Digg

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at searchengineland.com

Hey Firefox - Let Us Pick Our Own Search Engine!

searchengineland.com — So Firefox 3 has a new release candidate making news, suggesting that the browser is nearly done. May I suggest that the browser is nowhere near being done until the Mozilla Foundation drops its favoritism to Google and allow users to pick their own default search engine? And that Microsoft ought to be among those choices?

Bury

MakiMaki 122 days ago

151 diggs
digg it

whynotandy, on 06/06/2008, -2/+8Loads of engines here
http://mycroft.mozdev.org/
Overmind12812, on 06/06/2008, -2/+20It's not like the people at Mozilla are forcing you to use Google; there must be a default search engine in place so as to purport the functionality of the quick search bar. Would you rather they suggest using Yahoo or something?
- dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -4/+4Google argued that USERS should pick a default search engine in IE. Launch a clean version of IE, and that's exactly what happens -- you get to chose from a list of five major search engines rather than have someone chose for you because of a paid deal.
  
  In Firefox, while Mozilla isn't forcing you to use Google, it is deciding on your behalf to make it the default because Google pays it to do this. All fine and good, I suppose, if Google hadn't argued so strongly that choice was necessary.
  
  So yes, I'd suggest Firefox do what IE does, let the user decide.
  - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -4/+2"In Firefox, while Mozilla isn't forcing you to use Google, it is deciding on your behalf to make it the default because Google pays it to do this."
    
    You're just full of *****, Danny. Mozilla doesn't pick its defaults based on money. If it did, you'd have seen a leapfrogging in that box with every release as the various companies with search outbid each other.
    
    Mozilla picked Google as the default search engine long before there was any money associated with search in browsers and we continue to have Google as the default engine because it continues to be the best choice for our users --- completely independent of revenue.
    
    Suggesting otherwise without some evidence is total horse ***** and you should cut it out.
    - dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -2/+3I've replied several times now in other comments here with direct links to the facts on how search is sold in Firefox. The article had direct links explaining this as well. Not *****.
    - sexybobo, on 06/06/2008, -1/+2"Launch a clean version of IE, and that's exactly what happens"
      I get the option to change my default search engine. Skip that step and see what happens oh the search is defaulting to Microsoft live no way. Also Mozilla does get paid by google for every search that people do though that search box but they didn't set the default based on money several others offered more but they turned them down.
asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -4/+14Firefox users have their choice of several built-in and popular search services including Google's number 1 competitor and the second most popular, Yahoo!. Google is the default for most Firefox locales because it's the best search service available for the largest number of Firefox users (and was years before there was any revenue associated with default status).

Live search is still pretty awful. Last time I searched it for "firefox" the first result was a Microsoft Silverlight page. Seriously.

"Regular" users aren't clamoring for Live search and those who are can get it from the "Manage Search Engines..." option right in the search services list. And if that's not enough, head over to http://mycroft.mozdev.org where there are over 15,000 available alternative search services.

Mozilla was the first browser maker to incorporate multiple search services right into the browser and has been doing a pretty good job of exposing various search services to users for the better part of a decade. Mozilla's decisions around defaults are driven by what's best for the largest number of users and not what's best for revenue.
- jcwright, on 06/06/2008, -3/+2Get your things straight here...before I say what it its...let me make it clear...I use Google and Google only for search and havent use Live search except to verify so called facts like this.
  
  I just seached for Firefox in Live search and all the links were related to Mozilla and Downloading Firefox including Sponsored ads. http://search.live.com/results.aspx?q=firefox&form ...
  
  I went to Google and Searched for IE7 and the first sponsored ad in Bold letters saying Internet Explorer 7 actually downloads Google toolbar and not IE7
  
  I know its a competition but I love a game which is fair and thats what forces them to the next step innovative
  http://www.google.com/search?q=IE7&rls=com.microso ...
  - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -0/+3So they've improved somewhat in the last few months. Good for them. It's still far behind Google and Yahoo in popularity and usage.
- dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -4/+1Regular users are indeed apparently clamoring for it since the Live Search add-on is the fifth most popular download for the search box in Firefox, as the article points out.
  
