Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla Linux

Linux Mint Sells Out for Mozilla Money (betanews.com) 97

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
Brian Fagioli, reporting for BetaNews: The developers of the Ubuntu-based operating system have agreed to accept an undisclosed amount of money from Mozilla in exchange for making significant changes to Linux Mint. This includes removal of modifications to Firefox and a big change for search. The devs share the upcoming changes to Firefox in Linux Mint 19 and higher.
The default start page no longer points to https://www.linuxmint.com/start/
The default search engines no longer include Linux Mint search partners (Yahoo, DuckDuckGo...) but Mozilla search partners (Google, Amazon, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Ebay...)
The default configuration switches from Mint defaults to Mozilla defaults.
Firefox no longer includes code changes or patches from Linux Mint, Debian or Ubuntu.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Mint Sells Out for Mozilla Money More

Linux Mint Sells Out for Mozilla Money

Comments Filter:

  • and...? (Score:3)

    by franzrogar ( 3986783 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @02:37PM (#62161625)

    I mean, just make a package like "firefox-mint" (with "firefox-raw" dependency) so you install it and done.

    • I would assume the agreement would include not doing such.
      It would probably still be financially interesting for them, since many will not search for this package and simply use whatever be installed as default. — One cannot underestimate the commercial importance of defaults, even if the user be free to switch.

  • I feel like the golden era of altruistic Linux Distributions has long died. It was great when it lasted, but it's a new generation at the reins and everyone's for hire now. The reward isn't always money, but it usually is.

    • Re:No Surprise (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Merk42 ( 1906718 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @02:55PM (#62161723)
      Yeah, who knew expecting people to work for free wasn't sustainable?
      • Yeah, I think some users are pretty unrealistic in their expectations as free consumer of an awesome OS. Linux mint is still 100000000x ahead of windows or Mac OS when it comes to user tracking and privacy. If mint wants to bring in funding from this perspective, I have no issues. Users should also have the technical ability to set up other search providers too.. (probably a big assumption)

        • If you wanted to add Google to Firefox in Mint, you've always been able to. https://mycroftproject.com/ [mycroftproject.com]

          Changing search providers is built into Firefox. That's unlikely to change.

          Also, it's Linux. There's a fork for everything.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Wolfrider ( 856 )

          --Of course, clickbait headline tries to make it seem like this is a Bad Thing somehow. I would say 98-99% of end-users DON'T CARE what the default search engine is or that the defaults have changed for one browser. The ones that DO care go in immediately and change the defaults anyway.

          --Linux Mint (and Zorin OS) have been reviewed and seem to be the best-of-breed out there for Linux, if this change gives them a steady stream of income and maintains the project's quality, I have NO problems with it.

      • In this case, the Mint devs are being paid to stop working and put things back the way they were before and promise not to work on it again. Nice gig if you can get it.

      • Totally! There was a story about this just the other day where some package that is just a tiny part of larger applications was sabotaged by the developer, how much money do Linux users pay to all the individual contributors of all the packages that make up a distro? The makers of Mint are obviously getting a payday here but what of the developers of all the projects that go into Mint.

        It’s just not sustainable.

      • I presume it's good to earn money for doing what you love, but I also think that people do it because they believe in the project. I know I would do the things I love earning money or not. Of course I would have to find something else to make my living. There are examples too in history of people that did things out of their career that made a difference, probably because they loved doing it.

    • Re:No Surprise (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JackieBrown ( 987087 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @03:00PM (#62161743)

      They changed the default search engine and now use pure Firefox instead of the packages by Debian.

      I fail to see how this is a sell out.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dyfet ( 154716 )

        They also get a cut of the revenue from Google for doing this...

      • Debian&co patch out telemetry and other spyware.

    • Seriously?? More like Linux distributions that didn't like some quirk of an actual distribution (or to pay for it) and so copied 99% of it and rebranded it. Like CentOS, or Mint, or whatever. If it was an altruistic and independent Linux distribution, they would actually create it from the ground up, starting with the Linux kernel. That hasn't happened for a long time, and I'm not really worried about it. I just think you have an unrealistic view of things.

