Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ubuntu Moves To Yahoo For Default Firefox Search

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the can-you-say-bing dept.

Yahoo! 370

An anonymous reader writes "Starting in Ubuntu's Lucid Lynx release, Firefox's default search engine will be switched from Google to Yahoo. The switch was made after Canonical 'negotiated a revenue sharing deal with Yahoo.' Google will still be available as a choice. Since Yahoo search is now powered by Microsoft's Bing, this would seem to mean that Microsoft will be paying people for using Ubuntu."

cancel ×

370 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first post (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916090)

Microsoft paying people to use other Operating Systems? That's about right.

Re:first post (2, Insightful)

mugurel (1424497) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916506)

catchy, but incorrect. It should be: Microsoft paying people with other operating systems to use their search engine.

Even More Money (0)

syntap (242090) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916094)

And if one uses Bing Cashback, one is being paid by Microsoft to use Ubuntu and giving them money to shop online using it, perhaps to buy a Linux-friendly netbook and the cycle continues.

Re:Even More Money (5, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916208)

And if one uses Bing Cashback, one is being paid by Microsoft to use Ubuntu and giving them money to shop online using it, perhaps to buy a Linux-friendly netbook and the cycle continues.

Actually, in neither case is Microsoft actually paying anything.

With Bing Cashback, what users are paid are covered by affiliate commissions send to Microsoft from the participating sites.
With paying Ubuntu, Yahoo/Microsoft is actually paying Ubuntu a share from ad clicks.

In both cases Microsoft isn't losing anything. Actually, they're generating more revenue.

Re:Even More Money (4, Insightful)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916388)

In both cases Microsoft isn't losing anything. Actually, they're generating more revenue.

My company pays me to do a job. That job, hopefully, earns my company money. Generally more money than they're paying me.

So, they're generating more revenue... But they're still paying me.

Re:Even More Money (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916400)

Thanks for bursting my bubble! I was enjoying the delicious irony, and you go and tell me there is no irony, that MS is just being MS?

Darn you, reality! Now I'm miffed that once again, MS is using means other than having a better product to gain marketshare. I guess when your product is inferior you have to resort to being underhanded.

Re:Even More Money (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916456)

All of which points to a trend that everyone has been aware of for years now: revenue from desktop software sales is becoming less important than revenue from online services; advertising is such a service. It is likely that in the years to come, we will see more of these sorts of deals, particularly on mobile devices.

Doesn't matter (1, Insightful)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916098)

It only takes a couple of clicks to change it to a different engine. Hopefully they won't do anything cute and change it back everytime I upgrade (I'm looking at you Microsoft).

Re:Doesn't matter (4, Informative)

mejogid (1575619) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916212)

All they're doing is changing the system defaults - your user profile will remain exactly. It gives them the potential for a positive cash flow and the only cost is that people who need their Google will have to add 2 seconds to their system set-up process. I'm tempted to go Yahoo anyway due to their better privacy policies, and if doing so helps Canonical then that's pretty tempting. It's good to see a couple of underdogs team up like this, even if Yahoo is semi-backed by MS.

Re:Doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916448)

"Privacy"? ROFLMAOTSETUNG! Your search engine database is but 1 transparent layer. Think web forms, data miners following referrer links, local ISP traffic analysis, etc. The point is how do you know the "tooth fairy" wasn't invented by a crazy glue sniffer? You don't. There's another level of objectivity here you fail to consider in reaching such conclusions - you're the ultimate source of defining the world around you, and the moment control leaves your definition of it, such words lose their meaning entirely. Stop chewing on the blue pills.

If you want privacy, you are doing it wrong. (2, Informative)

Bragador (1036480) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916692)

Simply use https://ixquick.com/ [ixquick.com] since it searches Yahoo! and many search engines. It has no logs, no IP, nothing! In this way, you can use your precious Yahoo! while truly being protected.

Re:Doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916862)

ubuntu is getting profit ahead of its users, and this is the problem. I expect the default of a "for the users" linux to be the best of the flock, not chosen by revenue deals. (I'm not saying there that google is the best, only that the choice should not be revenue driven)

bye bye ubuntu. I'm returning to debian.

Re:Doesn't matter (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916224)

That's literally a couple of clicks, ie. two. On Ars Technica the comment thread was full of nerd rage about a change that takes a single second to undo. Even if they did change it on every upgrade it wouldn't be a big deal (though annoying).

Note that the engine WILL change to Yahoo when you upgrade to 10.04 IF you are currently using Google, ie. if you are using the 10.04 default provider. In that case it will upgrade from one default to the next default. Once you are using a custom search provider, it supposedly won't touch it later.

Re:Doesn't matter (1)

Devout_IPUite (1284636) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916406)

I'm nerd raging about all the people who don't have the technical prowess or common sense to not use Bing. Not the people like me who can change it.

Re:Doesn't matter (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916558)

I don't know; if I had more common sense, I'd probably switch to anything BUT Google since they know decidedly too much about me.

Re:Doesn't matter (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916854)

If course if you weren't a dumbshit you'd realize that google hardly cares about your ikea website searches. Fuck off and die already.

Re:Doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916570)

Why wouldn't I want to use Bing? Because it is Microsoft's search engine?

I've actually started mixing Bing searches in with Google searches just so I'm not throwing everything Google's way. Maybe I'll throw some Yahoo in there too.

Re:Doesn't matter (2, Interesting)

duguk (589689) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916608)

about a change that takes a single second to undo

There's around 8 million Ubuntu users [internetnews.com] . Google has approximately 72.1% (vs 17% for Bing) [blogspot.com]

This means 5,768,000 users will have to change their setting, meaning nearly TWO MONTHS (66.8 days) of lost time overall.

The old way would mean about 15 days of lost time

Re:Doesn't matter (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916264)

It DOES matter (to me) for two reasons:
        a) they clearly stated that upgrades will change your existing setting to yahoo
        b) anyone who takes money from Microsoft to push Bing is on my blacklist

Yes, 'b' is my own personal choice and others are free to disagree but 'a' should never be acceptable. But due to this, I am abandoning my Ubuntu advocacy efforts. I won't actively discourage Ubuntu use over just this transgression, but I will no longer use Ubuntu personally nor recommend it to my family, friends, employer, etc.

Re:Doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916396)

butthurt much?

Re:Doesn't matter (2, Interesting)

hughperkins (705005) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916450)

Yes because it's so much better to get people to use Windows, rather than to get them to use Ubuntu, and spend a couple of clicks changing their browser to ... well... some search engine that you prefer. I was going to say Google, but their founders seem to be selling out, so who knows what will become of Google?

I think I know what you're saying though: I guess you've been putting lots of effort into advocating Ubuntu, and now you feel betrayed? I guess I can understand that.

Still Ubuntu is I feel pretty cool, but I guess you could be right that accepting sponsorship indirectly Microsoft seems a little .... unwise...

Go ahead, (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916554)

nobody gives a fuck what you do. Also if you're one of those weenies who constantly act smug and superior about using linux, I'd say its an upgrade of the Ubuntu community when you leave.

Re:Next step: (0)

miknix (1047580) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916320)

1) Yahoo scans for "Ubuntu|Linux" in the user-agent.
2) Ubuntu user's internet experience is "improved" by presenting Microsoft solutions first, in the search results.
3) ??
4) Profit!

Re:Doesn't matter (1)

tokul (682258) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916576)

It only takes a couple of clicks to change it to a different engine.

It takes two additional clicks. That's another 30 seconds of system setup time or n hours of maintaining own firefox packages with correct defaults. They are wasting admin's time by pushing unwanted changes.

Re:Doesn't matter (2, Informative)

Erikderzweite (1146485) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916754)

It will affect new isnstallations only. Existing profiles won't be updated. So, no unwanted changes unless you're doing a clean install (admins rarely do).

Re:Doesn't matter (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916734)

So will this be enough of a change for Mozilla to revoke Ubuntu from using the name Firefox like they did to Debian?