  The bigger point is this. Firefox is exercising no real care with that search box aside from making money. The two major search engines listed are the two that are paying it money. Doesn't mean they aren't good, but Live Search is most definitely a rival to them that should be counted as well. And why can't they do a better job listing alternative search engines in the way that Groowe.com does? Why does it feel like that box is primarily full of revenue generators for Mozilla rather than choices with solid editorial decisions behind them? And if it's too much to maintain strong editorial control, then let the user make the default choices.
  - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -0/+4"Regular users are indeed apparently clamoring for it since the Live Search add-on is the fifth most popular download for the search box in Firefox, as the article points out."
    
    It's the 5th most popular optional search service for Firefox is your argument that regular users are clammoring for it? Most of the very most popular Firefox add-ons don't satisfy enough users to warrant inclusion in Firefox but the 5th most popular of a not very popular sub-set of add-ons should be included by default?
    
    Let's just add all ~15,000 searches to the dropdown. That way "Regular users" will all be satisfied. We should go ahead and add all of the ~5,000 Firefox add-ons as default features too because "Regular users" who downloaded them must have them as part of the default install!
    - dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -4/+15th most popular of a list that Firefox users have to actively hunt is pretty good.
      
      But no, my argument is that Live Search is a good alternative to Google and Yahoo which should be included at the very least in the drop-down box. And that it is excluded -- plus Google is made the default choice -- because Firefox finds this an excellent way to make money.
    - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -0/+2"[Live Search] it is excluded -- plus Google is made the default choice -- because Firefox finds this an excellent way to make money."
      
      That's total *****, though. You can argue it, but not by any other means than assertion and innuendo.
      
      If it was about the money, you'd probably see the search list changing every release as the various search companies tried to outbid each other for the top spot. That'd be the way to make the most money from the feature but that's not what Mozilla is doing.
      
      Mozilla made Google the default because it's the best default for the largest number of Firefox users and Firefox doesn't include Live Search because a default, Google, and the number #1 "alternative" Yahoo, is sufficient.
      
      Money has nothing to do with it. I'd wager that MS would pay more than anyone (they do have the most money) to be in that list but because we don't make those decisions based on money, we haven't added them.
      
      Again, you can assert whatever you want but it's just your claim, and a bogus one, unless you can back it up -- and you can't because you're not involved in the decision making process at Mozilla.
    - dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -4/+1The article itself has references that backed up my statements, and I've already provided even more in other comments here on this thread. It's not *****. It's fact, and well-referenced fact at that.
  - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -1/+4"Firefox is exercising no real care with that search box aside from making money."
    
    That's just *****. Both Google and Yahoo were in Mozilla's search feature years before there was any revenue associated with browser search. Maybe you should actually learn a bit about the subject before making those kinds of assertions.
    
    The editorial decision for which search services to include come before the revenue. Which ever search engines we might include would happily pay us for that and we're happy turning that down when we don't believe it provides our users the best possible experience.
    
    You can bet your little website that MS would pay whatever it took to get into the search box in Firefox but that doesn't matter. What matters is that Mozilla provides the best possible experience for the largest number of users.
    
    You don't know what you're talking about.
    - dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -3/+1To my knowledge, Yahoo was added as part of Firefox 1.5 according to the link that was in my original story, and this was due to Yahoo's deal to power Asian search engines.
      
      But hey, let's say that before revenue deals were cut, both Google and Yahoo were included and that Google was the default. OK, but these deals DID happen back in 1.5, and at that time, we know decisions were made on the basis of making money, not user interest.
      
      We're now coming up on 3.0. That box has simply evolved from 2.0 to carry one more search engine, Wikipedia. It hasn't gained a variety of search engines, categorized, as you could tap into similar to the Groowe.com add-on. It ignores both Live and Ask, which are major search engines that many search experts (including myself) would include.
      
      I agree -- what matters is that Mozilla provide the best possible experience. And in that search box, it's not by excluding Microsoft nor by making a default choice based on what Google wants because of a paid deal rather than allowing the user to choose.
    - dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -3/+1Recommenting more of what I put below:
      
      Google is the default search choice in Firefox because it has a paid deal to be this way. For the same reason, Yahoo is the default in some Asian markets. The story had references to both these facts. But to make it easier for you:
      
      http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/technology/12lin ...
      
      "The foundation has used a for-profit subsidiary, the Mozilla Corporation, to collect tens of millions of dollars in royalties from search engine companies that want prominent placement on the browser. And by collecting that money as a war chest to compete against giants like Microsoft and Apple, the foundation has, at least temporarily, moved away from the typical activities of a nonprofit organization."
      
      http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/press/mozilla-2005-11 ...
      
