Slashdot Mirror


Firefox Growth Slowing?

ninja_assault_kitten writes "Silicon.com has an interesting article on the apparently slowing growth of Firefox. To quote the article, 'The slackening of Firefox's growth could mean that the browser has converted a substantial proportion of its natural constituency, thought to be early adopters and the technically savvy. It could also show that the browser's widely publicised security flaws have begun to undermine the foundation's argument that people should switch from IE to be safer.' One thing's for sure, with the release of 1.0.3 and now 1.0.4 we can probably expect to breach the 80 million download mark shortly."

40 of 433 comments (clear)

  1. How many unique downloads? by xquark · · Score: 5, Interesting

    80 million I'm assuming a composite...

    Arash Partow

    --
    Arash Partow's Philosophy: Be a person who knows what they don't know, and not a person who doesn't know.
    1. Re:How many unique downloads? by bad_fx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      meh, this comes up in every firefox discussion. Yes, no doubt many people download firefox more than once. But there are also those of use who carry it on a usb key\cd\share\whatever and install it multiple times from a single download (I do so myself.) So what's your point? The fact is number of downloads, while no doubt not accurate, are still a good indication of the popularity of it.

      Also, for anyone who thinks updates of firefox count as another download (as someone always seems to bring up in these discussions as well), they don't.

    2. Re:How many unique downloads? by switcha · · Score: 5, Insightful
      lies, damn lies, statistics..

      and disingenuous posters

      I'm pretty sure all those downloads(+20 of them) count in on that 80 million.

      And so what? A download total number (used for marketing) is essentially used as a "vote of confidence". If you liked the browser enough to not only install each version as it came out, but install each of those on multiple machines, then Hell Yes it's a "vote of confidence" and should count towards the Total Number.

      I use Safari, and could really give shit about how many downloads Firefox, Mozilla or frickin' IE get. What I do know is that you're trying to somehow dilute the legitimacy of the number of downloads when your very multi-downloads were an endorsement of the quality of this product.

      --
      You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!
    3. Re:How many unique downloads? by dhoonlee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When people advertise that their application has had so many downloads, many people assume that that number equals the number of users. Never have I ever heard of that number being directly correlated to "user confidence" (if at all, only indirectly but the number of users). In the case of Firefox, the number has the potential of being a multiple of the actual number of users. Not only do people download it multiple times for different computers, each computer downloads it multiple times for every patch. It is easy to see how people could misinterpret these numbers to mean something that they don't. Anyway, not calling anyone a liar or a bad person, so don't get your panties in a bunch. :)

    4. Re:How many unique downloads? by VortexMK · · Score: 5, Informative

      Some companies downloads just one copy of Firefox and then everyone in the company installs that one copy... at least my company (30+ people) does it to save bandwidth. I bet that that many other companies use the same practice.

    5. Re:How many unique downloads? by jschottm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Guess what. There's no real way to tell, because your multiple downloads show up but my running around installing it off a USB drive or a local mirror (that doesn't report stats back to Moz.org) doesn't. I happen to use the products based on their merits and don't worry about how many other people are using it. It's vaguely interesting to see how many people might be doing so and so people try to make a guess based on what information they have, which in the case of open source software doesn't necessarily reflect the numbers accurately.

    6. Re:How many unique downloads? by kfg · · Score: 3, Funny

      A download total number (used for marketing) is essentially used as a "vote of confidence".

      Damn straight! I have so much confidence in it I downloaded it 79 million times just to let them know how much I appreciate it.

      KFG

    7. Re:How many unique downloads? by Gordo_1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With Firefox, updates are full downloads. While it may be a vote of confidence to you, to most people it's just another way to lie with statistics.

      Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but for it to be lying, wouldn't they have to say something like x million unique *users* rather than downloads? They call it a download because there's no easy way to differentiate unique users without forcing people to register or something... even then the statistics wouldn't be perfect.

    8. Re:How many unique downloads? by Adrilla · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When people advertise that their application has had so many downloads, many people assume that that number equals the number of users

      If people assume, that is their own fault. The number that Firefox gives is number of downloads, nothing more, nothing less. Downloads is the only number they should give to the public. They don't know how many unique users are downloading the program. They don't take personal information (and if they did, people would question why they need that info for a free, open source browser. Especially us tin foilers here at slashdot), therefore, they can't give out exact user numbers, they best they could do is estimate. Downloads is the perfect statistic for them; It's honest, a great representation of how well their program has caught on, it's an impressive number, and it does show a good deal of "user confidence". Even if every person downloaded 10 copies of it, that's still 8 million people who trust it, enjoy it, use it frequently enough that they stay updated with every upgrade, put it on every computer they use regularly, and probably tell their friends/family/colleagues about, which is a grand vote of confidence in my book. Misinterpretation of the number is the fault of the (potential) user, all Mozilla/Firefox is doing is giving out the facts.

      --

      "Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
    9. Re:How many unique downloads? by Trillan · · Score: 5, Informative

      Downloads initiated through update don't count.

  2. Translation to layman's term- by guardiangod · · Score: 5, Funny

    All the geeks on planet earth are now using Firefox.

    1. Re:Translation to layman's term- by Brandybuck · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except for those using Safari, Konqueror, Opera, OmniWeb, Netscape, Mozilla, several dozen gecko-based browsers that are indistinguishable from each other, emacs in web mode, xemacs in web mode, lynx, links, other text mode browser, etc, etc.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    2. Re:Translation to layman's term- by pebs · · Score: 5, Funny

      transalation:

      All the geeks on planet Earth are not using IE.

      (If you're using IE as your main browser, you're obviously not a geek.)

      --
      #!/
    3. Re:Translation to layman's term- by ignorant_coward · · Score: 5, Funny


      Real geeks stick their tounge on a frayed Ethernet cable.

  3. And shortly after the 80 million mark... by grommit · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...Firefox will reach the 80.592 million mark. Then we have a long wait until the 94.68715 million mark.

    What's with the arbitrary "marks"? 80 million? What about 75 million? That's 3/4 of 100 million which is much nicer than saying 4/5 of 100 million. Better yet, what about 100 million being the next "mark"? That's 7/7 of 100 million.

    1. Re:And shortly after the 80 million mark... by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Arbitrary? The number of mammal digits gets decided only after millions of years of evolution. The decimal notation of counting is developed independently all over the world to mesh with finger number. People finding mystical significance in number spurs Greek mathematics and philosophy and eventually Western Civilization.

      And a punk like you comes around and finds round numbers arbitrary. Just where do you get off, huh?

  4. Widely Publicized? by X-rated+Ouroboros · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seemed like the publication of those security flaws came from Mozilla itself... and a fix was out in about a week.

    Who tells us about IE flaws and how long does it take for them to get fixed?

    --
    Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions
    1. Re:Widely Publicized? by Swamii · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you look at last week's security advisory, it was published by Secunia, the same company that's published various IE security holes in the past.

      --
      Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
    2. Re:Widely Publicized? by GarfBond · · Score: 5, Informative
      It was actually originally reported to the Mozilla Foundation as a critical security bug (bug 292691, still closed access since May 2), and was actively being worked on with the original bug reporter under wraps before someone managed to leak it without anyone's permission, at which point FrSirt (or whatever their name is) and Secunia repackaged it as their own security advisory.

      True credit belongs to Paul from Greyhats Security Group and Michael Krax (and in the spirit of this post, I'm going to give credit to mozillazine for originally posting the summary I'm writing this off of).

      I am still trying to gather all the details as to how my research was leaked, but recent conversations are leading me to believe that it was a misplacement of trust, not a server compromise. However, I do not want to jump to conclusions too quickly, as this will only lead to more problems. That's all I will say about that subject, as I don't want to offend anybody.
  5. Corporate Adoption by chill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And IBM is encouraging in-house employees to use Firefox.

    There are still several "business" websites such as financial services, B2B and corporate intranets that rely on ActiveX and IE.

    While Firefox's growth may be slowing, it is still growing -- just not as fast. When the IE-only sites start to get more complaints about usability from their customers, then you will start to see a steady stream of corporate support for Firefox.

    -Charles

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Corporate Adoption by chill · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, I manage the network for a group of independent financial planners -- about 200 different offices.

      Many of them have already switched to Firefox and there are only one or two third-party services that are incompatible. These third party services offer 2nd-Level quotes and consolidated investment portfolio management for brokers. That is, hundreds of accounts -- not the stuff for the end user.