    • Agreed. Another "independent" Linux distribution bends over for...M_O_N_E_Y

  • Did you pay for Linux Mint? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Digital Avatar ( 752673 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @02:39PM (#62161641) Journal

    ...then don't complain. They're under no obligation to you. This is just like the guy the other day who bugged his own libraries because he was tired of commercial users making use of them and not paying him one red cent and everyone freaked out about it. God forbid people should want to make money. Perish the thought.

    If you really don't like this then perhaps consider that free as in freedom shouldn't mean free as in freeloader.

    • My position is that if it isn't for sale, I can't buy it. Think about how bad Kickstarter is. Then remove every single obligation and protection. That's what my experiences have been like when donating lump sums to free software projects, and that is why I stopped doing so. I give a little to Joplin every month on Patreon since they met a huge need for me and have a clear vision, but that is it.

    • Actually, yes, I did pay for Linux Mint. Wanted to stop being a freeloader. But I don't have any problems with this Firefox situation, so no worries. I'm actually starting to switch to Chrome because Firefox is starting to behave badly. I miss Seamonkey...

      • I miss Seamonkey...

        Why? It's still there [seamonkey-project.org]... And it's included with Slackware, makes me question why any other distro exists

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dryeo ( 100693 )

          Lots of sites that SeaMonkey won't open now. Check out alt.comp.software.seamonky, it is largely complaints of sites stopping working. Some things are slowly being fixed or workarounds found but it is the usual story about lack of developers, Frank seems to be doing most of it now.
          Posting from SeaMonkey.

    • Re: Did you pay for Linux Mint? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by klipclop ( 6724090 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @03:24PM (#62161823)
      Slashdot sold out for money years ago. So those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks.

      • the site and especially the articles are still majorily user-sourced. It doesn't really matter that a news publication you're reading a fact in has ads.

    • indeed; when the following clause or something like it appears in practically every open license that anyone uses, one would need to be a complete imbecile to expect anything else (in fact, it's usually even in all-caps which i had to change for slashdot):

      "... Any express or implied warranties, including... the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness... are disclaimed. In no event shall the copyright holder... be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, exemplary, or consequential dam

    • that's kind of a double standard:

      - did you pay for Linux Mint? No? Then don't complain they now act in their self-interest.
      - did you pay for the libraries? No? Then complain the author now acts in their self-interested ???

    • I donated to Mint a few times. I might pay more if they show a financial statement about what the money is used for. It isn't clear whether the money goes to one person (Clement), a company with multiple employees, or a nonprofit organization; whether it funds Cinnamon, and so on.

    • This is just like the guy the other day who bugged his own libraries because he was tired of commercial users making use of them and not paying him one red cent and everyone freaked out about it.

      No. This is nothing like that.
      This is a project making a project related decision just like every other fork that is in some way different from their upstream counterparts. This is not breaking a feature. This isn't removing functionality. This isn't in any way a negative to the end user, who can at any point change their defaults after first install.

      That the other day was a moron who didn't understand the license he was using, fucking up projects the world over because his knickers were in a twist and comm

    • ...then don't complain. They're under no obligation to you. This is just like the guy the other day who bugged his own libraries because he was tired of commercial users making use of them and not paying him one red cent and everyone freaked out about it. God forbid people should want to make money. Perish the thought.

      If you really don't like this then perhaps consider that free as in freedom shouldn't mean free as in freeloader.

      There is no "money" in free software. As a retired old fart, I can't part with my pension pennies. I did produce freeware, but noone who stopped to post a "thank you, it is in my library as useful". But aside from retirees, corps who take the software, repackage it and make a buck from it, should share in the benefits. If they do not, free software will cease to exist.

