World Firefox Day

kbrosnan writes "Are you a fan of Firefox? Want to spread the word to a friend who hasn't heard of it yet? If you can convince just one person to switch to Firefox before September 15th, you'll both be immortalized in Firefox 2.0's source code."

Comments

Alternative to the promotion

[patio11]

If you want to be known for all eternity as someone who did not spam your friends and family, post here and be immortalized on Slashdot and the will-someday-be-omniscient Google Cache.

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[tritone]

Here's a serious alternative that avoids some of the problems brought up and is more fun. Post all the names online somewhere and have a secret easter-egg hidden in Firefox that will connect and display them.

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[Anonymous Coward]

I just wonder what would happen if my name was

*/ do_virus();

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[piratePenguin]

From the FAQ (http://www.worldfirefoxday.com/en/faq.php#q12):

Will my friend and I be spammed by Mozilla or anyone else by giving our email addresses?

No. We ask you for a valid email address to prevent anonymous use of the nomination form. You enter your friend's email address so you can send them a single customizable invitation, but Mozilla won't send any additional emails to your friend. And we won't share either of your email addresses with any third parties.

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[Jaysyn]

My question is, what if you've already got 10-20 people to switch?

Jaysyn

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[Anonymous Coward]

My question is, what if you've already got 10-20 people to switch?

Then I ask you what you've done for me today.

Firefox

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd be teased about having a stupid name at school?

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[kfg]

I am not unaware that if I am not careful my biographer is going to have a field day with the shit I post here, much of it rather embaressing from a legacy perspective.

Your jibe has a legitimate barb to it. We are being "immortalized" in ways never before and it will have an affect on the way history is done in the future.

KFG

Re:Alternative to the promotion

[Anonymous Coward]

As I understand it, your "serious alternative" is what they are planning to do. The only thing that refers to inclusion in source code is the slashdot submission, which is hardly a reliable source...

Alternative Method

[jvalenzu]

How about fixing some bugs, or shrinking that memory footprint. Then you can be immortalized in the code *and* you don't have to be a nuisance to your friends.

Re:Alternative Method

[in2mind]

Hell yea. My idea of celebrating worldfirefox day is getting the HUGE memory leak squashed. [ My FF current on 150 MB out of my 256 MB RAM !] .

Re:Alternative Method

[slashdot-jake]

I was actually giving this some thought the other day and perhaps firefox should use one of the C++ garbage collecting libraries. A webbrowser really just needs to be usable and low on memory, no crtical speed requirements as long as the UI is responsive, websites render quickly, and javascript interprets at decent speeds (none of which a garbage collector would slow down). Firefox developers could still focus on keeping the memory footprint down, but applying a garbage collector is a good solution because its unlikely they'll ever remove every memory leak. This would remove most of them, help detect others, and keep the remaining problems minimal.

Re:Alternative Method

[Threni]

> Hell yea. My idea of celebrating worldfirefox day is getting the HUGE memory leak squashed.

It's not a leak it it's intentional - it's simply huge memory usage.

Re:Alternative Method

[spinel]

I think it is strange that someone who pretends to know something about computers would think that additional lines of comments in source code will result in a larger executable.

Re:Alternative Method

[Vexorian]

Too many people get the +4 insightful modiffier for trolling latelly.

Re:Alternative Method

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are talking about your parent post, you need to read it again. That is not what it said at all. The poster was suggesting that improving the quality of the product would be better marketing than actual marketing. He did not even imply that comments would make the executable larger. (Memory footprint is what it uses when it is RUNNING, not the size of the executable, and is something that firefox has gotten a lot of criticism about.)

Re:Alternative Method

[shiva mantri]

its not a bug, its a feature :-D

Re:Alternative Method

[in2mind]

Let them call it what they want - Leak / Mem Usage - I dont care. Let them just fix that !
Also the awful start up time !! Even the best IE basher will accept that IE is far better in this case!!!!

World Firefox day? Grrrr.

Re:Alternative Method

[KiloByte]

Faced with memory leaks on one side, and swiss cheese security on the other, the choice is pretty obvious. If it's slow -- I can survive. If it gets me pwned -- I'm dead (well, or vmwared...).

This said, these words are posted using eLinks. Now, if Taco changed the layout to move all the menus and links to the end of the file...

Re:Alternative Method

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"It's not a leak it it's intentional - it's simply huge memory usage."

If it's by design, then there's no excuse for not providing an off switch for it.

Re:Alternative Method

[nacturation]

Screw that. I'm going to fork the code and put my name in every other line.

Okay, might not be the most scalable solution. So how about displaying a full-page ad in some obscure newspaper? I've got this great idea... make it all yellow, include a picture of Mount Rushmore, and then claim that dead presidents who knew nothing about computers would actually use it because it's FREE FREE FREE. Yeah! Now I just need to start raising money.

Re:Alternative Method

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"there fucking is you moron. Every time firefox gets mentioned in a /. article, a thousand morons complain about the memory problem. It is something due to be repeated from now until then end of eternity."

If they didn't put a clear UI into FF to change this setting (or pick a better default), then of COURSE it's bound to be repeated from here until eternity. As I said, no excuse.

Re:Alternative Method

[Anonymous Coward]

I like how a FireFox screw-up makes everybody else a moron.

Re:Alternative Method

[silverkniveshotmail.]

The only thing that uses more memory than firefox for me is trillian. But maybe I'm using an old version.

Re:Alternative Method

[MyLongNickName]

You've noticed that in your three months with Slashdot?

(please mod +4 Insightful)

Re:Alternative Method

[The Real Toad King]

That's how I got my name in it. (Even if it's only my first name and email address) http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvslog.cgi?file=mozilla/ browser/components/search/nsSearchService.js&rev=H EAD&mark=1.8#1.8 Besides, most of the people I know already switched to Firefox. Except for my parents, who feel they're perfectly fine with IE. (Even after they had to get their computer reformatted after some strange virus infecting it.)

Re:Alternative Method

[masterzora]

Ah, the benefits of Open Source :)

(Says the Firefox user & FOSS supporter...)

Re:Alternative Method

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't squash a memory leak, you can squash bugs, but you have to plug memory leaks.

OK, so this is a totally pointless post, but it's sorta true.

Re:Alternative Method

[jms1]

... unless you take into account that 99% of IE loads itself into memory with the desktop itself. think about how long it takes the typical windows desktop to load, and then guess how much of that time needs to be added to the IE side of your comparison.

firefox would load just as quickly, if not more quickly, if it had 99% of its code pre-loaded in memory like IE does.

Re:Alternative Method

[kimvette]

1. MSIE is preloaded. If you want that kind of performance from a browser, but don't want to run MSIE, may I suggest you switch operating systems and use a KDE desktop with an instance of konqueror preloaded?

2. It's a feature, not a memory leak*. Google for it, or if you're too lazy to search Google, go into about:config amd change the default setting for browser.sessionhistory.max_entries

3. As far as load time goes, how about putting it into your startup folder but keep it minimized until you want to use it? You'll have the same effect as MSIE, except you'll have an application button in your taskbar

* aside from Extensions which have memory leak problems, in which case don't use that extension, choose an alternative, or email the developer and let him know there's a defect in his code, preferably with steps to reproduce

Re:Alternative Method

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you using ForecastFox or original Adblock (i.e. not Plus)? Both of them are known to leak memory like crazy. My memory usage dropped to less than half what it was after I disabled ForecastFox and upgraded Adblock.

Re:Alternative Method

[Threni]

> Let them call it what they want - Leak / Mem Usage - I dont care. Let them just fix that !

It's open source. If you want it fixed, fix it.

> Also the awful start up time !! Even the best IE basher will accept that IE is far better in this
> case!!!!

You have to include part of the loading time for Windows with the time it takes IE to load if you're going to compare it with Firefox. Firefox loads pretty fast on my machine - perhaps you should invest in a more powerful computer?

Re:Alternative Method

[TheShadowzero]

Now Opera on the other hand has a good startup time and it isn't preloaded into memory.

Re:Alternative Method

[in2mind]

It's open source. If you want it fixed, fix it.

Now what argument is this......all the millions of firefox users are assumed to be programmers with the ability to fix source code?

As for the IE preloaded argument,Opera beats FF.

Re:Alternative Method

[in2mind]

It's a feature, not a memory leak*. Google for it, or if you're too lazy to search Google, go into about:config amd change the default setting for browser.sessionhistory.max_entries

Dude,I know that long long ago.Just that it doesnt solve the problem - even with zero cache.Others who have tried will agree.

Re:Alternative Method

[Joebert]

or shrinking that memory footprint

I don't that's just Firefox, Opera has been using alot more memory for me lately.

I have theorys that either,
A)Microsoft pulled some sort of namespace rug out from under the competition with a recent update (AKA obvious conspiracy theory),
or,
B) Common libraries have been rewritten to utilize more resources with the better systems that are around theese days (AKA most likely).

Re:Alternative Method

[It'sYerMam]

It's open source. If you want it fixed, fix it.

When will people learn? Not everyone has the means or motive to fix someone's buggy code. It does not take a programmer to notice a bug. It does take a programmer to fix it, though! I can tell when someone sings out of tune, but that doesn't mean I can sing in tune. Likewise, I can tell when someone's painting is dodgy, but that doesn't mean I want to paint a picture.

Re:Alternative Method

[gettingbraver]

I've used both Opera (in the past) and Firefox (more recently). Think I'll go back to Opera now.

Re:Alternative Method

[Threni]

> Now what argument is this......all the millions of firefox users are assumed to be programmers with
> the ability to fix source code?

They don't notice the memory leak, otherwise they'd have mentioned it to someone.

> As for the IE preloaded argument,Opera beats FF.

I don't have a problem with loading times. Perhaps Opera is faster at loading on machine with 256 megs of ram or something - I really don't care. You load it, and keep it running. Where's the problem?

Re:Alternative Method

[riscthis]

Also the awful start up time !! Even the best IE basher will accept that IE is far better in this case!!!!

