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?"

Comments

I call troll

[bj8rn]

This story is nothing but a blatant troll. It has no content other than "the Firefox community are immature". The only proof the author offers to support his claim is that "the number of total Firefox downloads is misleading". I can't really tell what one has to do with the other, as the author has sort of jumped to the conclusion...nay, not even that. He's first come up with the idea that the members of the Firefox community are immature, and only then tried to come up with "arguments" to prove this.

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

Re:I call troll

[sbrown123]

There's one crucial difference: honesty.

Mozilla is honest. The figure they give is how many downloads they have counted . Now, how many of those downloads were from unique users? Thats a mystery there.

McDonalds has for years advertised they have served "millions" and later "billions" of people. Interestingly, they never spent the time to figure out that some of those billions served were sometimes the same people going back for more (sick bastards). But that fact doesn't matter since the truth is that McDonalds "served" that many people, not "served" that many unique people. And McDonalds is an advertising monster! They thought advertising the number served was a good idea. Probably 99.9% of Americans today know of that particular advertisement. That advertisement campaign was sooo good we all remember it! So, your idea that number counting in advertisements is not an effective means of promotion you are really, really wrong in that assumption.

Re:I call troll

[KarateExplosions]

And then the question becomes... Is McDonald's more immature for advertising how many billions they've served (obviously meaning burgers, not people), or for having a clown for a spokesman?

Re:I call troll

[Bogtha]

I wish that there was a way to eliminate the editors entirely and put everything on autopilot. Let the readers choose the stories, let the readers decide what topics are important.

This is exactly how Digg operates. Unfortunately, you are overestimating just how useful other readers are in determining which topics are important. Turns out, most people are idiots, and this is reflected in the stories that make it to the front page. The only real difference with Slashdot is that you can hold somebody accountable for the idiocy.

I think a hybrid approach would be better. Let Digg-style voting filter the unpopular articles away, and then let a group of site editors fix the writeup and decide which make it to the front page.

resort to using third-class promotional tactics?

[lordkuri]

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.

Let the software speak for itself

[fak3r]

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.

There is no bad publicity.

[Chas]

Just like this guy and his snarky opinions are now getting his site lots of traffic.

Soylent Green

[KarateExplosions]

The burgers are people!

And with 175 Billion served, they have done us a wonderful population-control service.