      I helped one major company make their site Firefox compatible just by pointing out "it already works if I make the browser lie and say it is IE". Their site is Java and the only holdback was the javascript checking for which version of IE to work around bugs.

      These brokers have tens of millions of $$ under management and when they say 'we want this", the firms DO listen.

      -Charles

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  6. Firefox is entering an already saturated market by El+Cubano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It could also show that the browser's widely publicised security flaws have begun to undermine the foundation's argument that people should switch from IE to be safer.

    Um... I don't think that's it. While the security flaws might be causing some to think twice, the real issue is market saturation. There does not exist a desktop computer sold in the last 10 years that didn't come with a web browser. They are essentially entering a 100% saturated market. Nonetheless, I think their accomplishments are stunning.

    1. Re:Firefox is entering an already saturated market by globalar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. For a given user at a given instant, the browser market is a zero-sum game. I can only post to /. with one browser a time. Therefore, the question of growth is misleading.

      We need to measure marketshare in relation to the rise and fall of other browsers. Unfortunuately, to do this we need to distinguish individual users in a series of samples for each one. We're gauging this by downloads and server logs from a few sample groups. These numbers could be wildly inaccurate.

      Also, it's been only a week since the "big" Firefox exploit and the patch has already come (well, the new version anyway). It hasn't been long enough to judge whether or not this alleged impact is from security concerns. Further, we can't tell if the numbers we recieve now are from users who know about the security implications or not.

      In fact, we can only guess why users choose one browser over another. We only assume their choice makes any sense. This is all a guessing game with a few numbers.

  7. Firefox users blocking WebSideStory? by A8bbNjwk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From TFA, "Website measurement and marketing firm WebSideStory said"

    Could it be that Firefox users are blocking marketing firm WebSideStory's tracking images? These guys are just as evil as DoubleClick in assembling a massive database of information on web users' browsing history. Wouldn't ignorant IE users be more likely to allow WebSideStory to track them?

  8. Re:80 Million Downloads...who cares! by ColMustard · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's funny. The first thing I install is Linux.

    Oh I'll burn for that.

    --
    Moof.
  9. Growth rate slowing? by Jonboy+X · · Score: 4, Funny

    So, the rate of growth of the number of Firefox users is slowing, or for you calculus geeks out there, the second time derivative of the number of Firefox users is presently negative.

    The good news is, the *third* derivative is positive, which means that the change rate of the growth rate is increasing. Soon enough, the growth rate will even out and eventually start increasing again!

    Oh, and don't even get me started about the 5th derivative...

    --

    "In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
  10. Friends & Family by fgl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Personally I install it on any friends or familys computers that require my support. Its part of the price for free tech support.
    If I find they have been using IE they get a 1 strike & they're out. If I find they have been using it a second time.
    "Sorry, my time is more important to me & I prefer not to keep fixing the same ol' same ol'"

    --
    Go Away! Not for Sale
  11. Hey here's a thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you have to look at the second derivative before you start finding bad news, maybe the news isn't really all that bad

  12. Re:Nah by dtfinch · · Score: 4, Funny

    Outside? What's that? Oh, yes, the unhappy place where I can't program. Why would anyone want to go there?

  13. Exponential Growth... by dolphinling · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or it could mean that firefox's growth just isn't exponential, 'cause that would be pretty hard to keep up for very long...

    --
    There are 11 types of people in the world: those who can count in binary, and those who can't.
  14. This is nonsense... by bergeron76 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For once, I'd like to actually see some empirical evidence.

    Every mega-corporation hires it's own sub/pseudo company to do an "audit" of the market saturation/absorbtion rate.

    Much like politics, it's not newsworthy to report that candidate X has lost +/-4 points. Let's see what browser the people choose.

    Unlike the US election, I'm sure that the people will make the right decision (when it affects them directly - [ex. No Popups, No Spyware, No viruses, etc.]).

    People may be stupid and they should be guided, but they should never be abused or manipulated.

    --
    Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
  15. Re:apathy by friedmud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People that say the "taskbar is my tabs" make me laugh.

    Seriously... try some tabbed browsing... even if you just buy an addon for IE... you should really try it.

    Using the taskbar makes a mess when you are doing more than just browsing the web. All of your websites get mixed in with your regular programs. Tabbed browsing keeps everything nice a neat. You can also browse a lot faster (Run down slashdot middle clicking on the interesting links then just close off tabs as you read them... much better than click a link... read.... click back... click a link... read).