Then Firefox Preloader is what you need: http://sourceforge.net/projects/ffpreloader/

If your user account has higher-than-user privileges you can combine this with SysInternals' PsExec to launch Firefox Preloader with limited permissions -- this ensures ensures Firefox will always run with low privs even if it's opened via a hyperlink from another program:

C:\bin\psexec.exe -l -d "C:\Program Files\FirefoxPreloader\FirefoxPreloader.exe"

(I first saw this tip in a blog comment on SysInternals site regarding PsExec and have used it ever since)

Re:Alternative Method

[ronadams]

1. MSIE is not only preloaded, it is the file browser. I draw this difference because GNOME has Epiphany (or these days, FF) preloaded, and many other OSes have some browser preloaded, and you won't get the same performace. That being said, objective speed tests show that when it comes to *loading* pages, IE is way behind. 2. There's more to it than that. There are several memory leaks in the code. 3. Putting it into your startup folder doesn't decrease the load time, it just makes it load at a different time. And Windows sucks so badly at multitasking (given that its a multitask emulator at best), I don't want another program running when I don't need it. *I totally agree: don't use leaky extensions, try alternatives, tell developers. Whining on /. is not going to fix da broken browzerz.

Re:Alternative Method

[Anonymous Coward]

And Windows sucks so badly at multitasking (given that its a multitask emulator at best), I don't want another program running when I don't need it.

Are you sure you actually use Windows? There's enough wrong with it that you don't have to exaggerate to make a point.

Re:Alternative Method

[XchristX]

One way to reduce start-up times is to always keep it in memory using Firefox Quickstarter:

http://mozillaqs.sourceforge.net/

  This chap built quickstarters for both Mozilla & Firefox. Doesn't addres the huge RAM usage, but it does effectively 'speed-up' starting the frontend (which does seem to have a tiny memory footprint, the main footprint is in the runtime environment itself...)

Re:Alternative Method

[m85476585]

There is a switch. Go to about:config and create a new Boolean called config.trim_on_minimize set to True. Now whenever you minimize Firefox its memory usage will be reduced significantly and it will not take up much more when you restore it. You should also update Adblock if you are getting an actual "leak" (it was fixed a while back).

Re:Alternative Method

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"There is a switch. Go to about:config and create a new Boolean called config.trim_on_minimize set to True."

That's not a switch, it's an obscure config operation. It should be a switch (i.e. checkbox) in the preferences panel. I'm talking about the visibility of the functionality, not the existence of it. (Yes, I wasn't originally that clear, I apologize.)

Re:Alternative Method

[m85476585]

Adding it to the UI would just increase bloat because eventually they would have to add every obscure option. In addition, less technical users wouldn't know whether it is better on or off. As mentioned below they should pick a better default (enabling config.trim_on_minimize). As far as I can tell there is very little downside to this option. It might make the browser be a little slower, but if it does I haven't noticed.

Re:Alternative Method

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Adding it to the UI would just increase bloat because eventually they would have to add every obscure option."

?? They'd add an option to fix a problem that LOTS of people complain about! There's no need to worry about the other stuff, this one's a biggie.

(I totally agree with what you said about the default, though. Probably a better suggestion than mine.)

Re:Alternative Method

[kbrosnan]

config.trim_on_minimize was set to false because when Firefox paged to the disk cache Firefox would hang for seveal seconds when restoring. You can read about it in gory deatail at bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76831 , sorry no link they block /. referers.

Re:Alternative Method

[KIFulgore]

"It's open source. If you want it fixed, fix it." You're right about one thing -- it is open source, so we don't have a right to complain. But I can always choose not to use it too. If the open source community for a product takes a "you fix it" stance then that software is doomed to fail.

Re:Alternative Method

[Threni]

> If the open source community for a product takes a "you fix it" stance then that software is doomed
> to fail.

OSS's track record suggests your conjecture is inaccurate. Linux, firefox etc aren't failing - at least, not on any platforms I've used them on. If you mean `fail` as in `not become commercially successful` - well, they're free, so how do you assess their success? Do you mean popular? Many OSS tools, apps, etc are very popular. What DO you mean?

Re:Alternative Method

[GuyverDH]

Opera is MUCH faster to load than firefox, even with 4GB of RAM.

I've actually removed firefox from my system, and will probably wait for the full release of 2.0 before re-evaluating.

Re:Alternative Method

[Threni]

> Opera is MUCH faster to load than firefox, even with 4GB of RAM.

Perhaps there's a problem with your CPU or something. I mean, there must be some reason why you're so unhappy with a one-off load time that's clearly of no consequence to millions of happy Firefox users.