Worse (0, Flamebait)

data2 (1382587) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916102)

Great... First they remove gimp and replace it with crap, and then they use an inferior search engine. I mean, it is all configurable, but still, do they want to make it as hard to configure Ubuntu as to configure Windows?

Re:Worse (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916300)

They removed GIMP? I'm not surprised, GIMP is overkill for what most people need or can understand. Give an older person Photoshop on Windows and they'll get confused, they need something more basic.

Yahoo search financial decision aside, Ubuntu doesn't want to make it as hard to configure to use as Windows, they want to make it as easy to use for the average joe (not us) to use. The Windows 7 adverts are nailing how easy it is to use and how "I suggested this and they did it!" which is probably what Ubuntu and friends need to respond to.

You or I can always install the packages that interest us, out of the box it'd be easier for my sister if it just worked (which is probably why she has a Mac).

Re:Worse (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916380)

removing gimp isn't a good reason to put mono on ubuntu.

add this revenue sharing (aka yahoo default) and add me to the list of users who isn't using ubuntu anymore. This is dipping their toes way too much into a gray area here.

any other suggestions of equally good linux flavors that don't have mono or the firefox move here?

Re:Worse (1)

hughperkins (705005) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916494)

debian?

But it's very 'raw' I feel, at least, I dabble in using Squeeze (Debian Testing), and there are plenty of bugs that are fixed in Ubuntu, that are still open in Squeeze, at least for me, for example turning off the wifi causes a kernel panic, and it took a while for a kernel to come out that recognized my touchpad.

I'd like to like Squeeze, and when I'm studying for linux exams and stuff, it's exactly what I use, but as soon as I want a system that "just works" I switch back to Ubuntu.

In some ways, it's like Ubuntu is the new Windows for me, in that it's the option that "just works" :-P

Re:Worse (1)

macshit (157376) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916866)

debian?

But it's very 'raw' I feel, at least, I dabble in using Squeeze (Debian Testing), and there are plenty of bugs that are fixed in Ubuntu

While I'm sure there have been releases where Ubuntu was less buggy than the nearest Debian release, this simply isn't true in general; sometimes Ubuntu releases are better, sometimes they're worse. What Ubuntu does have, though, is more end-user-oriented support, a willingness to throw in some proprietary apps, and great marketing...

Other than those things, though, the Debian and Ubuntu are extremely similar to each other in feel, feature-set, and general robustness (they're far, far, closer to each other than either is to any other linux distro).

Mandriva (1)

jbernardo (1014507) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916512)

You can choose mandriva (great hardware detection, nice support, with rpm instead of deb as the biggest con), or Arch Linux (rolling upgrades, fast, less clutter, but harder to install), or Debian, or SuSE, or Fedora... Just go to distrowatch and take your pick. I'm setting a Mandriva partition on my netbook straight away. Would switch to arch, but my GMA500 takes too much work to support there, as Arch is already on a more recent X server,

Re:Worse (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916524)

I don't see how removing gimp and adding mono are related... Can someone explain? Did the gimp replacement require mono?

Re:Worse (3, Informative)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916716)

Yes...

They whined about how much space GIMP was taking up only to replace it with something that takes nearly the same amount of space if you include mono dependencies.

Re:Worse (4, Funny)

dushkin (965522) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916614)

Have you considered Gubuntu? It's a flavor of Ubuntu that aims at the more Google oriented crowd by changing the default search engine to Google.

Re:Worse (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916426)

They removed GIMP? I'm not surprised, GIMP is overkill for what most people need or can understand. Give an older person Photoshop on Windows and they'll get confused, they need something more basic.

No, thiy didn't remove GIMP. The removed GIMP from the default install. It was there in the first place as a sort of show-case of what was available but, being a fairly specialised application, it is now a bit of an anachronism in a basic install.

Re:Worse (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916620)

The removed GIMP from the default install.

I'll have to go back to a default Ubuntu install I did on another disk, but I can tell you that Easy Peasy (based on Ubuntu NBR) does this and replaces it with... wait for it... Picasa.

That was the first thing to get removed and replaced with Gimp. Gimp really is much lighter on resources than Picasa.