  • Honestly, it does not sound like a list of big deal items aside from code patches - but, are there any? Are they significant? The article does not say.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jmccue ( 834797 )

      That is my take, what is the big deal ? AFAIK Slackware does this for free. Slackware recompiles vanilla Firefox into its own package, with permission from Firefox. Maybe Slackware can score some funds too.

  • install is delete all the search engines except duckduckgo, set the home page to duckduckgo and new tab to blank and turn of bunches of stuff, do not save anything, history, passwords, etc. etc. etc., clear all caches and restart.
    • Oh! and install NoScript
      • On another note, What the heck is going on at Mozilla! It seems it might be a good idea to keep an eye on what Firefox starts adding as features? Under handed sale to a malware vendor perhaps?

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by dimko ( 1166489 )
        I dont think you are aware of Firefox plans. Mozilla sucks up to google, they are to accept 'supercookie' technology to be compatible with chrome, which basically kills no scripts/no adds apps.
        • When NoScript goes, so do I after all these years.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by dimko ( 1166489 )
            And where you gonna go? There are only two browsers out there. FF and Chrome, both will have noscript apps disabled
            • If they leave me no choice and/or piss me off. I am a software developer. Let me see, A Utility Tool type browser for standard compliant no frills dynamic web content for those that use the internet vs browse the internet.

              After all, The Internet without NoScript is something I don't care to use.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Wolfrider ( 856 )

              > There are only two browsers out there

              Opera
              Palemoon
              Chromium
              Brave

              --Those are just the ones I have installed on my Mac. Also available for Linux.

              / Don'care about Windoze

              • Opera and Brave are based on Chromium now. Yes, even Opera. Palemoon is based on FF. So two browsers.

              • Re: (Score:1)

                by dimko ( 1166489 )
                Voice of satan ( 1553177 ) addressed those 4. But i go further. Any other browsers you may give as an example, best of luck to get them to work with youtube, facebook, pornhub, netflix etc etc etc etc.(especially since FF implemented DRM in it)
          • Comment removed based on user account deletion

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by caseih ( 160668 )

          But that's a big enough deal that at least one of the forks of firefox will remove it. And you can bet the chromium forks will cancel it as well. Vivaldi, for example. Except of course Google will pay them all off quietly.

  • This is nothing to get mad at Mint over, if you weren't already mad about the stuff they were doing for money.
    Mint's version hasn't been any less user-hostile than the Firefox default. Guys, I don't want advertising and tracking on my home page.

  • Sensationalist- click-bait article (Score:5, Interesting)

    by caseih ( 160668 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @02:44PM (#62161675)

    An open source project sold out to... another open source project? Come on, betanews. What a sensationalist piece of drivel.

    While i confess Mozilla as an organization drives me crazy and this whole idea of forcing some devs' notion of some kind of bizarre, branded, uniformity on everyone is tiresome (firefox, gnome 3, etc), firefox could be forked if you don't like it. In fact I use icecat as my daily driver. Doesn't fix the UI stupidness, but it is free from any trademarks issues and the maintainers can modify it however they want.

    • If they agreed to do it for free or have a best of three street fighter alpha 2 contest, I think the spirit of open source would be appeased....

    • icecat? Interesting does it work well with NoScript? Or have a workable NoScript functional replacement. As an independent contractor I don't get paid to fiddle with my tools.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hey! ( 33014 )

      I don't have any problem with someone trying to convince people to feel a certain way; but using manipulative techniques like emotionally loaded language bugs me. Stand up and say what happened, how you feel about it, and why you think I should feel the same way. I might not agree with you, but because you respected me I'd be inclined to return the favor.

      It goes the other way too; I detest people I agree with using propaganda on me. I'm a critic of the Chinese regime; the Internet has noticed and deluges

  • When in the world is the Mozilla world going to have enough of Baker and give her the boot?

  • Original article contains the marvelous phrasing "You could have went with a Chromebook but you didn't [...]"

    Just putting this here.

  • Look at it like this, Mozilla gets a small cut of the money from Google etc on the search referrals. This deal with Linux Mint pretty much is Mozilla saying, "we'll give you a cut of the money if you set the search preferences back to something that makes us money too". I like money too.

