

Canonical/Yahoo revenue deal; Yahoo is the new Ubuntu search default - timf
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2010-January/030065.html

======
ghshephard
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).

~~~
seldo
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?

~~~
wheels
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.

~~~
derefr
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.)

~~~
houseabsolute
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.

~~~
litewulf
This is precisely the problem that created Ice Weasel.

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

~~~
bad_user
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.

------
coderdude
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.

~~~
Tichy
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".

~~~
baltoo
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.)

~~~
Tichy
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.

~~~
baltoo
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.

~~~
Tichy
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.

------
jackowayed
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.

~~~
anonjon
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'.

~~~
houseabsolute
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.

~~~
anonjon
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.

~~~
houseabsolute
> 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. :)

------
wheels
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.

------
zang
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.

------
houseabsolute
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.

------
qeorge
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.

------
bugs
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.

------
mindstab
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.

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

------
neilk
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.

------
flashingpumpkin
Noooo :(

------
whyenot
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.

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

~~~
whyenot
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.