Re:Worse (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916792)

Well, that's true and all but that's not the point. Picasa is a more appropriate tool for
the average n00b that wants to futz with a few (or a lot) of photos. It has a good interface
for processing multiple images, a well laid out interface, a reasonably good red-eye tool
and it doesn't try to force a complete separation from the filesystem.

Picasa is something that a Windows user suddenly subjected to MacOS might install in place of iPhoto.

Re:Worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916522)

"The Windows 7 adverts are nailing how easy it is to use"

Haha ... yea ... I guess marketing worked for them. Whenever I talk to my dad lately, he curses his new Win 7 because it's so much harder to use than Win XP. Loads of error messages, idiotic GUI abstractions, apps no longer work, etc. It's also an abomination to administer because it tries to throw obstacles in your way wherever it can.

Re:Worse (1)

r_jensen11 (598210) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916392)

I was under the understanding that Gimp is still in the repository, but just not automatically installed.

Evidenced by:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/lucid/graphics/gimp [ubuntu.com]

GIMP on the DVD? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916596)

But is GIMP on the install DVD, or will people on a slow connection have to download the .deb on someone else's Ubuntu box and burn their own disc?

Re:GIMP on the DVD? (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916680)

DVD yes, CD (the default install media and the one you can get for free by Ship-it), no.

Re:Worse (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916504)

do they want to make it as hard to configure Ubuntu as to configure Windows?

I'm happy with Mandriva and haven't tried Ubantu, but isn't Ubantu supposed to be the Linux for Windows users?

Re:Worse (1)

johnnnyboy (15145) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916548)

Can I ask you how do you expect Ubuntu to make money?
You think all of this is free and with no cost?
I see this as a good thing. More revenue for Canonical will mean better Ubuntu releases in the future.

moolah (1)

zogger (617870) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916848)

Ubuntu/Canonical is a large enough company now that they could start selling integrated software/hardware platforms that "just work". Sort of like apple, but all open source as the main difference. They could make money that way. If a local mom and pop whitebox shop can put together systems and make money at it, Canonical could too. Perhaps they could focus on the ARM chip to do this, and start with good affordable netbooks and nettops, and work their way up from there. Heck, maybe jump into cellphones for that matter.

Re:Worse (2, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916588)

Gimp was bloated, extremely user unfriendly and is many years overdue for a major usability redesign. If it annoys you THAT MUCH, that it's gone, just install it via aptitude.

Re:Worse (4, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916828)

Yet despite all of this: the ordained replacement didn't improve upon any of these alleged failings.

Sure... replace it with something better, not something inferior.

icrosoft will be paying people for using Ubuntu. (1)

jkrise (535370) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916106)

Wow!! Amazing.. just the very thought! Long may it continue...

Great gauge (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916112)

Seems like a decent way for MS to track Ubuntu's growth.

Microsoft Paying for Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916126)

Seeing Microsoft pay for people to use Linux has got to be the greatest irony I have seen all week. It makes me smile. :)
Definitely first post worthy.

Delicious! (1, Interesting)

headkase (533448) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916146)

Microsoft paying when people use Ubuntu! Oooooh, my morning just became deliciously enriched. *Thank you* slashdot, these are the moments I know why I come here! =D

Re:Delicious! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916658)

"Microsoft Gains Access To Linux User Internet Behaviour"

What? No longer smiling? How come? ;)

Guess it's time to move on to another distribution. They were moving away from too many apps I use anyway. Once they get involved in these kind of corporate politics, it's high time to say goodbye.

Question (1, Insightful)

mewsenews (251487) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916154)

Does this affect the Ubuntu - Firefox deal? Debian's version of Firefox is named Iceweasel because Debian legal felt that the Firefox branding was too encumbered to users wishing to redistribute, but Ubuntu reached some sort of compromise that allowed them to keep the Firefox branding.

Will screwing with Firefox's default search affect Ubuntu's relationship with Firefox? I'm expecting "no" but wondering if anyone is able to explain why.

Re:Question (1)

plague911 (1292006) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916222)

Well amongst several things. Yahoo/Microsoft is no more or less open source than Google. So the change should um make a total of "0" difference...