    Just try it already.

    Friedmud

  16. For sure, we hope, maybe. by Shag · · Score: 3, Insightful
    One thing's for sure, with the release of 1.0.3 and now 1.0.4 we can probably expect...
    I think we have at least two, maybe three different levels of confidence in future events going on here.
    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  17. Just say no to IE. by ignorant_coward · · Score: 5, Funny


    Using IE instead of Firefox over security concerns is like keeping your eyes closed when hooking up with a drugged up bag of herpes prostitute.

    Just stick with Firefox. It's like using a rubber, which at least is 90+% effective at keeping out the herpes.

  18. Grows in Spurts by ebuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Firefox is just coming off of a growth spurt.

    Most things do not grow evenly through their whole life. Firefox grew explosivly in part due to the Wall Street Journal ad and a lot analysts pushing the security benefits. Now that there's been an equal amount of noise about the near-trivial exploit, people are getting cold feet.

    I mean, some of the people who were considering switching are now asking about the exploit. One that did switch is asking how hard it is to switch back.

    I say that it's a theoritical exploit that nobody has actually used to compromise a computer. If they're still listening, I add a joke contrasting IE's real world exploits. The news has hurt adoption rates of Firefox, but that's just because it's bad news, not because it's real.

    People want to hear "Firefox is a pancea for all your ills", not "Every piece of software can have problems". Expect Firefox growth to pick up again after people don't remember this recent bug, and expect a few people to remember this bug years from today.

    ----
    Evil will always win because good is dumb. -- Spaceballs.

  19. Stats from my site by mjtg · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here are some stats from a site that I help maintain. It is an Australian state government website that receives about 3 million hits per month. The site is not technology-oriented, and about half of the hits come from overseas, so they're probably a reasonably good sample of browser use.

    Here are some running percentages for IE and Firefox over the past year:

    2004-05: IE 94.1%, Firefox 0.6%
    2004-06: IE 94.0%, Firefox 0.9%
    2004-07: IE 93.1%, Firefox 1.3%
    2004-08: IE 93.1%, Firefox 1.8%
    2004-09: IE 92.6%, Firefox 2.0%
    2004-10: IE 92.5%, Firefox 2.5%
    2004-11: IE 91.9%, Firefox 3.1%
    2004-12: IE 89.3%, Firefox 4.5%
    2005-01: IE 88.0%, Firefox 5.6%
    2005-02: IE 87.9%, Firefox 5.7%
    2005-03: IE 88.0%, Firefox 5.9%
    2005-04: IE 87.3%, Firefox 6.2%
    2005-05 (first 12 days): IE 88.8%, Firefox 5.9%

    The big jump towards Firefox occured late last year with the Mozilla Foundation's marketing blitz. Since then, there does indeed appear to be a slowing up in migration towards Firefox. This month's stats so far actually show a reversal.

  20. Silver bullet? by DarkMorph · · Score: 3, Informative

    Okay when I saw the /. entry, I knew I had to say what I got here. The announcement of a security flaw in Firefox is the cause of the decelerating growth? This is insane; immediately I think that everyone assumed that Firefox is totally safe. Gah! It's not a silver bullet! It's good but it can't be perfect. Nothing is! Oh, so Firefox has one problem which will be fixed pretty quickly like most of the OSS world, but people will go and hide behind IE again since they think that the reports are false.

    Ugh, how long does it take for IE patches to come out, if ever??? Only if there's a widely-spreading virus or trojan exploiting it, then you get a patch miraculously within a day or two. Otherwise they just wipe your complaining away like a speck of dust. On top of that I bet IE has a lot more problems to worry about than Firefox could ever have. I know it's possible for IE to wipe out files on the hard disk; I doubt Firefox could do it unless there is some sort of ported ActiveX support forcefully ported to Firefox.

    Since I mentioned MS wiping you off like dust, I say that because way back when I submitted a report about the Up button not working when IE was in FTP mode. The Up button was calling the same routine that Back did. I tested it by going down a few directories and dumping the entire history cache. Up did not work as Back did not. I knew that was proof that Up didn't work right because you don't need a history to `cd ..'!! Every e-mail I got back from their "support" was garbage; all about searching their "Knowledge Base" (which lacked any knowledge about this by the way) and some FAQ URLs. Screw 'em. Let IE burn, it's garbage ever since it's been forced down Windows's throat.

    By the way, I remember the IE4 alpha PNG on the feature list. I was shocked to see it again for IE7. Took long enough! but wait we don't know if they'll actually do it this time.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - Wouldn't have it any other way. And fuck beta.
  21. Well, maybe by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I pushed out Firefox at work (university). It on all the machines. I didn't make it manditory, though it did cross my mind.

    Well lately, I am reconsidering. At this point I've deicded Firefox stays on all images, and I'll recommend people use it, but I'm not going to push it any harder.

    Why?

    Well the honeymoon is now over in regards to security. I know as well as anyone that OSS doesn't magically mean secure. Many programmers have an arrogance about them that they think all security bugs are perfectly obvious and if only THEY looked at the code they could get rid of them. No, if they were obvious, probably wouldn't be there in the first place. So you can have a ton of eyes, doesn't mean you are bug free.

    Initally the low usage was enough to make it worth while. No one was tarrgeting it so who cares? Well now it's getting popular, and the bugs are rolling in. It's not a bad record at this point, but it's enough I want to see how it develops. It's also an increased concern since Firefox won't patch itself. Unfortunately we have no central patch system and it doesn't look like we'll be given money to get one any time soon. The only way things get patched is if they do it themselves, if we do it manually, or if we reghost the system.

    So since Windows knows how to update itself, and thus IE gets updated as well, the only concern is that the bugs are patched before they can be exploited. With Firefox we need to worry that they are patched with enough time for us to get the patch out before there's exploits going around.

    This is a real concern, and probably much larger than IE only sites. I haven't encountered one of those in ages, and I use Firefox as my exclusive browser at home and work. As of now the only pages it seems to have problems on are ones with embedded video and that's a FF problem, not a design one.

    The security issue though, that's a concern. If FF doesn't learn to autopatch and if we start seeing exploits in the wild beofre or a short time after a patch, I'll probably have to pull it and go with Opera instead (our instution just secured a site license for Opera) or perhaps back to IE.

    The security isn't much worry to geeks for personal systems, that can patch their own shit with minimal fuss, but it's worrysome to instutions where having to manual deal with a patch to 3rd party software can be a pain.

    1. Re:Well, maybe by zerocool^ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hold on, let me go ahead and show you why firefox is better.

      Step 1.) Open firefox.
      Step 2.) Press Control-T.

      Here's another test
      Step 3.) Go to www.cnn.com
      Step 4.) Open internet explorer.
      Step 5.) Go to www.cnn.com
      Step 6.) Count the popup windows.

      Seriously, man. Have convictions. I do desktop support and network administration for a living, and I can tell you, with almost absolute certainty, users that use Internet Explorer will get spyware. Users that use Internet Explorer will get popups.

      Firefox has a vulnerability. So what? The honeymoon is over, as you say. Now it's time to play the lesser of two evils. Now it's time for clothespin voting. Pick which one you think is best for you and your end users. If neither are perfect, pick the one that stinks less. And Lord Knows what's in opera. If you're concerned that firefox's holes weren't showing up before because few people used it, MAN, opera is not for you. I'd take the monster I know (open source) over the monster I didn't (opera).

      Be pragmatic. Firefox doesn't have Active-X install popups constantly bugging users to install MyWebSearchToolbarAndAgreeToOurTermsAndConditions. Firefox instead has a way to only accept cookies for the origionating website. Internet explorer still has 80 holes for 6.x according to Secuna, 19 of which are unpatched, while firefox just released a patch in a couple of days.

      Don't jump overboard just because no browser is perfect. Some are closer than others.

      ~Will

      --
      sig?
  22. or it could mean that they need to advertise more by Drunken_Jackass · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You know about Firefox. I know about firefox. But Joe User might not know about it/remember it. And we can't tell everyone about it now, can we?

    AFAIK, its growth was pretty much tied to the full-page ad in the NYT. If growth is slowing, they need to pump out some TV commercials, start advertising on google, and keep up the print campaign.

    Non-technical people tend to have a very short attention span on things like this. They just need to be reminded that it's out there.

    --
    There are 01 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and me.