Posted Nov 7, 2011 21:10 UTC (Mon) by geuder (subscriber, #62854)
[Link]
> The paragraph on search engines was a bit confusing and strange...
n++
Search engine bit is confusing...
Posted Nov 8, 2011 7:01 UTC (Tue) by Cato (subscriber, #7643)
[Link]
The revenue bit should say that revenue came from search engines and browsers - same model as Firefox.
I'm not wild about the distro blocking ads that it doesn't like, but I usually block all ads anyway. In fact only linuxmint.com is unblocked (on my Ubuntu box) so I can help fund this distro.
The MGSE and MATE work looks great, so people have a choice of an upward compatible UI as well as the shiny GNOME 3.
I also really like this: "quality matters more than the time-frame" - if only Ubuntu did the same, so you didn't have to wait several months after an Ubuntu release before you dare use it... (or in the case of Lucid 10.04 on Intel graphics, not use it at all because it doesn't work).
Search engine bit is confusing...
Posted Nov 8, 2011 19:56 UTC (Tue) by endecotp (guest, #36428)
[Link]
> The paragraph on search engines was a bit confusing and strange...
Here is how I parse it:
In the past:
When users click on ads in Google search results, Firefox gets some of the money via the well-known scheme, and Google keeps the rest.
No ads are blocked.
No ad-related money goes to or through Mint.
In the future:
Mint have new deals with search providers so that when Mint users click on ads in search results, Mint gets some of the money.
Providers who don't have such a deal with Mint will be removed from the search provider menu in the web browser.
Ads from providers who don't have such a deal with Mint might be blocked.