      "With Firefox 1.5, Mozilla continues its search partnership with Google in the Americas and in Europe and begins a new search relationship with Yahoo! in China, Japan, Korea and Taiwan."
      
      You should also see this from the Mozilla Foundation:
      
      http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2007/10/22/beyond-s ...
      
      "Mozilla’s revenues (including both Mozilla Foundation and Mozilla Corporation) for 2006 were $66,840,850, up approximately 26% from 2005 revenue of $52,906,602. As in 2005 the vast majority of this revenue is associated with the search functionality in Mozilla Firefox, and the majority of that is from Google. The Firefox userbase and search revenue have both increased from 2005. Search revenue increased at a lesser rate than Firefox usage growth as the rate of payment declines with volume. Other revenue sources were the Mozilla Store, public support and interest and other income on our assets."
      
      and this:
      
      http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/documents/mozill ...
      
      Your contract with Google ends in November 2008. What happens then?
      
      We have a range of options. We may continue to work with Google which has so far provided a good fit with what our users find useful in the product. If for some reason that doesn't make sense then we could look at other potential partners. We have significant retained earnings, which allows us a good degree of flexibility.
      
      Your partnership with Google accounts for over 85% of your 2006 revenue. How does this affect your independence?
      
      We develop our product and technical direction as part of an open process unrelated to the search relationship with Google. We talk to Google about the parts of the product that offer Google services (i.e., the Firefox Start Page) and the services they provide, like anti-phishing. Otherwise Google does not have any special relationship to Mozilla project activities. We do not vet our initiatives with Google. We spent months talking to Google and Yahoo! before entering relationships with them to make sure they understood the separation between a search relationship and the rest of our activities.
      
      --> In other words, Firefox is independent outside of search. But search, it has relationships that wed it tightly to Google and Yahoo because they pay it money. Both are good search engines, too -- but they are default choices not because Firefox first and foremost is doing right by its users but instead because of business reasons.
DarkEnder, on 06/06/2008, -2/+10Don't forget that Google pays Mozilla for the advertisement traffic received from searches made in the quick seach box.
digitalhair, on 06/06/2008, -2/+9Mozilla can choose to set whatever it wants as default as far as my experience is concerned. Firefox has made customizability a standard, which is why we've seen IE upgrades follow suit with increased customizability.

So if grandpa needs to learn how to change the default search engine to Yahoo! (by googling "how to change default search engine in Firefox") and, in doing so, just so happens to realize how incredibly powerful Firefox is thanks to its massive number of custom addons as well as the vast community of users that provide free support, so be it.
- dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -5/+1That's fine -- screw Grandpa, I guess. But that's not Google's argument. Google went to court to get backing that in IE, a user should make the choice. But in Firefox, Google went to its pocketbook to take that choice away. It should be played the same way regardless of the browser.
  - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -0/+6"But in Firefox, Google went to its pocketbook to take that choice away."
    
    Google doesn't control the Firefox search box. Firefox search is 100% controlled by Mozilla and the decisions about the feature are made with zero input from Google. Suggesting otherwise with innuendo rather than facts to back up your argument is just horse *****.
    - dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -5/+1Google is the default search choice in Firefox because it has a paid deal to be this way. For the same reason, Yahoo is the default in some Asian markets. The story had references to both these facts. But to make it easier for you:
      
      http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/technology/12lin ...
      
      "The foundation has used a for-profit subsidiary, the Mozilla Corporation, to collect tens of millions of dollars in royalties from search engine companies that want prominent placement on the browser. And by collecting that money as a war chest to compete against giants like Microsoft and Apple, the foundation has, at least temporarily, moved away from the typical activities of a nonprofit organization."
      
      http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/press/mozilla-2005-11 ...
      
