Mozilla CEO Blasts Apple for Bundling Safari with iTunes Update

[kirangp]

Accuses iTunes Developer of Adopting Distribution Practices Similar to Malware

Mozilla CEO John Lilly has a beef with Apple, which he made clear yesterday after he blasted the company on its decision to package its Safari web browser with the latest version of iTunes and Quicktime.

Specifically, Lilly laments Apple’s decision to bundle Safari in a way that users have to opt-out of its installation during an otherwise routine upgrade to iTunes. Pushing Safari on users who may not understand what they’re doing “undermines the trust relationship great companies have with their customers,” writes Lilly, “and that’s bad — not just for Apple, but for the security of the whole Web.”

He refers to Apple’s decision to include Safari in the latest batch of updates issued to Windows iTunes users via Apple Software Update, which lists Safari as a program requiring updates regardless of whether it’s installed or not. As such, claims Lilly, unsuspecting users are lead to install the browser when they might not be inclined to do so: “Apple has made it incredibly easy — the default, even — for users to install ride along software that they didn’t ask for, and maybe didn’t want. This is wrong, and borders on malware distribution practices.”

Apple’s decision to mimic the “malware distribution practice” – where spyware is bundled with a program’s installer for various reasons, usually to recoup development costs – is a problem because “software makers are trying to get users to trust [them] on updates.” When presented with Apple Update (or similar updaters from Java or Adobe), most users will simply click the “install all items” button, “which means that they’ve now installed a completely new piece of software, quite possibly completely unintentionally.”

“It’s wrong because it undermines the trust that we’re all trying to build with users,” writes Lilly, “because it means that an update isn’t just an update … maybe [it’s] something more,” ultimately undermining “the safety of users on the web by eroding that relationship. It’s a bad practice and should stop.”

Critics at The Register point out that bundling Safari may also erode Firefox’s market share, by using the power of defaults to force another browser on users – and going so far as to speculate that Safari could usurp the millions of dollars of search engine royalties that Google pays the Mozilla Foundation . In a follow-up posted Sunday evening, Lilly disclaimed that sentiment, noting “unequivocally” that “it isn’t about competition.”

“To the contrary: competition is good — necessary, actually … as a consumer, I want more competition,” wrote Lilly. “Firefox is better because there’s competition from Safari and others — that’s great, because it means that normal people can find the software that works best for them and make their own choices.”

Apple promised last summer that it would use iTunes to help crack Safari’s sagging 5 percent market share, with Steve Jobs noting that Apple receives more than 500,000 download requests per day for the Windows version of iTunes.

Source

[narangz]

Is it Apple's turn now to face the music in courts?

[MetalheadGautham]

@narangz: nice line

ontopic:
I think Mozilla is just pissed that their market share might reduce.
But again, they do have a point.

As far as I am concerned, amaroK + Kaffine + Konqueror beats iTunes + QuickTime + Safari anytime.

I keep getting pissed off at the fact that Apple software use lots of system resources on my windows quarter(I also have a games quarter, music quarter and tux quarter). I heard that their products are SUPPOSED to behave that way on apple computers, but I am not too sure about that on a windows box.

Offtopic: Is this John Lilly a man or a woman ?

[shadow2get]

Originally Posted by MetalheadGautham

Offtopic: Is this John Lilly a man or a woman ?

John Lilly is a MAN. Here's a PIC:



Chk the following links:


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/te...=1&oref=slogin
http://mashable.com/2008/01/07/mozil...ly-as-new-ceo/

BTW, why are you interested ? Any plans ?
Hopefully not ... I suppose

[x3060]

ha ha ha . . . anyways on topic . . yeah it really is good to have a competition but really bad to bundle softwares this way . . now thats seriously bad . . i think the man got a valid point there

[MetalheadGautham]

Originally Posted by shadow2get

John Lilly is a MAN. Here's a PIC:



Chk the following links:


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/te...=1&oref=slogin
http://mashable.com/2008/01/07/mozil...ly-as-new-ceo/

BTW, why are you interested ? Any plans ?
Hopefully not ... I suppose

half name is man's name, half is woman's name. So I had a doubt.

[legolas]

nope, no part is woman's name dedicated any way, i trust you asked out of confusion.

on topic: Apple is always on the news, whatever they do.

[ax3]

ooh comeon .... apple is just stuffing their own product .....

[Gigacore]

strange things are happening

[DigitalDude]

*grabs a bag of popcorn and watches*




_

[tech_lover]

everyone is a crybaby cos they cant do what M$ did. given a chance and ABILITY, they'd all do the same!

[sreevirus]

Originally Posted by techlover

everyone is a crybaby cos they cant do what M$ did. given a chance and ABILITY, they'd all do the same!

Mozilla never resorted to monopolistic policies to gain following for Firefox. It was mostly done through social advertising campaigns.

On topic, I think what Apple is doing is not right. It's just not right to give the Safari browser as a software update to iTunes. Do I need Safari to run iTunes? I don't think so. And considering the userbase Apple has with people having iTunes installed on Windows, I would say it's kind of like an abuse of position. Any Apple OSX user worth his salt would've cried "outrage" if Microsoft would have given Internet Explorer as a software update to Office X/2004/2008 for Mac. (I'm not an MS fanboy, so macboys, please don't flame me). It would've been far better if Apple had gained more Safari following on Windows through advertising, rather than pushing their browser through a software update.