Re:Alternative Method

[kimvette]

Not only that, if he doesn't like "multitask emulation" I hope that he steers clear of all uniprocessor computers, and sticks with only multiprocessor/dual core machines. After all, without multiple processors you can't have "true multitasking" because with a single CPU the CPU is only executing a single thread at a time anyhow, and simply swapping between them for short bits of time ("timeslicing" if you will. . . ), giving the appearance of "multitasking"

So, by his standard, Linux, BSD, Solaris, IRIX, VMS, MVS, OS/2, OS X, Mac OS, Hurd, Be OS, and even the famed-but-pretty-much-defunct "multitasking" pioneer AmigaOS all use what he terms "multitask emulation"

But, it's obvious he just wants to play semantics and troll for a response. Here's a hint: if you have a single processor, in general, you're doing nothing more than timeslicing, and never really running anything in parallel. Your criticism of Windows on that basis is false, since it also applies to whatever OS it is you prefer to be using. My crappy Pentium 4 machine here is running Linux, and yet the best it can do is "emulate multitasking" through timeslicing.

But get this: even when you have multiple processors, you are in general not really running more than two threads at once, on each processor, you are, in your term, "emulating multitasking." To get TRUE multitasking the likes of which you are implying, cable of running multiple threads on a single processor, you'd probably want a biological computer (er, let's call it a "brain") and a complex massive parallel processing program (let's call it "consciousness") but given everyone here personally owns one (barring a few racist trolls here and there) we know that even IT cannot multitask all that well much of the time, as evidenced by those who can't walk and chew gum or who cannot drive and use a cellphone simultaneously (or not well, at any rate).

(I tried to blend funny and a retort to the AC's parent's implication that Windows doesn't multitask but Linux/other OS does)

now this...

[joe 155]

...is a good idea, it gets people like us who like firefox, and would secretly like to have their names in the code, to go out and really try to get other prople to use Firefox in a way that costs nothing for them (well, almost nothing). So everyone wins... I'm going to do it now.

Re:now this...

[masterzora]

It is similarly a good idea to simply summarize the whole point of the site and watch the +1 insightful mods roll right in.... I mean, you didn't even say anything of your own, let alone anything insightful!

Re:now this...

[joe 155]

"now this is a good idea"

This is a comment stating my thoughts on the matter, and as such is a "thing of [my] own"

"it gets people like us who like firefox, and would secretly like to have their names in the code, to go out and really try to get other prople to use Firefox"

this might be the point of the article but it doesn't explicitly say this, and mentioning that I, like a lot of other people, would like this as something to say "hey, I'm on Firefox" is again my own thought; it is my no means a given.

"in a way that costs nothing for them (well, almost nothing)."

This is my judgement and again not mentioned on the site. "almost nothing" is implying that they might have to pay for bandwidth and a few other overheads, but again it is my judgement that this cost is so small that the project is acceptable on a cost/benifit basis. "So everyone wins... I'm going to do it now."

Another value judgement by me and all my own thoughts. Saying I'm going to do it indicates that people will be willing to do it as a way of helping. I fail to see how you can say that this doesn't deserve any possitive moderation, even summary of the site is useful but as I have shown it went far beyond that and it was small enough to be read quickly; to keep people interested.

Re:now this...

[Anonymous Coward]

You want fame and fortune? Show up as a guest on Jerry Springer!

Re:now this...

[masterzora]

"now this is a good idea" might be your own thought, but it has no substance at all. It certainly isn't insightful in any way.

"it gets people like us who like firefox, and would secretly like to have their names in the code, to go out and really try to get other prople to use Firefox"
So what if it doesn't explicitly state it? Many made-for-TV movies have shootings occur offscreen, and it's not explicitly stated that somebody is dead, but I'm not insightful for saying "OMG Harry shot Fred!!!!!" And it might not be given that people would like the idea of being in a comment in the Firefox source, but it is a given that the entire point of this project is to appeal to people who would. It doesn't become insightful just by changing it from an abstract third-person to a single-person plural.

"in a way that costs nothing for them (well, almost nothing)."
So what if it's not specifically mentioned? There is nothing insightful about it at *all*, just as it wouldn't be insightful for me to say that word-of-mouth is good advertisement because it has little to no cost. It's kind of obvious to most people.

So all we have from you now are obvious statements and substance-less value judgements. Your implied wish to participate is far from insightful or any other real moderation. Summary of the site is useful if TFP doesn't have it, but stating the obvious point of what is already summarized in TFP is not. I'm sorry, there is just nothing mod-worthy about your post and the only reason it got modded at all is that it appeals to the /. groupthink.

not a person, but a company.

[lanswitch]

Add Microsoft. They make people switch to firefox.

Re:not a person, but a company.

[stunt_penguin]

Yea like burning ships make people switch to lifeboats.

self-fulfilling prophesy?

[griffjon]

So, we all know that as the user-base increases in size and diversifies, the code tends towards bloat, but really, do you have to make it a 1:1 ratio??

Re:self-fulfilling prophesy?

[smokeslikeapoet]

I assume that all the names would be inserted into the code as comments, meaning the names won't be compiled into the binary. I'm not a cvs master or anything but I assume you can exclude the directory that contains the names when you update your source locally.

Re:self-fulfilling prophesy?

[Anonymous Coward]

whooosh!

Yeah, he knew that. Yes, it's easy to keep the names from adding to the executable size and you don't have to be a Makefile expert to keep it from recompiling very often. The poster was merely noting the humuorous math of adding a "line of code for every new user." I'll wager that windows has a greater than 1 to 1 ratio without counting the comments.

