Canonical/Yahoo revenue deal; Yahoo is the new Ubuntu search default | Hacker News Reader

Canonical/Yahoo revenue deal; Yahoo is the new Ubuntu search default

lists.ubuntu.com

66 pointstimf43 comments

The competitive landscape on search/browsers/os/user-engagement is getting fascinating:

Mozilla, who doesn't have an operating system/distribution and therefore isn't the last team to touch an app, has a revenue distribution deal with Google by making them the default search engine of the firefox browser, which has a 25th percentage or so share of the browser market.

Said Revenue Sharing deal, is now being undercut by Canonical, the Operating System Vendor, that uses the Firefox Browser, but who has now entered a revenue sharing deal with Yahoo, who uses Bing! as their search back-end. Bing! of course, is owned by the company that Canonical seeks to upend with its 2-3% market share in the Operating System Market. I wonder how Mozilla will feel about their "Branded" firefox browser having it's search engine (and revenue) reprogrammed to point at Yahoo by default? I wonder if they'll force Canonical into switching over to Ice Weasel?

Google, has decided to create their own browser, and is now working on their own OS (a linux distro). Google has the ability to do a full stack integration (OS/Browser/Search) - But is weak in everything but Search in terms of market share.

Apple, meanwhile, who has a both a Operating System, and Browser, and is now becoming increasingly competitive with Google, may be turning to Bing! for a revenue sharing deal on the browser. Apple has no search engine, has some (but not overpowering) share in the browser/OS market.

Finally, there is Microsoft, who, continues to move along with Dominant Operating System and Browser share, and, slowly, increasing their small share (in the teens) of search (though mostly at the cost of Yahoo).

If Microsoft were to announce tomorrow that they were shipping Windows with a copy of Firefox, but the default search engine was Bing, what would the reaction be?

Interestingly, it'd probably decimate Firefox since MS would no doubt feel no need to do a revenue share with Mozilla and Firefox users would feel no need to download a virgin Firefox, thus destroying Firefox's revenue stream.

Or Mozilla could revoke Microsoft's use of their trademarks, thus creating "Microsoft IceWeasel", a program I don't believe anyone would consider using. (Or they could brand it as IE9—but then people would keep downloading Firefox, just to avoid the now stigma-saturated IE brand.)

Actually as long as Microsoft doesn't modify the program, isn't it the case that Mozilla can't revoke their ability to distribute it? It's released under the GPL isn't it? I guess that opens the question of whether a change in the configuration is a derivative work or just a compatibility change. I'm not a lawyer, though, it's above my pay grade.

Actually it's not. If Canonical can do it, I guess Microsoft ought to be able to as well.

This is precisely the problem that created Ice Weasel.

The code is open source, but the name "Firefox" is trademarked. The two are distinct.

Ice Weasel is a Firefox modified by Debian maintainers.

It's actually a good thing that they couldn't use the Firefox trademark ... since its rendering has been broken since a year ago when I first installed it (some problem related to Cairo or something like that) ... while Firefox downloaded from the official website worked fine.

Not to mention that a lot of people get tricked into buying open-source software through various shareware websites, and the big problem with such services would be that browsers like Firefox get "enhanced" with spyware abilities, while branded as "Firefox". Such actions diminish the trust of users in the brand, so Mozilla has to have a way to prevent that.

Good point, thanks for reminding me of the distinction.

...Yahoo, who uses Bing! as their search back-end...

I know such a deal was announced... but on a few test queries, there's little similarity between Yahoo's results and Bing's results. Anyone know what/when is really happening with Yahoo and Bing?

The integration is a complex 2-year process; six months have passed so far. Don't expect results to change before 2011. (I'm a Yahoo, but this is public knowledge)

Quick, off-topic question, but weren't you guys called Yahooligans for a while? A quick search on Google shows that it might have been repurposed as a children's gaming brand.

I've only worked for Yahoo for 3 years but AFAIK employees have been called yahoos since pretty early on, and yahooligans was only ever the kids brand. I could easily be wrong though.

Also, thanks for researching Yahoo's own history on Google :-p

http://www.conversionrater.com/2007/04/29/yahoo-acquires-rig...

This is the one small source I found of a guy calling himself a Yahooligan. Coincidentally it was about 3 years ago too.

Google, has decided to create their own browser, and is now working on their own OS (a linux distro).

And Google hired Canonical to work on Chrome OS...

So obviously only for the money. Seriously, Ubuntu users -- people who willingly changed their operating system to get away from a crap product -- are not the same people who would choose Yahoo search over Google search. Good for Canonical to make some money (so long as that means more Ubuntu), but lame.

I am a Linux user and I routinely choose Yahoo search over Google search. The primary reason for me to switch was that Google insists on sending me to their German variant of search results.

At the moment it has become quite convenient: if I want to search in English (most of the time), I use Yahoo, if I need German results, I just switch to Google with the said two clicks in "Chrome".

I realize you probably already know this, and perhaps even don't need this, but I often use http://google.com/ncr. The "/ncr" bit ensures that no localization redirection is done.

(At least with regards to the language for the UI and search results. I don't know if advertising is adjusted.)

I just wanted to try this with blocked cookies, and it seems FireFox doesn't even have the block cookies option anymore :-( Or I couldn't find it atm. I suspect it wouldn't work without cookies?

Anyway, I used to block Google cookies but I have become lazy. Still, how would I configure the /ncr in the FF search field ("Chrome")? Overall I take it Google doesn't really want me as a customer, so whatever.

I guess they use cookies, yes.

Personally I'm an opera fan, so I haven't tried getting it to work but a quick search brought up: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/51000, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/12625 and https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/11551 as plug-is. As for blocking cookies there are several options.

