Slashdot Mirror
1 Million Firefoxes in 4 Days
Dodger73 writes "The Mozilla guys would have liked to reach 1 Million downloads of the Firefox 1.0 pre-release version within ten days of its release. After four days, the download counter now shows 1,006,060 downloads, surpassing the 10^6 mark more than twice as fast as they desired! Congratulations!"
How about adding a few more downloads?! Get it here.
Copies are spread through many other sources so the actual amount of downloads is probably much more than the download counter indicates!
Congrats Firefox!
Things that impressed them the most over their first ~5 mins.
1. Tabbed Browsing
2. Ability to set multiple pages as home pages.
3. Sleek look.
4. Small download size.
I guess the popup blocker didn't make as much of an impact because of 3rd party blockers/etc that they had installed and functional.
Go Firefox!
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Behold.. Windows Update Extension for Firefox.
Enjoy!
I can't believe noone mentioned Kevin Karpenske who kindly donated the firefox.com domain to the mozilla guys.
Kudos to Kevin for demonstrating a great deal of kindness in supporting our favourite browser..
groklaw, wired and slashdot. The holy trinity of work based time wasting.
I've been looking at ways to automatically deploy it using MSI files, and switch the default browser to it across the company network.
Even though I limit peoples permissions they still get spyware. When things get bad especially for people who need admin access to their machines for legacy apps, I have to reinstall Windows2k. Not fun.
Wait till we get version 1.2 or something, and people can confidently install it in the corporate.
Then start counting.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
You should take a look at slashdot through the W3C markup validator.
Of course, the Slashdot Moderators(tm) don't want you to look at the site through the w3c. That's why you get the 403 forbidden error. However, if you save a page from this site and upload just that html file to w3c, you'll get over a hundred html errors. Try it with this story and you'll see what I'm talking about.
And people wonder why this site doesn't render right on different browsers, sheesh.
Shaggy
p.s. Yes, I know it's easier to bitch and moan than to actually do something about it. But damnit Jim, I'm a bicycle mechanic, not a programmer!
With almost every release of Mozilla based products, we fix security bugs. We announce those security bugs when we release, that's our standard operating procedure. See http://www.mozilla.org/security/ and http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vul nerabilities.html.
We're very proud of our new Security Bug Bounty program which went into effect well before the Firefox PR shipped. That program helped us identify and fix several more security bugs than might have otherwise been fixed in this release.
The PR was actually release a couple of weeks behind schedule, in part due to our being busy working on fixing a couple of security and privacy issues. We certainly didn't "throw together a preview for the sake of not having to announce it as a fix for major exploits." What actually happened was that we announced the security fixes to the public and to security research firms like Secunia when we shipped PR. They found out about the problem because we shipped and we disclosed the bugs -- our normal process.
You seem to have the misconception that the security issues were about to be disclosed so we rushed a release out. That's just not the case. It was the Mozilla Foundation that made the security disclosures. We do that each time we ship a new release that has security related bug fixes.
--Asa
Yes. This bug still apears in 1.0PR.
It comes from the ability to view the site while not all of the data was already downloaded. In case images don't have their size properties, it assumes a default value and forgets to update it when the data appears.
To fix, simply ctrl- and ctrl+ to change font size and it'll fix the layout.
^_^
Actually, given the increasing number of broadband users in the USA, the difference in download times for FireFox and Mozilla 1.7.3 is no longer significant.
The difference between 4.5 MB and 11MB is dramatic for the 60 million (49%) US internet users who still don't have broadband.
I'm not sure how a figure like "half" isn't significant. Half of the US still isn't on broadband and for them, Firefox downloading much easier than Mozilla. Firefox is about the size of an MP3. People can relate to downloading something that size.
But Mozilla has a few things that FireFox lacks right now: 1) better page-rendering accuracy and 2) a very good mail and newsgroup reader.
Mozilla and Firefox share the same Gecko rendering engine so I'm not sure where you get the "better page-rendering accuracy" from. Firefox has a powerful companion e-mail application called Thunderbird for anyone who needs a great (not "good") email and newsgroup reader. Thunderbird is to Mozilla email what Firefox is to Mozilla browser.
--Asa
Interesting project, although I think building a lean browser from the ground up is the better approach compared to trying to strip the bloat off Mozilla.
:-)
I think that anyone who has ever built a rendering engine capable of displaying even 95% of today's websites would beg to differ with you. Mozilla's Gecko rendering engine is the most capable standards supporting code available. Minimo is an attempt to get that rendering engine leaned down some and running on small devices.
I've spent some time testing Minimo on an iPaq and it rocks. It can handle just about any web page you throw at it, like Mozilla and Firefox, and it fits in your pocket
--Asa
Do the Mozilla folks have any good recommendations on when to use Firefox vs. Mozilla?
t s. html
http://www.mozilla.org/products/choosing-produc
--Asa