Re:self-fulfilling prophesy?

[Rooked_One]

I remember in my feeble attempt to learn java that all you had to do was comment something out and the compiler would completely ignore it. So its probably good to assume (Besides the fact that the setup file would increase in size vastly) that it will just be in the tree. I didn't even think of that before you said something.

Re:self-fulfilling prophesy?

[joseprio]

If you take a look at the FAQ, "How will our names be included in Firefox 2?", it seems that there will be an option to display all the names... then, I assume that the name list will be distributed with Firefox 2.0 (hopefully in a data file, not into the code!).

Re:self-fulfilling prophesy?

[jesser]

I think these names are not being added to the source code, but rather added to a page hosted on mozilla.org that will be accessible in some way from Firefox's UI.

Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so long.

[A beautiful mind]

you'll both be immortalized in Firefox 2.0's source code

This finally explains the recent bloat in Firefox. :-)

And what a fitting tribute

[192939495969798999]

Because we know how many people will read through that to find your name... one... you! Anyhow, I think I'll refer tons of people just to get a really large font mention in the source, maybe I can get every other line even. Of course, I'd prefer to have all the variables named after me, carmen electra, and awesome. Awesome = me * carmen electra. That would be sweet!

Re:And what a fitting tribute

[grahamlee]

Before anyone complains about font sizes and source code, we actually have an in-house scripting language where the keywords are [coincidentally ;-)] identical to some RTF control codes.

Um... hang on a sec...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's Open Source - I can just immortalise myself in the code and compile it myself.

Tch... trying to use capitalist tactics to increase your market share! What next, are you going to start selling it? ;o)

Kids

[Joebert]

Amongst some of the names allready registered,

1) Harry Sachs
2) Hugh G Rection
3) Ivana Tinkle

Re:Kids

[Anonymous Coward]

Already. A single L.

Re:Kids

[Joebert]

Already. A single L.

Funny thing is, I bet I remember how to spell it from now on. :)

Re:Kids

[Anonymous Coward]

What about : Mike Hunt and his brother, Warrick Hunt? And mustn't forget Hugh Janus either. :)

Re:Kids

[Anonymous Coward]

Seymour Cox, the urologist.

Re:Kids

[joel8x]

Looks like I'll have to switch my buddy Mike Hunt as well.

Re:Kids

[Anonymous Coward]

billgates@microsoft.com

Amway?

[Frankie70]

Is Firefox taking the Amway route now?

Re:Amway?

[Trazk]

No, Amway was a multi-level marketing system that paid people for getting others to join. Amway would get a chunk of the money from the products they sell to members. It was a concept where money flowed upstream. Making the people who got in early extremely rich without having to do any work.

With Firefox there isn't any money involved, so it isn't anything like Amway.

It's more like Pepsi, really. Asking someone to switch from Coke to Pepsi and offering to give them a free case of Pepsi for doing so. Pepsi loses money on the deal, but they gain more customers. See the difference?

Re:Amway?

[airlynx]

That was my first impression, except I don't get anything but a mention for a referral. Give me $20 and I might care. Besides, what about us that coerce everyone we know to switch to Firefox? I don't have any friends running anything else anymore, how do I get my mention?

Re:Amway?

[pairo]

What does Firefox/Mozilla Project lose in this case? 50 bytes of bandwidth for each source download per user?

What's the point?

[Bodero]

What's the point? I'll probably just be commented out.

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll probably be ok, but I'll probably get commented out.

Last time I got my name in browser code it caused a few problems, but that's what comes with being called document.write('<blink><H1>Hello World!!!</H1></blink>');

Re:What's the point?

[vrwarp]

From the FAQ: How will our names be included in Firefox 2? If both you and your friend opt-in to have your names included, we'll add your names to an interactive Firefox friends display that will be accessible from within Firefox 2.

Re:What's the point?

[A beautiful mind]

I'm starting to be afraid that PR is crushing what dare I say, used to be, a geek browser.

Firefox 2.0 gives us, what:

- Builtin spellchecking. Woohoo! I don't want that in Firefox. There is already an extension to do just exactly what this feature does. If someone wants spellchecking, go install the extension. - Firefox friends. I don't want this much evangelisation. I will most likely never look at the thousands of names listed. Why would I? I want a technological masterpiece not a PR one.

This PR push makes my approval towards FF dwindle, what do you think an average people would say? "Geez, it's just a friggin browser...". Separate PR from the browser. That is why spreadfirefox.com, NY time ads and stuff like that aren't totally useless, but as soon as you touch the maximalist geek perfection idea of mine how a browser should be like, you lose the rubber stamp of geek approval.

I want a secure, fast, technically elegant, standards supporting browser with a flexible extension system. That's it. Stop the bloat. Stop the PR. I don't even need extra special tabbing, just some basic one, if it doesn't suck ram like a madman.

I know feature creep is tempting. It gives you a nice feeling that you've implemented something, etc. BUT IT LEADS TO BLOAT. I think inevitably the Netscape -> Mozilla -> Firefox cycle will start again soon. "Hey, let's create a new fast , slim browser and let's call it firebird!" What an innovative idea...

Re:What's the point?

[vinohradska]

Yes, but does your MOTHER want built-in spell checking? Or does she prefer the learning experience of having to hunt down some far flung plug-in and install it? You yourself have already installed the plugin, thus voting for its usefulness, but your poor mother, who will never find that plugin, will be forced to speell badley and look like a foool.

Your mother suffers for your ideology! Think of your mother!

Sure, the PR push is a bit lame, most PR is, big deal, but don't bash the spell checker! That is the one killer feature I want!

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I want to install zillions of extensions for stuff that more then likely should be included in a modern web browser by default.

So I need to download a Tab extension, a Spelling extension, a Java/Javascript extension, a Bookmark extension, a Flash extension, a RSS extension, an Extension handeling extension, a Download Manager extension, etc.

Yep, I can see people leaving Opera and IE in droves for FireFox now......

Seeeesh, I had a Tab Manager that was a lot better and let me move tabs around, but I supported the inclusion of the feature to move the tabs around because it improves on the broswer's default settings. I can still use the Tab Manager if I wan't, yet it is nice to have some default feature you don't have to add with extensions. With say spelling, it also means that when I go to someone eles's computer(work, college, friend, etc) that feature will be there, and I don't have to muck around with their settings(if I can).

Re:What's the point?

[gettingbraver]

Built-in spellchecking is kind of insulting to the user.

Re:What's the point?

[ning]

I couldn't agree more. Firefox is meant to be about what it doesn't contain, not what 'features' (read bloat) have been added. Make Firefox slimmer, get rid of the bugs, make it start up quicker and make it more secure. It's not sexy but then, it is only a browser. Don't make it the victim of some horrid tick-list feature bloat marketing.

I can't help...

[excelsior_gr]

...all the people that I know have already switched to Firefox. The people that refused to switch, I now pretend not to know.

Re:I can't help...

[MrSquirrel]

A fellow IS worker had me clean up her computer (she had a doozy of an AdArson) didn't have Firefox on her computer so I had to install it for her and went through my 30 minute spiel about how much better it is than IE (she was like "oh I don't want this I love IE" before my speech). There are still a few (though very few) people "in the know" who use IE as their standard browser (then again, how "in the know" is she if she had to have someone else fix her computer). It amazes me that there are still people stuck on IE, even when they know about Firefox, Opera, and all the other good browsers out there. More functionality + safer + FREE = why not switch?

Re:I can't help...

[NemosomeN]

I have to admit, I switched from Firefox to IE7. IE7 isn't bad, it's a huge improvement. I never liked Firefox, but when they killed the Mozilla suite, I was kinda forced over. I keep Firefox around on my Windows machine for a few sites that still have bugs in IE7, but hopefully they will get worked out eventually (They are rather rare). Safari on my other computer. I might try FF when it hits 2.0, but I sure as hell won't be compiling from source. F that.

Re:I can't help...

[Anonymous Coward]

"IE7 isn't bad..."

But it's still an out-dated brower from the get-go (no CSS2 even). Turn in your geek card at the front office.

Re:I can't help...

[arth1]

excelsior_gr (969383) wrote:

...all the people that I know have already switched to Firefox. The people that refused to switch, I now pretend not to know.

The friends I call worthy of being friends have by now switched from Firefox to one of the many less bloated and more configurable alternatives (many of which use the same underlying Gecko engine).
Firefox is so yesteryear.

Re:I can't help...

[spacefight]

Mozilla as a Suite is not dead. Checkout Seamonkey.

Re:I can't help...

[spacefight]

Those would be...? Flock?

Re:I can't help...

[jZnat]

People like you (as well as the IE developers) are why us web designers are still making IE hacks so that web pages display as frickin' web pages and not shit on a shingle like the default renderring of IE is.

Re:I can't help...

[jZnat]

K-Meleon (Windows), Camino (Mac OS X), and Epiphany (Linux, BSD, etc). They use the Gecko renderring engine, but cut some bloat and render the interface using a native GUI rather than via XUL.

Re:I can't help...

[NemosomeN]

People like me? I didn't do anything. Blame Microsoft. IE7 is on the road to standards compliance, but for now it's close enough. Ironic as it is, Firefox will become more viable when IE7 is compliant, because then it will render webpages "correctly" when they are designed with IE in mind. IE7 doesn't really have the extra bloat that Firefox has picked up, either (key word: extra. If I use Firefox, I'm STILL going to have some parts of IE running anyway). Though, I admit, I used Mozilla, which was pretty bloated as well. The world isn't perfect,

Re:I can't help...

[kbrosnan]

SeaMonkey 1.0 It is the community release of what would have been Mozilla Suite 1.8.

Waste of bandwidth

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets say I download firefox 2 source to compile on my linux boxen. I am also forced to download kilobytes (megabytes?) of useless information embedded in comments. What is the point in this? I would like a dollar amount for what this campaign is costing in bandwidth and man hours. Would this be funds donated to the Mozilla Foundation in order for them to improve their browser? This wastage annoys me.