I've looked at those plugins a while ago, too. But then I wasn't sure if they don't do too much, that is, limit to english (or even US) results. I just want a general search - if the German result is better, give me the German result.

I would have to look further into the workings of Google to understand that, but as I said: why should I invest the time? They shouldn't be forwarding me to German Google without my explicit desire to do so (which I would state by visiting google.de instead of google.com).

Also, I don't like to install plugins in general - who knows who made them and if they are safe. So why risk it? Using Yahoo! seems the cheaper course of action for now.

I wonder how much money they'll really get out of this. Even Ubuntu, the most user-friendly Linux (and please don't try to argue otherwise; that's not the point of this comment. Pretend I said "a very user-friendly Linux" if you have to), draws a pretty tech-savvy audience. I think the vast majority will make at most one search with Yahoo, realize they're using an inferior search engine, and then switch.

more like ... hit ctrl k <search> + enter, realize they haven't set default to google, and switch :)

I think that the predominance of 'tech savvy' users in Linux (especially ubuntu) will change soon.

This is only an anecdote, but when I whip out my ubuntu laptop, people don't say 'what's that' anymore, they say 'cool ubuntu, how is it?'

Up until fairly recently you had to hack around with text files in shell in order to set up simple things like multiple monitors and proper sound support.

That sort of stuff got a lot better with version 8, and with the current version, 9.10 i'd say that using Ubuntu is as easy as using windows (possibly easier).

The only barrier currently is 'can i buy an OS disk in the store', and 'can I get a computer with it pre-installed'.

Maybe. People have been thinking (wishing?) that the makeup would change, but that people believe Linux is close in usability to Windows or Mac is actually a barrier to that happening. And there's the whole "this probably doesn't work economically-speaking" thing.

> people don't say 'what's that' anymore, they say 'cool ubuntu, how is it?'

You and I must know different people. ;)

I know that it's the dream that Linux will one day be predominant, but I've been hearing about how Ubuntu is going to change the landscape since 2006 when I started using it and it hasn't happened yet, nor is there any strong evidence that a trend is starting.

Are you indicating that my belief that Ubuntu is close to the usability of Mac or Windows is false, or that being easy to use is a problem?

Ubuntu certainly is very easy to use, Linux as a whole is not.

> Are you indicating that my belief that Ubuntu is close to the usability of Mac or Windows is false, or that being easy to use is a problem?

The former, of course. Being easy to use is wonderful and important. :)

> Up until fairly recently you had to hack around with text files in shell in order to set up simple things like multiple monitors

I still have that problem in 9.10 - same goes for getting wireless to work

> That sort of stuff got a lot better with version 8, and with the current version, 9.10 i'd say that using Ubuntu is as easy as using windows

I completely disagree, until there's better device support it'll still be a pain to use compared to windows. More importantly installing software is still a pain, in my opinion, compared to Windows. Sure it works fine if you try to install from Canonical's list of supported software, but as soon as you want to install anything else (example Firefox 3.6 see the recent thread on HN) it's a usability nightmare.

Unfortunately I think this type of thinking that it's good enough and already surpasses windows is partially what leads to so little progress being made on this front. How does the old saying go? "The first step in solving a problem is admitting that you have one"

Pretend I said "a very user-friendly Linux" if you have to

Wouldn't it have been simpler just to say that?

Good point.

I don't think it's an accident that this announcement comes far away enough from the next release for there to be time for Google to make them a better offer. Even if that doesn't happen in the next release, this may be Canonical's way of showing their hand.

Not while Yahoo! actively collaborate with the Mainland Chinese Government to imprison Hong Kong citizens without even the courtesy of a warrant request - I could not look my grandchildren in the eye - I call them out as collaborators and frankly they should be shot or at least interned without trial - Yahoo are dead to me.

Solidifying my view that advertising is a plague, and it must be destroyed. It is the causal agent in so many anti-consumer decisions. Google or Yahoo or Microsoft or any of their agents (e.g. Canonical) need only do well enough not to piss off their current subscribers. To the extent that they manage that, they can encrappen their product with incorrect or useless shit in order to bring more revenue. You will get much better results if you pay for quality.

It kind of makes me embarrassed to work for one of those companies I decried. At least I can rationalize it by noting that our results are the best and we're really bribing other actors to not make decisions that harm their users.

I'm surprised by this, given Google and Ubuntu's previous relationship with Goobuntu.

Not that the two are mutually exclusive, but Google and Canonical do appear to have had some form of commercial relationship.

Ubuntu users hopefully are savvy enough to change the default search engine, one funky thing about firefox and ubuntu is that an extension is installed by default and can only be disable not removed by most users.

How does this help the users? Canonical is selling their user base to yahoo at the cost of user experience. This is kinda disappointing and shady.

You're assuming everyone is better off with Google as a default search engine. Seems like a pretty strong assumption.

I wonder if they considered Bing. In a few years, that's what it will be, just with sanitary purple branding to keep people's heads from exploding.

Noooo :(

If it's making Canonical some money, that's great. It is easy enough to change the defaults to whatever you want after you install. It's a shame they couldn't cut a deal with a search engine that's actually useful, like Bing, though.

Yahoo has already agreed to use Bing to power their search, so while I don't know whether that has already been implemented, you'll soon indirectly get your wish that they'll support Bing.

The reason I find this unfortunate is that I'm still boycotting Yahoo over their treatment of Chinese political activists; a FOSS operating system using Yahoo as a search is something I therefore find highly odd.

Well, it's a rev share, so it won't make them any money if you switch back to Google.

Yes, and that's why it's a shame.

I realize my message above was a little too cheeky and deserves the downvotes, but it's a legitimate concern. I want Canonical to have a firm financial footing, and I don't think this will help much.

hahahaha ... good one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com