[Gigacore]

^ welcome back

[sreevirus]

Originally Posted by Gigacore

^ welcome back

Who me?

[Gigacore]

^ yeah, I'vent seen you for a long time

[sreevirus]

Originally Posted by Gigacore

^ yeah, I'vent seen you for a long time

Nah... I do keep dropping in and make the odd post every now and then... Just don't get much time these days, you know.

Anyway...Let's see what others have to say on the topic.

[sourav123]

Waiting for a comment from Ayush.

[desiibond]

huh. Mozilla also gives web browser, a mail and newsgroups client, an HTML editor, web development tools, and an IRC chat client in a single software package : Seamonkey.

What's so bad if apple does the same with their software?

Who will prefer safari anyways. It's Firefox that is most preferred. useless fear.

[kumarmohit]

^^^ They are parts of the same tool, not an update! And it becomes the default browser, all by itself.

I think that this is really a bad move on Apple's part. It is a tool with which you update Apple's tools. I mean it is called Apple Software Update not Apple Software Installer or Apple Software Market or Apple Software Downloader.

@Metalhead
It's John man, I mean WTF!

[iMav]

Originally Posted by sreevirus

Mozilla never resorted to monopolistic policies to gain following for Firefox. It was mostly done through social advertising campaigns.

ever used ubuntu

on topic the only issue i have with this is that everytime there is a small change i have to dwnld 50 something mb and now courtesy this the freaking size will go up

[The_Devil_Himself]

first of all who are those stupid 500,000 people requesting 'iTunes for windows' download?I mean who usees iTunes now?it absolutely sucks(dunno about macs but it sure do suck on windows).

[iMav]

^^ ipod users

[The_Devil_Himself]

^^there are lotsa iPod managers(unlike zune ) other than iTunes which are ,IMO,better that iTunes anyday.

[sreevirus]

Originally Posted by iMav

ever used ubuntu

Yep. And I've used openSuSE, Linspire and Mandriva too. But I wonder when did Mozilla ever arm-twist Novell or Canonical or Mandriva to put Firefox in their distros. AFAIK, it was the developers' choice to put Firefox, because it was the sanest choice that they had. Correct me if I'm wrong here. If I am wrong, I apologize. And there was always a choice if you were using a Linux distro. You could've used Konqueror (or for that matter Opera) if you were using openSuSE. And c'mon, an OS aimed for desktops just has to have a web-browser. Could you imagine MS not giving IE with Windows?

Originally Posted by iMav

on topic the only issue i have with this is that everytime there is a small change i have to dwnld 50 something mb and now courtesy this the freaking size will go up

But that's not the point here. A critical update would have to be installed irrespective of the size. But this is different. Is Safari a prerequisite to run iTunes? No. Will the performance of iTunes be affected if Safari is not installed? No. Then could you even classify this as an "update"? I would say NO.

I presume you are a Microsoft fan (in fact, from whatever I know of you, you are one). So would you have liked it if you were using iTunes (just presume that you were forced to use it) and the Apple updating process installed Safari as the default browser over your favourite IE? I don't think your answer will be in the affirmative.
And as I said in my previous post, I don't think Mac users would've been crazy about it either if MS offered them IE as an "update". That is just not fair.
If Mozilla had given Thunderbird as an update to Firefox, even I'd have been really angry, because I don't need it. I can't count the number of times I've been pissed off whenever a toolbar came piggyback-riding with some softwares that I wanted to install on my PC. And what Apple is doing right now is not much different, if not equally bad. This is just not the way of getting your software installed on a computer.

Originally Posted by The_Devil_Himself

first of all who are those stupid 500,000 people requesting 'iTunes for windows' download?I mean who usees iTunes now?it absolutely sucks(dunno about macs but it sure do suck on windows).

That is gross underestimating man. it would only be a minority of all iPod owners on earth who would actually take the pains to find an alternative. Even I had an iPod and the most logical choice that I had was to use iTunes. (another reason could've been laziness on my part). I would definitely admit iTunes sucked on my PC and I wasn't exactly fond of it because of many reasons (which I don't think I should elaborate here, because this is not a thread discussing that point). I sometimes really felt I was being forced to use it. (If Aayush is reading this, please note that it's a personal opinion, maybe it's just me, no flames please). But my grudge is not against iTunes. Some of my friends dote on it (and they are not even iPod owners). The point is I don't like the way Safari is given as a software update to a software whose primary function is to play music, not surf the web. If it's Apple's way of advertising it's product, then doesn't that make iTunes some sort of an adware like RealPlayer was?

[narangz]

Offtopic:
@iMav
^^Where were you?

[kumarmohit]

Originally Posted by iMav

^^ ipod users

Originally Posted by The_Devil_Himself

^^there are lotsa iPod managers(unlike zune ) other than iTunes which are ,IMO,better that iTunes anyday.

6 th generation iPod users/ 3rd generation nano users/ All touch users/ All iPhone users to be precise. The crypto system in these iPods does not allow them to sync with anything but itunes. and considering that there is no documentation incase of 6Gipod and3G nano, making alternative clients compatible is a big problem.

[krazzy]

Its not a big problem for broadband users. They can download it and choose not to install Safari. I, for one, wouldn't mind Apple bundling Safari, QuickTime or Steve Jobs's home videos with iTunes if I had a fast connection. But with my current slower internet, and with the already large size of iTunes itself, I'll be really mad if I had to wait even longer, downloading a bigger file, for something I won't be using and for something that shouldn't be there in the first place.