zlacker

>>airhan+(OP)
Makes you wonder how someone thought this was a good idea in a browser that was an early pioneer of popup blockers. Imagine if Firefox in the 2000's had seen popup ads and said "Yeah let's get in on that action!"

At least it was a small scale experiment and not something that rolled out to the whole install base, I use Firefox on a couple of computers and didn't see it myself. But should you really need user feedback to know that inserting an overlay that looks like in-page ad content is a bad idea?

>>wlesie+93
Mozilla management are malicious snakes. This isn't the first time they've tried something like this and it won't be the last. Each time they issue noncommittally apologies, if you can call them that, but it keeps on happening. They're testing the water for even more ads in Firefox, trying to normalize this until people stop complaining. Keep the heat on them, don't give them an inch or they'll take a mile.

>>logdap+r4
> Each time they issue noncommittally apologies, if you can call them that, but it keeps on happening.

An apology needs three parts: admission that you did wrong, expressing regret for your wrongdoing, and a change in your behavior so that you don't do it again.

Mozilla's tendency to just do the first two and skip the third means that, in my view, those weren't real apologies.

>>JohnFe+bu
It's hard to say they even do the first two. This one for example is not "sorry we added ads", but a "We're sorry you're concerned or confused".