Re:Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916398)

The problem is the branded versions of Firefox aren't quite open either. You can see/modify the code (except the bug reporter in older versions), but if you do something Mozilla Corp/Org doesn't like, they can force you to not distribute their branding (that's why debian has iceweasel).

Re:Question (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916634)

Microsoft is no more or less open source than Google.

Chrome has a substantial Free version without the patented parts. IE doesn't.

Re:Question (3, Insightful)

NorbrookC (674063) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916304)

I doubt it. Firefox has always given users the ability to change the default search engine. While Google was paying Mozilla to make Google the default search on those products, it doesn't necessarily affect other deals made.

This is interesting, but I don't think it's all that big a problem. Although it's fun to get all paranoid about Microsoft - with some justification - I don't see this as an attempt to "take over" Ubuntu.

Re:Question (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916354)

Firefox has a revenue sharing deal with Google. However, I don't know if the searches generated by an Ubuntu Firefox were part of this deal, since Ubuntu ALSO has one (which is now being replaced) and a Google search from the Ubuntu Firefox contains an URL parameter "rls=com.ubuntu:en-US:official." If Mozilla didn't get any money from Ubuntu searches in the first place, I don't see why this would affect anything.

I think the Debian/Iceweasel thing was a Debian issue rather than a Mozilla issue; they could have had the Firefox name, but Debian will not distribute encumbered IP (good for them!). I can't imagine that the deal with Google limits Mozilla in what they can do with their trademarks. On a sidenote, the deal runs out in November 2011, who knows what the default search provider in a stock Firefox will be at that point.

Re:Question (2, Insightful)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916394)

I'm confused. I thought it was named Iceweasel because Mozilla told Debian that they couldn't redistribute a non-official binary and use the logo and name it Firefox.

Re:Question (3, Interesting)

mejogid (1575619) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916462)

Canonical brokered a compromise with Mozilla, something about authorising their patchset, whereby they were also allowed to keep the branding. However, if a user makes further changes to Firefox and distributes it they would have to remove the branding. These terms were unacceptable to Debian but Canonical decided it was worth it to draw new users with the Firefox brand.

Re:Question (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916542)

Ah, thank you sir.

Re:Question (5, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916784)

Not quite. It was actually more like this:

  • Mozilla: Hey, dudes, all you have to do is to ask "Can we use your trademarks on our modified distribution? [mozilla.org] . It'll totally won't be a problem for you guys, we're cool with you. Love your work!
  • Debianz: Graaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
  • Mozilla: Errr....?
  • Debianz: RAAAAAAH GRAAARRRRRR! AAAARRGH! RRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRR!

You know, just so we're clear.

Re:Question (1)

AlgorithMan (937244) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916496)

iirc Debian changed the name and icon of firefox to iceweasel, because Mozilla told people to not change the icon when redistributing altered versions... Debian is quite strict about free software and that demand violates the 4 essential freedoms (even if it violates them only peripherally), so they forked firefox...

otoh they keep up with the versions - it seems they fork every version again or so - i don't know...

Semantics (2, Funny)

Bicx (1042846) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916156)

So by "revenue sharing," this guy really means "Yahoo! is shoveling over the cash for a minor feature change on Ubuntu."

Re:Semantics (1, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916278)

Or alternately, "selling access to our user base to a corporation". I can guarantee you that's how Yahoo management is thinking about it.

Frankly, this was not what I signed up for when I used Ubuntu to create a largely MS-free environment at home. If need be, I'll roll my own desktop Linux to keep out of this sort of thing. I'm happy to donate time and cash to worthwhile projects, but not if they're going to turn around and get corporate sponsorship.

Re:Semantics (4, Insightful)

mejogid (1575619) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916530)

Or you could make *two clicks* and change it back. This is a significant opportunity for Canonical to become profitable and could potentially see a minor, insignificant revenue increase for MS. If they were dealing directly with MS you could argue they're asking to be screwed, but with Bing/Windows on the one side and Google/Chrome OS/Android on the other Yahoo appears to be the least self-sabotaging search engine at the moment. Particularly with Chrome OS, Google is looking to make the desktop ecosystem on which Canonical depends an irrelevant commodity in the face of a closed, in-the-cloud system.

If you'd rather use Google then take the two clicks to change it, but don't act as if you're making an ethical stance against corporatism. Google's end goal is you being locked into their webapps, just as MS' end goal is you being locked into their OS and apps.

Re:Semantics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916672)

Uh, Ubuntu is a corporate Linux distro, backed by a single corporation. Linux itself is mostly written by developers paid by corporations. Even Debian relies on donations, mostly from corporations. Corporate sponsorship is a major part of the basis of open source and to a slightly lesser extent, the free software movement.

Embrace, Extend ... Extinguish (3, Informative)

ausoleil (322752) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916190)

If someone thinks that Microsoft has changed their stripes, they are being foolish.

In 1996, John Markoff said, "Rather than merely embrace and extend the Internet, the company's critics now fear, Microsoft intends to engulf it." Bing and putting Bing everywhere, including a major Linux distro is just a continuation of that strategy.

In other words, this is just more of the same for a company trying to leverage the Internet and in their most grandiose scheme, somehow come to dominate it.

Re:Embrace, Extend ... Extinguish (1, Insightful)

n2art2 (945661) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916310)

So you mean to tell me that a business has an agenda? And that agenda is to make money? Wow, I need to sit down.

Re:Embrace, Extend ... Extinguish (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916416)

Mod up, that comment made my morning.

Re:Embrace, Extend ... Extinguish (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916532)

Making money doesn't need to be the only agenda of a business, although it needs to be damn close to the top of the list.

Oh, God. This is getting old - it is old. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916662)

If someone thinks that Microsoft has changed their stripes, they are being foolish.

In 1996, John Markoff said, "Rather than merely embrace and extend the Internet, the company's critics now fear, Microsoft intends to engulf it." Bing and putting Bing everywhere, including a major Linux distro is just a continuation of that strategy.

In other words, this is just more of the same for a company trying to leverage the Internet and in their most grandiose scheme, somehow come to dominate it.

Do you (and every other Microsoft critic or hater) get tired of posting things about MS trying to take of the internet or [insert technology here]?

For me it got old in 2001. Apple and others have killed MS in the mobile market, the tablet market is about to be given a boost by Apple today, even on the desktop MS has got its ass kicked. MS tried to nudge into Intuit's turf with MS Accounting (giving away a full functional version for free, btw) to try to take that huge market for Quickbooks from them. Nope. MS shut down the Accounting the product not too long ago. Search engines? Please. Bing doesn't have much of a chance against Google, unfortunately because as far as I'm concerned, MS has a higher ethical standard than Google has.

Anyway, this is 2010, and your comments about MS have no validity - you're just bringing up old shit from a bygone era.

The search box in Mozilla is named "Chrome"?! (0)

MustardAndPizza (1617631) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916234)

I wonder whose brilliant idea that was.

----
My signature fell down and can't get up.

Google stole the name (4, Informative)

ThrowAwaySociety (1351793) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916346)

"Chrome" has long been the term for the browser's UI...the toolbars, status bars, and such that surround the content.

Google calling its browser "Chrome(tm)" would be like calling an operating system "Windows(tm)."

Re:Google stole the name (1)

10101001 10101001 (732688) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916646)

Google calling its browser "Chrome(tm)" would be like calling an operating system "Windows(tm)."

More like, 'Google calling its browser "Chrome(tm)" would be like calling a windows based GUI "Windows(tm)."' But, then, you'd have 'Google calling its browser based OS "Chrome OS(tm)" would be like calling a windows based OS "Windows OS".

ick (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916240)

Selling out a technical decision (which search engine should be the default) to the highest bidder is kind of a shitty move. Does anyone really think Yahoo is the best choice? Probably not. So they've slightly worsened their user experience in exchange for some cash. Not a great precedent.

open source funded by closed source (2, Insightful)

v(*_*)vvvv (233078) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916254)

Products don't magically sell themselves and make their creators wealthy or even put bread on the table - the lesson of open source.