  • I'd bend over and sell my ass too. You only have to take it once, after that just imagine all the hooker and blow parties you can have.

  • ... if you don't like it, pick another distribution. See? Easy.

  • If the goal is to get Google as the default search then can we really assume this is Mozilla money and not a back door buy off by Google? Last stat I saw was that 88% of Mozilla's funding still comes from Google in exchange for a number of concessions.

    It stands to reason that Linux Mint would have egg on their face if it sold out directly to Alphabet so the plausible workaround is do run the money through Mozilla instead.

  • Chromium and Brave in Mint it doesn't much matter to me. I'm more annoyed by them going to rounded corners on the Windows. Reminds me of the Win XP Fisher-Price interface. Ah well, in a couple of years everyone will go to the 'clean, modern look' of square corners and tout it has a huge advance.
  • He's mad at Mozilla. That the Mozilla organization gave the Mint organization money to not build Firefox custom to Mint. Maybe he doesn't like the leadership for Mozilla for good reason, maybe he sees a conspiracy, maybe he sees control creep and loss of control. Maybe I do too, maybe I don't. But... This brings little change to the setup of OS or browser. Well, browser. I set mine up anyway on install with extensions and plugins and theme (yep) and bookmarks and search engines. DuckDuckGo is there in both

  • I don't think the changes is a big deal. So what if the defaults are changing. I will be changing everything to what I use anyway.

  • Sounds good! (Score:3)

    by demon driver ( 1046738 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @04:26PM (#62161999) Journal

    Why? It's more evidence that Linux Mint is getting even more traction, otherwise Mozilla wouldn't care. The recent point release (20.3 "Una") upgrade having been followed by their servers being more overwhelmed with download requests than ever was another piece of evidence. This probably will be the last upgrade that forced the main package source to back to Mint's own servers from whatever mirror server had been selected.

    And why should someone not want to accept money for not doing some work they used to be doing?! Just for getting bloody Firefox like everyone else gets it per default, too?

    It's still one of the major browsers, as much as the Mozilla Foundation is trying to make it unusable for people conscious about how much they control their computers.

  • I used to love Firefox. Now it is a crap show. This is just another step towards perdition.

  • It sounds like all they're changing is the default Firefox configuration.

    Who complained about it - Yahoo?

  • As much as I have appreciated Mozilla Firefox for about 20 years, I've been evaluating Edge-on-Linux for a while... and their stable release is **good enough** that I use it more often than Firefox whilst on Mint 20.x, anyway. Combined with DuckDuckGo Extensions (either on Firefox or Edge) has insulated me and others from the goings-on at Mozilla.

    I'm not settled on Edge versus Firefox as my default daily driver on Mint, but it's definitely not Chrome or other third-party browsers.

  • Who benefits? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by GuB-42 ( 2483988 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @05:04PM (#62162111)

    Obviously, Mint goes for the money, ok, good for them.

    But why does Mozilla has to pay Mint? Mint already had Firefox, maybe not the exact same version, but it is not like Firefox is trying to increase its market share. So what is so special in the "official" version of Firefox? Tracking? Ads? Is Mozilla the new Google? I hope not, but who knows, Mozilla has been known for its terrible decisions in the last years.

    Most likely, the answer is Google. Google pays Mozilla, which pays Mint. Why doesn't Mint partners with Google directly, again, I don't know.

    But if we treat it as an indirect Google-Mint deal, do Google has a lot to earn? I don't know the official search engine for Mint. Yahoo? Do people keep using Yahoo? I guess most have already switched to Google without Google making any effort. And the "privacy" crowd probably have set it to DuckDuckGo or similar, and will not let it go to Google.