Furthermore we now run the risk of "that fox-fire thing" being associated with unwanted, unsolicited email advertising.

One step forward, two steps back.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

I would like a dollar amount for what this campaign is costing in bandwidth and man hours.

I would estimate that the amount of bandwidth/man hours wasted by this campaign will roughly equal the amount of bandwidth/man hours wasted by your post (and my reply :-)

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[prichardson]

Wastage?

Fuck you for diluting the language.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[FooBarWidget]

Text can be easily compressed by 80-90% by bzip2. Suppose that there are 100.000 names in the code, and the average length of a name is 15 characters. Counting newlines and comment prefixes (in the form of " * [name here]"), the space taken will be 100000 * (15 + 4) = 1900000 bytes, or 1855 KB. If the file is compressed by 85% then it'll become 278 KB. In comparison, the current Firefox 2.0b1 source tar.bz2 is 32 MB. 278 KB is about 0.8% of that. Hardly significant comparing that you as a Slashdotter probably has a broadband connection.

There are many things to worry about but worrying about wasting bandwidth on names is just rediculous.

Besides, marketing is important! You as a geek may not realize it, but crappy products can be more popular than your oh-so-mighty technically correct ones if the former is marketed better than the latter. While you're screaming on forums about the technical superiority of product B, everybody else is using the 'inferior' product A and couldn't care less what you moan about.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[Anonymous Coward]

"Lets say I download firefox 2 source to compile on my linux boxen."

Let's say that you worry about it when you actually do download the source.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[nacturation]

Wastage?
Fuck you for diluting the language.

Oh, come now. I found it perfectly cromulent.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[Reverend528]

Better yet, store the names in a Bloom Filter. Sure it's lossy, but it can fit an unlimited number of names into an arbitrarily small space.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[flooey]

You as a geek may not realize it, but crappy products can be more popular than your oh-so-mighty technically correct ones if the former is marketed better than the latter.

What, in the browser market? Surely you jest.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[chris_eineke]

There are many things to worry about but worrying about wasting bandwidth on names is just rediculous.

But... think of the tubes!

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[drsquare]

It won't just be in the source it'll be in the actual program itself. 278k can take several minutes to download on dialup, just for something you'll never see.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[FooBarWidget]

And that 3-4 minutes is significant compared to how many hours it takes to download the entire file?

I've found that even modem users these days usually don't care how long it takes to download something, as long as it's easy. If people care *that* much about download time then:
- Everybody would have switched away from MP3 to Ogg/AAC (which offer the same quality for less space).
- Commercial developers wouldn't bundle dependencies with their installer, but instead would ask people to download dependencies seperately. This certainly saves bandwidth because users don't have to download the dependency again if they want to upgrade the program. But in reality, people would rather wait than spending time to download an extra file.

Download time is overrated, only some geeks care about it. And even then, they usually only care about it because of emotions.

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[mkw87]

Suppose that there are 100.000 names in the code

[american=on]Whats with the extensive sig figs?[/american]

Re:Waste of bandwidth

[Anonymous Coward]

Suppose that there are 100.000 names in the code, and the average length of a name is 15 characters. Counting newlines and comment prefixes (in the form of " * [name here]"), the space taken will be 100000 * (15 + 4) = 1900000 bytes, or 1855 KB. If the file is compressed by 85% then it'll become 278 KB. In comparison, the current Firefox 2.0b1 source tar.bz2 is 32 MB. 278 KB is about 0.8% of that.

Might work for you, John Smith. But Vijayalakshmi Ravindranath, Alejandro Ruiz Montoya de Las Cruces, and Mohammed Ibn Sulaiman Ibn Abdul Aziz Al Ribdi and their friends are hoping to change that outside the anglo world.

Ok so...

[vivin]

This is just bragging rights... right? I guess at the very least you convince someone to switch to Firefox. I mean... so they put umptybillion names into Firefox Code, that would be accessible from Firefox 2? Isn't that unecessary (and frivolous) bloat? Unless they plan on having you access it online - which means I guess you won't be able to view it offline... hmm...

And how do they verify that my "friend" has Firefox? I can just send off an invitation to some fake email I create and then accept it. Or send it someone that I know already uses firefox and wants their name on the list too... Seems like there's no real way to verify it.

Then what happens when Firefox 3.0 comes along? Hmm? Do the names get carried over?

I'll go try it anyways...

Re:Ok so...

[gitargr8]

Isn't that unecessary (and frivolous) bloat?

I would assume that the names would be included into a commented section of the code, which is ignored by the compilers, which would add nothing to the size of the .exe.

Re:Ok so...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you go to the site it says you can access it from Firefox. If the names are comments, you won't be able to access it from code, because like you said, they won't be compiled. So they have to be part of the code.

Re:Ok so...