      "With Firefox 1.5, Mozilla continues its search partnership with Google in the Americas and in Europe and begins a new search relationship with Yahoo! in China, Japan, Korea and Taiwan."
digitalhair, on 06/06/2008, -1/+25doesn't firefox give a dropdown list of search engines by simply clicking the Google icon in the searchbox? I'm starting to feel like i'm wasting my time here...
- dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -7/+1No, it doesn't. It gives one other major search engine choice, Yahoo -- though both Live Search and Ask.com are comparable to Google & Yahoo. It also provides a few specialty search choices. In contrast, a tool like Groowe provides very easy access to tens of search engines. Firefox could do better by its users.
  - WiseWeasel, on 06/07/2008, -0/+3Good. Live sucks. Screw Live, screw it right in its stupid little face. As for Ask.com, is that still around? If users want them badly enough, they can go to the 'Manage Search Engines / Get more search engines' area and add it there. I support the suppression of Microsoft; that'll learn them to not play nice with others.
asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -3/+6"Google is the default search choice in Firefox because it has a paid deal to be this way. For the same reason, Yahoo is the default in some Asian markets. The story had references to both these facts. But to make it easier for you:

Danny, you're quoting someone else that's getting it wrong doesn't make you right.

I'll try to make this real simple for you:

Google is the default search choice in Firefox because Mozilla decided it is the best choice for Firefox users.
AND (not because!)
Mozilla derives revenue from it's search relationship with Google.

The key that you seem to be missing that may help you understand this is that if search engine "Foopy" was the best search engine in the world, it would be the default EVEN IF THEY OFFERED MOZILLA NO REVENUE INCENTIVES. Likewise, if search engine "Noopy" was a poor search service, It would not be included in Firefox EVEN IF THEY OFFERED MOZILLA MASSIVE REVENUE INCENTIVES.

It's not about the money. The money's there and Mozilla isn't going to turn it down, but it's not about the money. It's about providing users with the best possible experience.
- dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -5/+1I'm quoting what Mozilla itself says -- that it sells search in Firefox. I gave links to back this up, both in the article itself and in other replies to you here. At this point, you're either choosing to ignore the facts.
  
  I think what you're trying to say is that if Google was a bad search engine, even if they wanted to pay lots, Mozilla wouldn't sign a deal. Sure, I can buy into that. But then again, why is Yahoo the top choice in some countries? Did Mozilla undertake relevancy studies to know it should out Google? I highly doubt it. And why isn't Microsoft included at all, when it is a good search engine too?
  
  It is about the money. If it were about the best user experience, that search box could be a heck of a lot better. Not much thought has been put into it other than ensuring it keeps making money for Mozilla, as far as I can see. Go check out the Groowe.com toolbar for Firefox. You install that, spend a week with it and tell me that's not good default functionality that should be in Firefox. But putting that in Firefox might make the need to install something like the Google Toolbar unnecessary -- or make default choices harder, both of which go to the bottom line.
  
  Money IS a factor.
  - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -0/+4"But then again, why is Yahoo the top choice in some countries? Did Mozilla undertake relevancy studies to know it should out Google? I highly doubt it."
    
    Actually, yes. Well, sort of. As Mozilla grew and built an actual organization in Japan and China, we came to realize that Google was dominant globally BUT not dominant in every single locale, and we started to adjust.
    
    Our first experiment was to move CJKT to Yahoo (because, yes, we believed Yahoo was more popular in CJKT than Google.) We also moved to add other domestic search services into the menu of choices where it made sense. Yandex in Russia, Baidu in China, Naver in Korea, etc. For some of those changes, we entered into new financial arrangements. For others we didn't.
    
    After that experiment, users in CJKT made it pretty clear that regardless of Yahoo's market share in the region, they didn't prefer Yahoo and so we changed yet again.
    
    It's not about the money, Danny. You just don't seem to want to accept that. It's about what's best for users. After that, sure we look for revenue relationships and many companies are amenable to entering into those relationships.
    
    Another example is Ebay. Ebay is the dominant auction site globally but not in every locale. In Latin America, it's Mercado Libre and we didn't know that when we shipped Firefox 1. We learned that when JT and I took a trip to South America and talked with our community there and they explained a lot to us about the locales.
    
    Another service in the browser example is the BBC news feed. Originally that was the default for all Firefox locales. It's not any more because we've worked with our locale communities to adopt more locale-specific news feeds for the default feed in Firefox.
    
    Did you know that Mercado Libre was rocking South America? Did you know that Yandex kicks everyone's ass in Russia? We didn't when Firefox 1 shipped but we do now. We change when we learn :-)
    - dannysullivan, on 06/06/2008, -3/+1"Our first experiment was to move CJKT to Yahoo (because, yes, we believed Yahoo was more popular in CJKT than Google.) We also moved to add other domestic search services into the menu of choices where it made sense. Yandex in Russia, Baidu in China, Naver in Korea, etc. For some of those changes, we entered into new financial arrangements. For others we didn't."
      
