They need to rededicate themselves to their stated mission, and prove to their users that they're serious about it. If Mozilla wants to regain the trust of its users (and ex-users), they need to do more than just apologize for their most recent mistake. we see now that the criticism was correct.Īs has already been stated on these boards, Firefox is on a slippery slope, and already pretty far down, at that. Many people argued at the time that it was not just a bad product, but that it set a bad precedent and signaled that worse changes would be coming. Looking at Pocket's privacy policy, I'd personally stay far away from it. I am guessing this is valuable data to Mozilla? Why would Firefox want to host this type of data? Bookmarks and screenshots of pages might indicate a user's interest in a specific page. ![]() And 45 pages of results for the term "screenshot". A search for the term "bookmarks" on AMO returns 51 pages. Why Pocket is being forced on users in contrast to the many available extensions on AMO, I have no clue. A privacy aware browser shouldn't be doing this, although it should still give us the option if anyone would want something like this. The main problem with the Pocket addon is that it sends bookmark data to the cloud. IMO, Firefox should remain lightweight, fast, secure, customizable and privacy oriented. These type of addons smell like bloatware to me. The Pocket addon should definitely not come pre-installed with Firefox, users should be given a choice whether they want this functionality or not (that's the whole point of installing custom addons through AMO).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |