just not there yet.
If it ever does get there, I'll gladly switch over and hope Mozilla adopt it as Firefox's default search engine. But not before. I have stuff to get done.
Re: (Score:2)
But the fact is, it's a bad search engine. Google eats it for breakfast.
Let me tell ya! Life was going well, Google was providing me search results that enhanced my social, spiritual and financial well being. After I switched to DuckDuckGo from Google, I lost my entire fortune, My wife left me and my dog ran away, and my Pickup Truck fell completely apart.
But now I'm a Country Western singer, and that's a good thing.
Re: (Score:1)
Provide one single example where a google web search does better than duckduckgo.
Re: (Score:2)
Every time I try DuckDuckGo, it either gives roughly the same results Google gives, or it gives worse results.
If you want an example, here's one off the top of my head: D programming language compile time expressions
Google's top 7 results are right on the money (though ideally the very top result wouldn't be the Compile-time Argument Lists page). DuckDuckGo's top 7 results are nowhere near as good - ironically it seems to be matching 'regular expressions' with 'expressions' in a way that a human programmer
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If users want a well funded highly capable browser then they'd understand that Moz needs to get funding. Google has paid 100's of millions literally to get their search box as 1st choice. And you can easily change it, unlike the ****ing UI or the fact that your plugins are all broken now.
Re: (Score:2)
I would say most people prefer to use google because it gives them the best search results. On my Linux laptop I have left duckduckgo as the default and it's ok, but on my primary machine I always set google as the default. It's through choice, not ignorance of the options.
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox 56 64bit, then 57 niether works (Score:3)
Even thought updates were off I ended up with firefox 56 64 bit! A real PITA, lockups while using, heck it only started up every other time every time.
While battling this crap, I made sure update was disabled!!! Now I have 57.0!!!!!
What the heck are the shakers and movers at mozilla doing this is a cluster frak!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Firefox 56 64bit, then 57 niether works (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.
Re:Firefox 56 64bit, then 57 niether works (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, exactly. You have probably tweaked a ton weird settings in about:config. Clean it up!
Re: (Score:1)
That's mozilla.org for you. Fastest finger pointers on the net.
(By the way, you know that story recently where Linus Torvalds was going ape-shit because someone broke third-party code and claimed it wasn't their problem to fix it? Ha, what a funny guy. Too bad he doesn't run a *real* software project, right?)
Re: (Score:2)
If you've got weird custom tweaks from 30+ browser versions ago still lurking around, then yes the problem is definitely on your end.
Re: (Score:2)
So I need to lose all my customization
Not necessarily. Just like a windows XP machine that hasn't been formatted in a few years, often it's not the customisation but the buildup of stale shit in your profile that can often do this.
I myself had Firefox crash hard on me on every startup after an update. The solution was to create a new profile, import the old profile, and re-install all the same plugins I had previously. Fixed a lot of issues doing that and I had all the customisations I had previously.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you import old file without importing al the junk you don't want? I see solutions of just copying the entire folder into the new profile folder, but doesn't clean stuff up.
However, I did create a new profile ran the same test on the old one and the new one the the pages load in the same amount of time, which feels slower than I remember. So I don't think junk in the profile or weird config settings are causing this.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you import old file without importing al the junk you don't want?
You could manually export things which are important (passwords, bookmarks) and then reinstall your extensions.
Or just push this button: https://support.mozilla.org/en... [mozilla.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, sure is great that everyone has the expertise to do that! Firefox, the browser for everyone!
Just like finely tuned street race cars are the cars for everyone? To be clear you're talking about a browser that isn't working at peak performance. There's nothing stopping everyone! using Firefox. Just like bugs like cache creep in Edge aren't debilitating, or how in Chrome if you use services that make heavy use of local storage services can cause your profile directory to inexplicably grow massively in size to the point where there are plugins to help you manage the amount of space it takes.
This may co
Re: (Score:2)
Yup. I rarely touched about:config. The fact that Mozilla hides a zillion settings there yet every release the public interface for settings gets smaller and smaller makes configuration management very painful.
I suspect some of this is because the internet is slow and I have scripts running (reminds me to check of noscript is finally ready). But the old style would show you something before the entire page rendered, which made it feel faster and let you see what you needed to see sooner. Now you see not
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I politely call this Tech Arrogance
Firefox is just a tool used for a task. Over the years it has been a good one. But when the tool becomes the task. If is no longer useful.
I have learned may things over the years listening
Re: (Score:2)
But when the tool becomes the task. If is no longer useful.
You have just described Linux, Windows, MacOS, as well as every other browser.
Effectively you have said: "A car is just a car, as soon as I need to take it in for maintenance it is no longer useful". Even a simple tool like a spanner can benefit from being cleaned at some point in its life.
Profile huh? (Score:2)
A year and a half ago, FF started freaking out on me. I would launch it with an empty about page (default), or even with a link via email, and it would open and just sit for 30 seconds. It was unresponsive, and my cpu/,memory was fine. Then it would magically become responsive and work fine. I deleted my profile, disabled add-ons (I only had 3 or 4 basic ones like adblocker, gestures, etc.). I went through several new versions, hoping it would be fixed. Nothing worked. After about 6 months, I gave u
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Obligatory Google Flame (Score:5, Funny)
Fuck Google.
I'd advise against it. Google doesn't cuddle, doesn't call, but creepily stalks you afterward.
Why is Google propaganda on /. ? (Score:1)
I'd like my news as non evil corp propaganda free as possible please thank you.
Re:WHERE NoScript??? (Score:5, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
...sell every bit they have about you...
They don't, and that's the key. They keep all data they collect for themselves, and they sell service based on these data, revealing as little as possible.
That's part of the reason they are so good. They can use that huge database to improve their results, and competitors can't access it, even by paying. They have a goose that lays golden eggs, and they spare no expense taking care of it, there is no way they are letting it go.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I closed my GMail account after Google decided that they didn't believe in the 1st Amendment for views which differed from Schmidt's.
The last thing I did before I hit the delete button was to check passwords.google.com. I was stunned to see the login name and password for every website I registered at in the past 10 years, including my wifi admin name and password.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And if the NSA shows up with a secret, warrentless request, they proudly say "no", doing jail time if necessary.
No one can get information out of you if you don't keep it.
about:config is your friend (Score:1)
The Moz devs work hard, I am certain, but I have disagreed with every UI change made in years.
However, all or almost all of the changes are optional - you can, if you know what to do in about:config, revert them.
This is a profound blessing because the other browsers on the market are the enemy. Usng software *provided by* MS or Google or Apple is catagorically unthinkable.
As it is however I find more and more sites which do not work in Firefox.
Actually, I have to come to the view *all* web-sites are broken
Upgraded (Score:2)
Upgraded this morning. Odd that my theme was changed, but that prompted me to grab a new one. Simple and now I have a better theme!
Very impressed with the speed. Feels much snappier.
This is excellent news (Score:3)
Perhaps Google's excellent search engine will help Mozilla find all the missing Firefox users.
A year ago the difference to Chrome was worrying (Score:2)
On websites like https://www.iconfu.com/ [iconfu.com] where a lot of computing is done inside the browser, you can still feel a slight performance difference, but it is almost negligible. It feels nice to have a real competition again.
User's interest... (Score:2)
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 dropping XUL while not having an equivalent substitute in WebExtensions is doing that? Nope.
And Thunderbird's Cozy Relationship With Bing? (Score:3)
Since Mozilla didn't throw Thunderbird entirely to the wolves, does this meant that Thunderbird's offensively cozy relationship with Bing will also end? (The default contextual action for highlighted text in Thunderbird has been a Bing search for the text, for perhaps two years now. Searching with Google is an option buried in a context menu pick list.)
Searx Metasearch (Score:1)
Why wouldn't you just cram an instance of searx [github.io] on your server and completely be done with the Search Engine Battle?
Really? (Score:2)
I downloaded the Linux version of FF57 to try out on my KDE Neon User Edition and the first thing I did was to check the search engine. It was set for DuckDuckGo.
I quickly changed it to StartPage.
FF57 automatically carried over my FF settings from the previous version, including links and add-ons. Only one add-on didn't work, but the email button continued to work fine.