Slashdot Mirror
Firefox Community, Sickly Out of Control
darlingbuddy writes "After users started reporting Firefox's 150 million+ downloads, this article mentions why it's a bad move on the community's part. The author writes, "I'm proud of the community that pitched in enough donations for Firefox to get a full-page advertisement in The New York Times print edition, and I'm delighted to see them think of creative ideas for promotion, but reporting total downloads every so often and immaturely degrading Internet Explorer is ridiculous. The thing with these numbers is that they are misleading at best, and the only thing they accomplish is immature fanboyism. It's a fact that Internet Explorer is inferior to Firefox with its extensive collection of extensions and ability to support qualified web standards, but does the community need to resort to using third-class promotional tactics with total downloads number?"
Personally, I can't see anything wrong with the promotional tactics "criticized" in the article. It is, after all, an easier way to get the message across than the ones the author of the article suggests ("Release updates, innovative extensions and add interesting features (not necessary by default) to promote with value", which, while a good thing, is hardly a good way to promote Firefox).
Yeah, I know, I shouldn't have fed the troll. But it felt so bloody good I just couldn't help myself :7
Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
YES! In case you haven't noticed, advertising in this day and age is mostly pandering to the lowest common denominator. The vast majority of people *love* to see "big numbers" because "well, if everyone else is doing it, I should do it too". Microsoft themselves have used the exact same tactics, as well as almost every other company on the planet at some point or another.
Advertising is a game that has to be played, and it must be played in a fashion to make it work. Personally, I think it's somewhat sad that they have to resort to outlandish claims, but that's what works... it speaks more for the state of our society than anything else.
but does the community need to resort to using third-class promotional tactics with total downloads number?
If I could figure out what that meant I might have a witty retort.
We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
I always thought the NYTimes Ad thing was a bit silly, I mean come on, this is software; it should lead by example and be used by people in the know. People learn about new software from reviews and co-workers/friends. Mozilla is not Microsoft, they shouldn't spend money in an attempt to gain marketshare. This is not a case for old school marketing, this is a new way of thinking; let the software speak for itself.
fak3r.com
Just like this guy and his snarky opinions are now getting his site lots of traffic.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
does the community need to resort to using third-class promotional tactics with total downloads number?
*points at Microsoft*
They started it FIRST!!
Would you prefer Firefox and Mozilla to pay for researchers to put out highly slanted reports instead? Which class would that be? First? Second? If you ask me, that's without class.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
The author seems to have a good argument... ;)
But, even if 1/10th of 150 Million downloads are by individuals - who continue to use Firefox after downloading - 15,000,000 is still a significant number, given that most OEMs are still putting IE as the default browser in new PCs...
If all OEMs include Firefox in their new PCs and ask the user to configure which browser they would like to use (on first startup), I am sure most of them who know about Firefox will choose it..
That said, I would say that promoting Firefox by saying that "Firefox Downloads Exceed 150 Million" is still valid... at least it is for the betterment of the whole Internet
How is this any different from Microsoft claiming to have X billion MSN searches a month when their browser redirects any typo or bad url as an MSN search query? I agree that the reporting of X million downloads isn't particularly meaningful, but when the competition sits there throwing around meaningless numbers, one of the only choices is to join in and play the same game...
This guy's the limit!
Downloads are just a rough approximation of support.
The fact that some users may Download multiple times while others will re-use the same copy over and over or bundle it on a CD for distribution.
That said, there is nothing wrong with letting people know that Firefox is a viable alternative to IE, and using the download number is the only tool at hand to guage the size of the user community.
There was a time when working with computers was referred to as a Science. This was completely justifiable in that almost every aspect of working with computers can be quantified. And as Heinlein observed, that which can be quantified is science, and that which cannot is opinion.
While the article's author does, in fact, have a point about the statistical validity of the Firefox download count, he doesn't approach the subject from that perspective, and instead is ultimately guilty of the same thing he is accusing the Firefox community of: being completely immature.
I'll only believe that IE is inferior to Firefox for end user applications if lots and lots of end users agree.
"...does the community need to resort to using third-class promotional tactics with total downloads number?"
Well, if 150 million end users agree IE is inferior to Firefox for end user applications, then I would tend to agree with them, especially given the extra download Firefox users must perform to install Firefox on their desktop.
So...the answer would appear to be "Yes, Firefox is doing the correct thing by posting usage and adoption numbers." Can I help you with anything else today?
Of course they need to resort to "immature" tactics like reporting download totals and making fun of IE.
Any non-geek user doesn't understand what is wrong with IE. You can't verbally demonstrate what is wrong with it. HTML standards compliance, full CSS2 support, Javascript, DOM1, wah wah wa. It goes over their heads.