      First, if you work for Mozilla, you should have said that from the start.
      
      Second, if Mozilla is making these types of decision, then Mozilla should be public about it. Everything you've said, nada from Mozilla about it before.
      
      "It's not about the money, Danny. You just don't seem to want to accept that. It's about what's best for users. After that, sure we look for revenue relationships and many companies are amenable to entering into those relationships."
      
      Oh, I do accept it's not only about the money. But money's part of it. Microsoft should at the very least be one of the options in the box. If Mozilla knew search, they'd know that. And if your partner Google is about choice in IE7, then it should be about choice in Firefox -- which means they can pay to be an option, but they shouldn't be given that gift-wrapped. Why not let Firefox users in each country pick the search engine they want. Surely they know better than you, don't they?
      
      And I did know Yandex kicks everyone's as in Russia. Did you know that Ask is the number two search engine in the UK? But Firefox doesn't include it? And did you know that marketshare doesn't equal the relevancy of a search engine? And that by allowing default choices, you help establish marketshare?
      
      It's not hard to let users have a choice. It's what the company that chiefly funds Firefox says should happen -- IE, Google. So why is it so hard to let the users choose?
    - asadotzler, on 06/06/2008, -0/+3"First, if you work for Mozilla, you should have said that from the start."
      
      I figured the repeated use of the word "We" when talking about Mozilla would be sufficient. I also figured someone with your online experience would take a second to google a person before going so deep into a discussion. I, for example, googled you to figure out that you were not a Google employee despite your using Google's icon in your profile here on Digg.
ashukg, on 06/06/2008, -6/+1It's all about the money. Google buys market share by paying cash strapped companies like DELL and Mozilla to put google search as the default. So much for don't be evil! :)
nc60659, on 06/06/2008, -0/+7Holy *****, guys! You can remove any of those default ones by clicking a few times. Then you can add whatever you like.
ivankraszl, on 06/07/2008, -0/+4Maybe Mozilla is crossed with msn because the Search button on search.msn.com is broken on FF for Mac.
Niallgriff, on 06/07/2008, -0/+3click the Google logo, manage search engines, get more search engines, that's not exactly challenging, now is it?
aahpandasrun, on 06/07/2008, -0/+2I'm pretty sure internet explorer 7 defaults to microsoft live. But, there's an option to change it. It's like complaining about the default homepage of a browser. Who cares?
Winston84, on 06/07/2008, -0/+3http://www.searchplugins.net/generate.aspx
So, you think this would even exist if Internet Exploder was the only browser around ?
Buried as micr0$0ft-whining ..
treelovinhippie, on 06/07/2008, -0/+21) You can change the default search engine and add almost any other site you want to search to the browser.

2) They use Google because they make money off every single search anyone performs within that Firefox box. I'm sure all the other major search engines have put forward a bid to replace Google as the out-of-the-box search engine box in Firefox. But Google is the most well-known search engine, they pay-out well for searches and their company culture and initiatives fit well with that of Mozilla.
Jegzzy, on 06/07/2008, -0/+3We can choose our own. It doesn't need fixed!. What a pointless article.
Disregard, on 06/07/2008, -0/+4Yes I'm desperate to use Lycos or Altavista. Oh wait, this isn't 1998.
Rajaie, on 06/07/2008, -0/+2It's amazing all the things money can do
phroztbyt3, on 06/07/2008, -0/+2#1, why is this story digged so much. #2 there is a "get more search engines feature" in FireFox2. What the hell is this guy talking about. Firefox, much like google does not want to overwhelm the customer with choices. You can get the rest on the mozilla addon website. BURIED
SirPopper, on 06/07/2008, -0/+1Mozilla will do a Big Big thing in the next time!
matt2008, on 06/07/2008, -0/+0sir popper, wht mozilla wil do
cdawzrd, on 06/07/2008, -0/+1Who would want to use anything other than google? I mean, the Wikipedia and eBay search is neat, but regular search engines?
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Hey Firefox - Let Us Pick Our Own Search Engine!

Login or register to add a comment