Also, I can't find the reference anymore, but I definitely remember promises of getting a pref to use a different backend. AFAICT, that was another lie.
So multiple lies surrounding this product, along with it being continuously pushed on users (I've had it disabled via pref since day 1, and then it started showing up on the new tab page regardless).
And people are surprised when it gets hate.
[1]: https://www.pcworld.com/article/2930532/reading-service-pock... [2]: https://groups.google.com/g/mozilla.governance/c/2PYq2w8tejs...
In the latter case 100% agree and Mozilla is shooting itself in the foot as users that actively turned it off probably simply don't want it and will be a tiny minority. But do we know yet whether this happens again with this update?
Your privacy is not safe with Mozilla. It requires the same level of distrust as other browser vendors, but at least with those vendors people already know. Mozilla luls people in to trusting them and then uses that trust to fund a business model that is specifically about collecting and uploading user data.
I have done the same. You can use this add-on to remove it from your new tab: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/new-tab-overr...
I am in agreement. Although you can tweak and customise FF endlessly, however, you shouldn't have to delve into about:config to disable a malignant feature. The comment by [pseudalopex] probably sums up my view.
Revenue is good. Sacrificing privacy for revenue is debatable. Misleading people about sacrificing privacy for revenue is dishonest.
This supposed feature is nothing more than a css tweak that somehow needs to upload your urls to this 3rd party provider that is not bound by the privacy guidelines of Mozilla.
It is makes Mozilla a bunch of liars in a way that Google isn't lying. Actually. Google isn't sharing your data with another party.
I wont be switching back to Firefox until they remove the pocket thing and enact policies preventing this from happening again.
Now it's just a worst chrome, with better promises that turn out to be bigger lies.
First party provider. Mozilla owns Pocket.
It would be nice to have some new comments for a change.
It seemed mostly criticism of an approach where marketing says X ("we look at what users really use") but the product says Y ("we push feature X cause we like it eve if users don't").
As for Pocket, I fail to see how someone's experience is ruined by the mere existence of a feature. Obviously they could ignore it. But they're complaining and have been complaining for 4 years like the sky was falling. Again, how can I take such people seriously?
Lastly, I'm not a Firefox developer. I don't need to take any criticism of Firefox seriously just because some person said it. No doubt the devs need to say "the customer is always right" or some such. Whereas I'm free to call it like I see it.
If you wanted a specific feature, you'd install an extension / plugin.
Software has been going that way since forever, just think back to Nero Burning Rom. Which went from a very capable, heavily specialized application to burn all kinds of CDs with to a collection of mediocre tools to do everything but burn CDs with.