The Mozilla I want

Somewhat a response to

NOTE: These are more personal opinions and not necessarily those of my employer, your employer, or any of the businesses and government in my town,city, state, country.


It is *never* something people want.  Have you ever heard someone say “I really want this content I bought/”rented” to be harder to share/remix/watch and to have even greater legal ramifications if I do so?”  They do want content made by Hollywood, but those are different things.

DRM – Mozilla being played?

This reminds me of the time Chrome said it would drop H264 [1].   From what played out in public it seemed that Mozilla didn’t see the need to push for H264 sooner because they trusted Google to actually drop H264 support.

In a somewhat reverse situation, Mozilla just said they will adopt EME in Firefox before any of the possible benefits are realized by others.  Right now it’s being implemented only in Chrome and IE 11 [2], and I’ve only seen it used in Chrome OS and IE 11.   From my point of view I would have preferred if Mozilla had at least waiting to see if we will get more platform support from major vendors on this.  (aka Linux support for Netflix)

If so, maybe the increase in Linux market-share would provide some balance to the DRM’s negative affects.  Making free software overall a net win.   If so, I would (still reluctantly) support Mozilla’s decision here if they saw it as an end to get Hollywood media to more freer platforms.   But why not wait and see if this is actually true with Google Chrome/Netflix on Linux?


Reduce “Hollywood” power

I would like to see Mozilla pushing Indie/Crowdsourcing media, like:
Paid streaming site for indie videos
Public broadcasting
Better publishing
Basically, How can Mozilla use it’s capabilities to better change the media landscape?  (A slightly “better” form of DRM should not be the answer to this question).

Abandon the DoNoTrack header, provide actual options

It doesn’t work (and almost certainly never will) and it gives people a false sense of doing something.   You are giving advertisers another data point to track!  It literally does the opposite of what is supposed to.


  •  Finish blocking 3rd party cookies (
  • Promote (by adding it as a search option, etc) providers that promise to not track ANY of their users.   DuckDuckGo being the most obvious example.
    Their is so little difference between Yahoo and Bing search.. and DuckDuckGo is a damn good search engine[2].
  • Push advertisers off of Flash (generally a good idea, but also will help with privacy – no flash cookies, etc)
    Generally I’m supportive of the Click-to-play, etc initiatives Mozilla has taken thus far.  Flash is the exception to that rule.   Here’s the outline of a plan to push advertisers off of it. (the numbers are obviously made up for illustrative purposes)

    1. Start forcing Click-to-play for Flash when the site has more than 6 plugins running (pick some “high” number, and count all plugins, not just flash)
    2. Reduce the number of plugins to 5, after some number of Firefox releases or some specific Adobe Flash counting metric.  Repeat pushing to 4, etc.
    3. Once advertisers get on board and Flash ads aren’t served by the big advertisers, now we can push Flash to click-to-play at 2 instances per page.
    4. Once flash usage drops under 5% [1], we’d be able to push it to default click-to-play for all Flash.


SSL 3.0 – When will it go away?

You’ve removed the (easy) option to disable it.  When will it go away for good?  Why does Chrome let the user see what protocol version (TLS 1.2 vs 1.0, etc) their users are using, but Firefox doesn’t?

Mobile – Firefox OS

Well I work at a direct competitor in mobile… but not actually working with our phone product..

  • Launching just with Facebook contact sync well, isn’t very open and totally goes against promoting those that respect your same values.
  • I get that you can’t magically make the devices more open, but at least can we get public commitments for how long a device will be supported for?  And how often it will get Firefox OS updates?
  • I wish you had used Thunderbird as Firefox OS’s email client… I think that would let it scale really really well and give you a new reason to push features there.. Maybe you are under the hood?

If you’re reading this and don’t know, you can try out Firefox OS (“Boot2Gecko”) on your desktop too! (

End on a positive note..

I love the new Firefox interface.  It’s awesome and makes customizing the browser much better.   I’m a nightly user and teach courses on Firefox.  I’m not going anywhere (fast) over the DRM decision.  Going to keep doing what I do and see how it pans out…

2 thoughts on “The Mozilla I want”

  1. In terms of EME it hasn’t landed to users yet what Mozilla has done it stated its intention to implement it. We will need this to land as early as practical because the minute a popular publisher starts protecting their video content we need to ensure our users can access that content if they desire to.

    The EME will be optional so the user has the choice as to whether they want to use that.

    In terms of reducing Hollywood power and promoting indie content I would live to see this too but the reality is Mozilla has very limited funds and has to pick and choose what it can support while also still promoting Firefox as it stands Microsoft and Google hundreds of millions more into their product marketing then Mozilla one reason why Chrome has had such momentum.

    Mozilla spends millions already funding and supporting lots of projects, activism and causes.

    As for SSL 3.0 I don’t have an answer why don’t you pop in #fx-team on Mozilla IRC and ask dolske of their are any plans there.

    Also be mindful Mozilla.has signicantly less staff then every other browser and thus has to pick and choose features and bugs it works on for each release.

    Finally on Firefox OS having Thunderbird that really would have required a lot more headcount which Mozilla cannot afford. As things stand right now the Firefox OS overwhelmed with work and has years of work to do just to catch up with other platforms.

  2. Thunderbird isn’t an application based on web standards, it doesn’t only use HTML, CSS, JavaScript but is a “native” application (using C++, XUL, etc.). It couldn’t be directly used in Firefox OS.

    About DRM, it *is* something people want. If they buy a content they want to watch it, if Firefox doesn’t give them the possibility to do so, they’ll just switch browser. So Firefox not implementing DRM isn’t really a solution against DRM!

    About Flash and click-to-play, it looks like an interesting solution to me, why don’t you propose it on a Mozilla mailing list?

    I think you can see what protocol version you’re using in the “Security” section of the Page Info dialog.

    About Firefox OS, Mozilla wanted to release the first version as soon as possible (to avoid being irrelevant), so they didn’t have enough time to support many providers for contact syncing.
    I think Mozilla is working on another way to support updates that should rely less on manufacturers (IIRC, there was a discussion on dev-b2g).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *