Closed Bug 624620 Opened 14 years ago Closed 14 years ago

Refresh google homepage snippets, making them "scary" for users running older builds

Categories

(Websites :: Other, defect)

Product:
Websites
Component:
Other
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: christian, Assigned: lforrest)

Details

The current snippets can be seen at: http://google_snippets.stage.mozilla.com/en-3.0/ We should think about updating them to be a bit scarier, as we are doing with the advertised update dialog in bug 609085. We might want to wait to see if there is significant response to the scary update dialog. (I'm not sure what components these bugs go in fwiw).
Summary: Refresh google homepage snippets, making them more "scary" for users running older builds → Refresh google homepage snippets, making them "scary" for users running older builds
We may want to direct them to choose the "Check for Updates" menu item rather than a webpage. That would take phishing out of the equation and is generally quicker.
Laura/Mayumi - what's your recommendation here?
I also recommend making the message scarier ala what we did with the billboard and emphasizing the security risks + the benefit of more features/speed. Although not sure how this fits into the Google schedule/capabilities.
To give you a taste here's what the current update snippets are now. There are several variations: 1. Upgrade now to Firefox 3.5 for improved security and better browsing. [This one seems to be the main localized version] 2. Teach your old fox new tricks by upgrading to the latest version of Firefox today. 3. Experience more of the Web! Upgrade Firefox for a faster, more secure browser that can take you new places. I'd suggest including a link to a page where they can update instead of explaining the 'check for updates' process within a small snippet and hoping for the best. Having a clear call-to-action in the form of a easily click-able colored link is more noticeable than giving a set up instructions. I'm not familiar with any snippet phishing problems. I also think people are more comfortable and familiar with interacting with web pages than with their browser's chrome. And it could be confusing if we try to connect the two like we'd be doing in this type of messaging. Mayumi - thoughts on this? Process: We update our snippets directly through Google on a monthly basis. I manage that process. I believe we can change these legacy snippets as well but will confirm. To get into the Feb batch we'd need final content within the next two weeks or so or else this can be included in the March batch. The biggest variable would be localization as l10n efforts will add time to this process.
(In reply to comment #4) > > I'd suggest including a link to a page where they can update instead of > explaining the 'check for updates' process within a small snippet and hoping > for the best. Having a clear call-to-action in the form of a easily click-able > colored link is more noticeable than giving a set up instructions. I'm not > familiar with any snippet phishing problems. I'm not sure about snippets phishing, but we've seen a large uptick in people copying mozilla.com and/or firefox update pages and sticking malware on them instead of Firefox. If we have them go through browser chrome (as we say in announcements...."Updates can also be applied manually by selecting 'Check for Updates…' from the Help menu.") there is no chance of phishing. It's also generally quicker and there is no way they can get confused as to what build to download, lose the downloaded installer, etc) I also think people are more > comfortable and familiar with interacting with web pages than with their > browser's chrome. And it could be confusing if we try to connect the two like > we'd be doing in this type of messaging. Mayumi - thoughts on this? This is a totally valid point. > Process: We update our snippets directly through Google on a monthly basis. I > manage that process. I believe we can change these legacy snippets as well but > will confirm. To get into the Feb batch we'd need final content within > the next two weeks or so or else this can be included in the March batch. That's fine, these don't have to be done at any specific time, though the sooner the better of course.
I agree with Laura re: the call-to-action and leaving the promos as they are today (i.e., not pointing to the "check for updates" page). As for L10N, if it's easier maybe we can just use "Upgrade now to Firefox 3.5 for improved security and better browsing." but change the version number. However, I'd like to make it a bit more scary and not make it version specific so ideally we completely update the copy. Adding Pascal C to the thread.
Pascal - Are we able to include updates like this in our regular batches to Google? Can you give us an idea of how long localization will take? John - Can you take a stab at creating a scarier more urgent update message that's not version specific?
we can definitely include updates like that in our regular batches. As with any translations involving 70+ locales (and more people than that), this is not something we can do in a couple of weeks while we have also many other ongoing projects on the fire but it's not an all or nothing task, we can update those progressively month after month. I would really prefer to have a generic message not involving a specific bug number so as that it doesn't become obsolete over time and we can just reuse it when 3.6 becomes the unsupported version for example. Changing the version number can work for most locales but a few locales have syntax changes linked to numbers and that would not work for them and if they didn't take action with the current 3.5 message, they probably won't notice the version number change.
How about this for a 'scary' update snippet that's version-neutral? (Copy is taken from the similarly scary pop-up window that we worked on last month.) Urgent: this version of Firefox is no longer protected against online attacks. _Get the upgrade_ - it's fast and free! Note: we should be sure that this is only served to people who need to see it!
I'd add "safe" to the list i.e., "- it's safe, fast and free"
(In reply to comment #10) > I'd add "safe" to the list i.e., "- it's safe, fast and free" New text: Urgent: this version of Firefox is no longer protected against online attacks. _Get the upgrade_ - it's safe, fast and free!
John's first suggestion (without 'safe') is exactly what we used for the Major Update text: https://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/unsupported/details/index.html If we can reuse this very same text, that means that we can generate those snippets for all of our locales for the February batch of snippets we give to Google. I would prefer this solution if possible.
Agreed that it would be nice to avoid a major l10n hit with this. However, noting that the new version is safe seems to be the key point here. Pascal, are you saying if we add 'safe' then we wouldn't be able to get this into the February snippets, but if we don't then we will? If that's the case, I would say let's go ahead and get it in now without the 'safe', but then add that word for March and beyond. Mayumi, what do you think?
@John, yes that's what I mean.
+ 1 to go w/o "safe" in February but try and get for March
This sounds good. John - we'll need a new graphic for this as the current updates are using the Firefox logo, which doesn't make much sense. I'll include that in a separate bug I'm filing for snippet graphics.
Assignee: nobody → lforrest
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.