    My guess is the following: our partnership with Yahoo is worthless, we don't want to maintain a fork of Firefox, most people are already using Google, so let's make a deal with Mozilla, which can bring us both the browser and their own partner (i.e. Google) money. Really, it is a win for everyone, Less work and more money for Mint, probably also for Mozilla, Google foots the bill. In fact you should be happy *especially* if you hate Google, because Google is now paying for users they had for free before (those who switched from Yahoo to Google), and you can still use your favorite non-Google engine.

  • Hilarious (Score:4, Interesting)

    by demon driver ( 1046738 ) on Monday January 10, 2022 @05:15PM (#62162155) Journal

    Changing a browser's defaults is a significant change in a bloody operating system? What drugs does someone have to take?

    I suggest reading Levebvre's blog post [linuxmint.com] and his answers to all the questions in the comments. It isn't even clear yet whether Linux Mint will lose or gain money with this, because they lose revenue from Yahoo and DuckDuckGo. I think this comment sums everything up nicely:

    We just don’t know how many [linuxmint.com] people already run Google (which is currently monetized by neither Mozilla nor Mint). We’ll lose revenue from Yahoo and DuckDuckGo but we’ll get revenue from Google.

    The partnership is in place because we’re both happy with the outcome. Without the partnership we would have had to stop using the Mozilla brand if we wanted to continue to monetize the traffic with our search partners. I think people weren’t already keen with our customization, and I think losing the name “Firefox” would have been detrimental to our project long-term. Forking the browser or even continuing to adapt to changes when it comes to search is also very costly in terms of development. So no matter what, we couldn’t continue the way we did. Not having to spend resources on the Web browser is a huge plus for us. The Mozilla and Google brands are also extremely popular. Even if we lose money on search performance we think the change will make people happy, bring Google users in the Mint community back to monetization and attract more people long term to our distribution.

    By the way, Linux Mint would have had to move to building their own Firefox packages from scratch instead of just modifying the Ubuntu packages because Ubuntu is in the process of changing Firefox packaging to snap. Now getting the .deb packages from Mozilla would have been a godsend even if they wouldn't get some revenue from that decision.

    • Linux Mint would have had to move to building their own Firefox packages from scratch instead of just modifying the Ubuntu packages because Ubuntu is in the process of changing Firefox packaging to snap. Now getting the .deb packages from Mozilla would have been a godsend even if they wouldn't get some revenue from that decision.

      Thanks for that tidbit. I would much prefer to tweak my search settings than to have Snap on my computer. I am very glad that the developers of Mint share my distaste for snap and don't sully their distro with it :-)

    • Changing a browser's defaults is a significant change in a bloody operating system? What drugs does someone have to take?

      In the eyes of many, the browser has the same significance as the operating system.

      While I personally do not see it this way, most people can nowadays only work with browser-based tooling. It is the only thing they want and get pretty vocal if you do not provide a (crippled) web-interface to software tools that worked for them previously. Pretty sure I'm not the only one noticing this trend.

      So yeah, I can imagine someone afflicted with that blurred vision on computing to get up in arms after a browser chang

  • That's the beauty of FOSS and since few users donate those who don't should be grateful for free stuff.

    It's only browser settings and any user offended but not sufficient to use another distro (as if mere downloading meant anything beyond using bandwidth) can change those as desired.

    Betanews wanted clickbait and got it. Not an impressive performance.

  • If I were only to focus on one of those companies affected... Mint is selling out Duckduckgo and switching to... Duckduckgo? Does Slashdot think Duckduckgo is good or evil these days? I'm not asking for a friend, I'm asking for myself... I'm old, have a beard, wear sandals and sweat pants, my significant others are my computer and my cat, I have excessive body hair and body fat, and I haven't bathed in four weeks. Also I remember a time when Slashdot thought Google was a wholesome company that could n

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by JustNiz ( 692889 )

      >> I'm old, have a beard, wear sandals and sweat pants, my significant others are my computer and my cat, I have excessive body hair and body fat, and I haven't bathed in four weeks.

      Stallman is that you?

Slashdot Top Deals

"The lesser of two evils -- is evil." -- Seymour (Sy) Leon

Close