Mozilla employee here: That is incorrect. There is limited public information available about this deal, but the best quote so far is in this article: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2930532/reading-service-pocke...
Mozilla employee here: That is incorrect. There is limited public information available about this deal, but the best quote so far is in this article: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2930532/reading-service-pocke...
This makes even less sense... I also assumed the Pocket integration was a paid placement, in which case I was fine having to spend the time removing the button and disabling it in about:config, since I saw it as a cost of actively developed free software (same with having to change my default search engine away from Yahoo all the time).
Integrating a third party API for free when plenty of browser-centric features are left as extensions makes me really question Firefox's goals.
How is elevating an arbitrary third-party service from an extension into native browser code "promoting openness, innovation & opportunity on the Web"?
I also assumed the Pocket integration was a paid placement, in which case I was fine having to spend the time removing the button and disabling it in about:config, since I saw it as a cost of actively developed free software
Apologies for being slightly off-topic, but I'd argue this would be questionable even if it were an openly announced partnership like with Yahoo. Yes, Mozilla is free software and is doing some enormous contributions to the open web. Which is why we should support them with donations and code contributions. (And I'd also fully endorse usage of paid services from them should they develop any).
However, what they are doing now is basically selling their good reputation and their wide user base to force some features on their users that they don't need in return of (presumably) payment. That strikes me as deeply unethical.
But installing stuff users don't want is working so well for SourceForge why would Mozilla not want to follow such a great lead /s.
Works for Google and Apple. They've been doing it for years.
Quote from the article: "There's no monetary benefit to Mozilla from the integration: Pocket didn't pay for placement in the browser."
Maybe not monetary incentive, but perhaps this was a condition to get Pocket to integrate with Firefox Accounts?
Mozilla wanted users to be able to use Pocket without needing to create an additional account.
It also encourages users to create a Firefox account to use Pocket.
I suspect a lot of people are wary of "signing in" to browsers.....
> I suspect a lot of people are wary of "signing in" to browsers.....
Nobody's being held at gunpoint.