Firefox, you're supposed to be in my pocket, not the other way around

Re:Firefox, you're supposed to be in my pocket, not the othe... by foiboitoi on Monday July 13, 2015 @12:07AM (#9876321)

That still doesn't explain why firefox has to be marketing for the Read it Later company. Why even bother having extensions if Mozilla going to pick and choose for you?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Firefox, you're supposed to be in my pocket, not the othe... by pmontra on Monday July 13, 2015 @03:16AM (#9876812)

My first reaction was that Read it Later is paying Mozilla for that tight integration but it's not true. Check this https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/38aorv/psa_mozilla...

"this has absolutely nothing to do with money. We're shipping Pocket because we love their product, and so do our users. Pocket is, by very far, the most popular reading-list add-on used with Firefox."

Apparently they went too far: it's the most popular extension of that kind among people that care about reading lists (hardly the majority I think) and it's being hated by everybody that don't tolerate imposed choices. No good can come for Firefox and Pocket from this. If I were Pocket I'd ask Mozilla to unbundle the code into an extension as soon as possible because this is starting to be a PR backslash.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Firefox, you're supposed to be in my pocket, not the othe... by IshKebab on Monday July 13, 2015 @06:25AM (#9877240)

I'm not sure that is a denial. "[Us including pocket] has nothing to do with money." Could also mean "We like pocket enough to include it, but they are also paying us."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Firefox, you're supposed to be in my pocket, not the othe... by vacri on Monday July 13, 2015 @03:44AM (#9876877)

They had a win with the Hello chat stuff, which is backed by Telefonica. It's understandable that they might have tried another item in the same vein (regardless of underlying good v bad motiviation).

[ Parent | on HN ]