You could show them the difference but CNN and MSN and Slashdot and so on all work in IE just fine, with no huge glitches or problems, no great security issues (I tend not to click things at random).
What I find more immature is site designers who make sites which ONLY work in Gecko (and not Opera and specially not IE!) and then complain that the other browsers are not standards compliant. These site designers were the first to blast websites that were "best viewed in IE" or designed using Microsoft JS extensions (document.all[]) and so on.
Not so much the development team or Mozilla marketing fanboys but basically a pretentious, self-righteous, deluded few.
...is reporting stats immature or "fanboy" behavior. There are plenty of sites that report stats ad nauseum for things that other people care little about. Would you call those sorts of sites immature or "fanboy" sites? I personally think the submitter has an axe to grind... Too bad you can't mod the people who get their articles submitted when it's something as stupid as the main story here.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
simple: to let people who are considering supporting firefox know that it is worth their time. the only way people are going to move away from IE-only renderable sites is if it merits their time to ensure cross-compatibility. by letting them know how many people are downloading it, it helps show them that there is a install base worthy of attention
My other sig is an import.
You know how people use the word "literally" when they mean "figuratively?" Apparently, it is also now okay to use the word, "fact" to mean "opinion."
Best to leave marketing to the professionals. Geeks don't understand it and never will. If a full page ad in the NYTimes is what they need, then by all means, bless them.
However, the thing that will kill firefox more effectively than anything else is if it loses its repuation as a stable and quick browser. The more frequent crashes since 1.0.7 have started a little buzz of criticism. The most important thing mozilla should do NOW is to address the instability problems quickly and completely.
Put the geeks to work on that. Put the biz-dev-marketing people to work on NYTimes.
Inversely, I used to sysadmin a network where I installed Firefox onto a few dozen PC's but from only one download.
The numbers are obviously unreliable, but they do lead to trends. Maybe a 'better' number would be a % delta over month-month or quarter-quarter. Then again, you're assuming that people would understand what that means. Pure raw numbers at least cater to the lowest common denominator in that the vast majority of people know that 150M is a lot.
Bye!
I've been reading Slashdot for six years or so, and it seems to me, the quality of stories have really taken a nose dive. Or better put, stories written to incite the community have been getting greater air time. I read, write, and sometimes moderate, but stories like this makes me scratch my head and wonder why I even visit this site anymore.
It's a fact that Internet Explorer is inferior to Firefox with its extensive collection of extensions and ability to support qualified web standards,
Why must he denigrate IE so? He sounds like such a fanboy.
Actually, I've found you can verbalize what's wrong with IE quite easily:
works pretty effectively.
Also effective:
And the closer:
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
I completely agree. But also...
Am I the only one that sees that pandering to the lowest common denominator for a GOOD product actually benefits everyone? If less people use Internet Explorer (because nobody updates anyway) then less people can have their lives/businesses interupted by malware. Thus, the big numbers convincing simple people for the sake of good, is GOOD.
It's like health. Stay healthy, and you will live longer and more comfortabley. Not many people are healthy for the sake of their own health. But, tell guys that girls will have sex with them because they look healthy and -WHAM!- guys are hitting the gym.
How is announcing the # of downloads different than McDonalds bragging about the number of burgers served? Yes, if we think about it, we can fairly say that not every download was unique, but we can also say that not every McDonalds burger that was sold was sold to a single person. We don't get mad at McDonalds for that, though (we get mad cause those "Billions of Burgers" have all been crappy :P).
:P), or taking money from microsoft to sabotage their own product. I thought they were hatching a scheme to turn everyone's computers into nodes for the ultimate evil planet-controlling network, and demanding that the world leaders give them $$$$$ or we'll all be blown straight to hell. Something.
That being said, 150 million downloads is a significant number. First off, it's big. I mean really really big. But Secondly, it's a sign that people are still using Firefox. For every time that the same person downloads another copy of firefox, that person is quietly saying that Firefox works for them. That's pretty significant.
All that being said, saying the "Firefox Community, Sickly Out of Control" in this regard is over-hype, and actually worse than bragging about a downloads number. It's creating a major false-impression. I thought the title meant that the FireFox community was fracturing and that 2.0 was going to be seriously delayed or some such. I thought that they were turning into a porn-download-machine (more than it already is, being able to connect to the internet
Saying "yay, yay, 150+ million downloads. Microsoft sucks. we rock. Go us." is not sickly out of control. Maybe immature...maybe.
--Jimmy
Here here.
Where? Where?
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mhear.html/
#!/usr/bin/english
That's not even an overstatement; it's the headline of some completely different story. "Mozilla Community: Prone to Exaggeration" maybe. But not even half as much as the troll who wrote this article.
Check out the Apostrophe open-source CMS: http://www.apostrophenow.com/