Lucid changes to Firefox default search provider

[Richard JOHNSON]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:19:33PM +0530, Vishnoo wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 00:21 -0600, Richard JOHNSON wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 01:45:53AM -0500, Alain-Olivier Breysse wrote:
> > > Bonjour,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The motivation  of your decision is already being talked about around the
> > > net in many different languages, and because it is the net, will continue to
> > > do so.
> > 
> > Good, more publicity, seeing as 95% of the places I have read, the people
> > commenting were all level headed, understood the deal, and realize they
> > still have that wonderful thing called a choice. If you are so
> > anti-Microsoft, then switch it to Google or whoever.
> > 
> > I don't mean to be an ass, but beating a dead horse isn't going to scare
> > Canonical into changing their decision.
> > 
> 
> I been having a nagging worry regarding this recent change. 
> 
> I'v noticed several users in #ubuntu+1 complaining about the change and
> mentioning that they have changed their search engines back to google.
> Similar comments in various blogs mentioning the change.

I am fairly certain Canonical knew there was going to be some complaining,
and I feel it was expected personally. The thing that really got to me with
this announcement, is those that I did expect to start a FUD campaign, or
really bitch about it, didn't. They understood the situation and stayed
level headed about it. I was impressed and it made me feel really good
about this wonderful community we are a part of.

> Since unfortunately Yahoo isnt really as good as google, I suspect even
> more are switching quietly .  
> I'v tried to stick with yahoo for my searches and support the change ,
> but the results were not really as good/relevant/sufficient as google's.
> 
> If more folks are going to switch back , Will it eventually turn out to
> be more profitable? [not to doubt the deal-makers]
> I really hope the Yahoo deal is *very* good to cover all the loss we
> have from the user's switching and in turn more profitable for
> Ubuntu/Canonical. 

I would assume that Canonical and Yahoo both thought about this and
realized that people will jump ship right away back to Google or their
preferred search engine. With new people trying Ubuntu every day, the
chances of them not changing are more than likely better than that of us
who are used to one provider or another.

> Or is Canonical also entitled to revenue from Ubuntu google searches?
> [which would make me feel less guilty for switching ;)  ]

I don't know if there still is to be honest, but I am almost positive there
was one in the past.

-- 
 Name|  Richard JOHNSON
Title|  Developer
  WWW|  http://www.ubuntu.com
Email|  nixternal at ubuntu.com
GnuPG|  3578 0981 A21D D662 2A96  7623 F4C1 838C D8C4 4738
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/attachments/20100223/a73b36d5/attachment.pgp