But if the ultimate goal of the open source movement is to eventually overtake closed source software, this is damning evidence such a scenario will never happen. At the end of the day, closed source is funding much of the open source initiatives. One could say this also includes those of us working closed source jobs by day and open source projects by night.

What a dilemma... (1)

argent (18001) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916270)

Given the way they would have to track this, I suspect Ubuntu only gets money when you actually USE it.

If you switch the search back to Google, Ubuntu won't get paid.

If you don't, you have to actually use Bing.

What a dilemma.

wrong summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916282)

Hell, I'd install Ubuntu in a fucking VM and let it spin overnight if it won me a check from Microsoft the next morning. What, I can't do that?

No, Microsoft is paying Canonical for people using Yahoo. End users don't see any money.

It was nice while it lasted (2, Insightful)

paulzeye (736282) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916292)

I've used Ubuntu for a few years now and always though it was great. Using a clearly inferior search engine as a default is pretty bogus. I guess I'll just go back to using Debian. Can't say I blame them though they need to make money somewhere.

Re:It was nice while it lasted (2)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916498)

I've used Ubuntu for a few years now and always though it was great. Using a clearly inferior search engine as a default is pretty bogus. I guess I'll just go back to using Debian. Can't say I blame them though they need to make money somewhere.

So if I have this straight you think Ubuntu is great and now you're going to Debian because you're too lazy to switch the default search engine? Your nerd-fu is weak.

In Soviet Yahoo ... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916294)

... Ubuntu's default browser is Lynx!

Please implement it better than Linux Mint! (1)

Ezel (249772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916330)

I hope their solution is better than what the Linux Mint distribution does. The Google-results from the Mint-search is really poor compared to Firefox-search. And also the way they have implemented their Mint-search makes it almost as hard to go back to Normal-Firefox-search as deleting spyware in Windows. Just take a look at the instructions below. Might not be that hard for Linux-pros, but it's way harder than what the Firefox-crew meant it to be:
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=39623 [linuxmint.com]

Wow... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916336)

That is some seriously fucked up shit. The beginning of the end. Before you know it they will start shipping "IE for Ubuntu". Ridiculous. Canonical should be truly ashamed. I understand people have to eat, but this is crossing the line.

Re:Wow... (1)

SteveFoerster (136027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916682)

If it meant Canonical got a big fat check, I'd *want* then to install "IE for Linux".

I mean come on, people, does it really take an unusual amount of vision to prefer a sustainable Ubuntu that's 98% perfect on install rather than one that can't sustain itself that is 100% perfect? Especially when we're only talking about defaults which can be easily changed?

might be good, I guess... (1)

correnos (1727834) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916366)

I realize that Canonical needs money and this deal would get them some, but this is still sort of sad in that it's giving M$, the biggest competitor of... any OS really, more money. Also, Google has served Firefox and Ubuntu quite well in the past, so I'm having a hard time figuring out how this serves Canonical well in the end.

Microsoft will be paying people for using Ubuntu? (4, Funny)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916382)

Dear Friends; Please do not take this for a junk letter. Bill Gates sharing his fortune. If you ignore this, You will repent later. Microsoft and Google are now the largest Internet companies and in an effort to make sure that Bing remains the most widely used internet search engine, Microsoft and Ubuntu are running an e-mail beta test.

When you forward this e-mail to friends, Microsoft can and will track it (If you are a Ubuntu user) For a two weeks time period.

For every person that you forward this e-mail to, Microsoft will pay you $245.00 For every person that you sent it to that forwards it on, Microsoft will pay you $243.00 and for every third person that receives it, You will be paid $241.00. Within two weeks, Microsoft will contact you for your address and then send you a check.

I thought this was a scam myself, But two weeks after receiving this e-mail and forwarding it on. Microsoft contacted me for my address and withindays, I receive a check for $24,800.00. You need to respond before the beta testing is over. If anyone can affoard this, Bill gates is the man.

It's all marketing expense to him. Please forward this to as many people as possible. You are bound to get at least $10,000.00. We're not going to help them out with their e-mail beta test without getting a little something for our time. My brother's girlfriend got in on this a few months ago. When i went to visit him for the Baylor/UT game. She showed me her check. It was for the sum of $4,324.44 and was stamped "Paid in full"

...

Re:Microsoft will be paying people for using Ubunt (1)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916804)

Sweet Jebus, today is the day I need points to mod up posts.

ok short term money for long term pain! (1)

daveb1 (1678608) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916412)

ok short term money for long term pain! Google is better than Bing. Yahoo is dying please ignore them. This is only going to harm the users of ubuntu.

Terrible. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916452)

This is a HORRIBLE idea. Who the hell uses Yahoo these days anyway!? Or Bing for that matter...

But bing sucks (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916468)

With the recent google CEO privacy statement fiasco I actually made a concentrated effort to avoid google search and use bing instead.

After two weeks I was pretty much ready to sell all my private information to google just to have a working search engine again.

The search results from bing were irrelevant rubbish (if not just plain wrong) and it was the same thing whether I searched using English terms or those of my native language.

Bing sucks.

Re:But bing sucks (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916844)

Did you try Yahoo search? I know it is supposedly "powered by Bing" but I have found its UI and search results to be better. And once you get used to the "more" tab (that is the little blue tab just below the search box) you'll find it is really quite indispensable. It makes it much easier to drill down into a search than either Bing or Google IMHO.

so (1)

charliemopps11 (1606697) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916482)

could they also install, by default, the addblock plus plugin?

A couple months later.... (1)

Bicx (1042846) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916486)

All - I am writing to apprise you of two small but important changes coming to Lucid.
I have asked the desktop team to start preparing
these changes to make them available in Lucid as soon as reasonably
possible. Probably on the order of weeks.

Change #1 In Lucid, the desktop background will now feature Google AdSense.
This will aid users in finding sites closely related to the personal information harvested from their home directory.

Change #2
Change #1 will be unoptional.

Why?
I am pursuing this change because Canonical has negotiated a revenue
sharing deal with Google and this revenue will help Canonical to provide
developers and resources to continue the open development of Ubuntu and
the Ubuntu Platform. This change will help provide these resources as
well as continuing to respect our user's default settings, except in the case of the AdSense.

Cheers

use ixquick.com instead - way better privacy (3, Informative)

H4x0r Jim Duggan (757476) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916528)

I've switched to using

It's a meta search engine that focusses on privacy by not logging your IP address and your searches. On the technical side, it's nearly as good as the big name search engine I used previously.

Here's a plugin for GNU IceCat / IceWeasel / Firefox: Ixquick [mozilla.org] , or the https version [mozilla.org] (which I haven't tried, but I guess is the same to users).

Re:use ixquick.com instead - way better privacy (1)

base3 (539820) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916660)

Cool--thanks! I've been using Scroogle, but am not completely confident it's not a honeypot (though they'd be quite disappointed in my relatively boring searches). It's good to diversify so that it becomes harder to build a comprehensive profile anyway IMO.

Good deal for Microsoft. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916572)

So Canonical gets some money from Yahoo, and Bing gets search market share from Ubuntu. Overall, I think this was a smart move on the side of Yahoo/Microsoft that will help increase their market share. Just as with the Xbox, Microsoft is trying to conquer a market by `giving money away'-- that is something they still have in quite some abundance, after all.
If it works out, good for Microsoft. If it doesn't, Canonical simply won't get a lot of money.

(Myself, I would have asked Google to match that deal, had I been Canonical.)

I assume that Apple will be getting some material benefit out of switching to Bing, too.

Sorta... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30916640)

"this would seem to mean that Microsoft will be paying people for using Ubuntu."

True, but not the end user. Microsoft will be paying Canonical for end users using Linux. The user will see nothing of this for using Linux.

REPENT! (1)

6-tew (1037428) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916648)

The End is nigh!

Thank Goodness For (2, Interesting)

shock1970 (1216162) | more than 4 years ago | (#30916652)

Tools -> Options -> Main -> Homepage
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>