[tomhudson]

If you go to the site it says you can access it from Firefox. If the names are comments, you won't be able to access it from code, because like you said, they won't be compiled. So they have to be part of the code.

ummm - news flash - firefox is a web browser/b>. All they have to do is include a link on the toolbar to a web site, some AJAX, and there is your "interactive access from firefox".

Re:Ok so...

[trogdor8667]

The Google/Firefox referral ads which AdSense offers can tell when someone installs FireFox who hasn't before (if someone clicks on a Firefox referral link that has FireFox already installed, it won't count as a referral). My guess is this will work the same way.

Re:Ok so...

[kbrosnan]

I am not sure about the technical details about this project but no matter how they accomplish it, none of it will be in Firefox 3.* The code for Firefox 2 is already on a CVS branch. This means that code changes on the branch are not reflected on the trunk uless someone makes a check in to the trunk. *unless they apply same marketing strategy for Firefox 3. But I doubt they would marketing people like to try different things.

Re:Ok so...

[RealGrouchy]

Then what happens when Firefox 3.0 comes along? Hmm? Do the names get carried over?

No, it said that the names will be "immortalized in Firefox 2.0's source code". I can only assume (and hope) that it won't be transferred to 2.0.1.

- RG>

Regardless of the FireFox Day

[rangeva]

I recommend my fiends and family to at least try firefox, regardless of any google/firefox incentive. Firefox is just a good browser - period.

Re:Regardless of the FireFox Day

[soliloqy]

I told my family and friends that if they weren't using Firefox, I would no longer help them remove spyware from their computers. Oddly enough, since I did that, they haven't needed my help..

Do we need to encourage evangelism?

[gihan_ripper]

Firefox has reached sufficient popularity and code maturity that it doesn't need to encourage evangelism. Sure, I use Firefox and I'd recommend it to most Explorer users, and I've already converted those close to me. However, I'm not going to go on a Firefox Crusade as that would stink of zealotry and probably hurt the cause. As other posters have said, Mozilla should put their efforts into bug fixes and usability issues. Yes, I know this isn't a zero-sum game, but we'd all be more likely to recommend Firefox if they could clear up the excessive memory usage 'feature' and the odd keyboard scrolling problem that took me ages to figure out.

Re:Do we need to encourage evangelism?

[bobsledbob]

I agree with you. Being a long time Firefox user, I have no real desire to engage in this evangelism as you put it.

However, thinking about the newly converted, I'm guessing there's a lot of folks who are still goofily happy over finding and using Firefox that their enthusiasm to engage in this campaign will be great.

Because of the large number of recent convertees, I'm sure this campaign may very will succeed. I guess we'll see.

Ah man...

[nother_nix_hacker]

...as if firefox wasn't already bloated enough! :D

Re:Ah man...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm getting fucked off with people saying this and it getting modded insightful, this will not create any problem as it won't be executed by Firefox when it is running... this is about as insightful as saying "If I take out all the lines in the config files that have # at the start of them it's bound to make it all run faster"... it's ignored. Stupid mods.

One thing that makes me uncomfortable...

[alex_guy_CA]

One thing that makes me uncomfortable is being asked to proselytize. If someone wants FF, great. but it is not my job to convince them. I learned a meditation technique and was turned off when the class teachers asked to get my friends to do it. World FF day makes me feel the same way. People can make their own decisions.

Re:One thing that makes me uncomfortable...

[Anonimouse]

Amen to that one. I must be one of the few on /. that are bored stiff with FF stories. The rampant zealotry seems to have died down a bit in recent months, but still with the spread FF campaign, FF flicks and now this, i can't help but draw parallels with desperate publicity whores like some of those teeny boppers and big brother winners. Sooner or later people get sick of it and totally turn off. Far better to just quietly improve the product. The product, if it is good will speak for itself.

Re:One thing that makes me uncomfortable...

[wondafucka]

I know where you are coming from. I once applied for a job selling knives until I saw them cut a penny with the kitchen shears and then proceded to shove a clipboard in my face. They wanted the names of friends and family BEFORE I was even offered a "position". (Naturally I left the interview).

The other side of this story, is that there are some families who actually want a decent set of knives (yes, the knives were very nice).

An informal poll of my office revealed that about 80% have never heard of Firefox (What you say? What sort of unintelligent rubes do I work with? I work with some pretty damn smart engineers that have families and social lives and barely spend time on the internet except to download a datasheet). I have non-technical friends who have also never heard of firefox. Nobody's asking you to try and win over people who will get annoyed. There is a lot of momentum that can be gained for this and all open source movements before IE7 is released and most of the FF features are rendered "meh" to the casual internet user.

If you can't think of someone who you can convince to switch without a hassle, then don't try. No one is going to think less of you. You are probably already surrounded by intelligent proactive people. If there's an aunt or coworker who would shit there pants if they saw tabbed browsing or any of the awesome extensions that have been written, then drop them a line. I personally think it would be cool to have my name in source code without having to worry about getting a phone call three years later.

Re:One thing that makes me uncomfortable...

[Thorsten Timberlake]

People can make their own decisions.
I'll remember that if I'm ever in california and need, say, a photographer :P

Re:One thing that makes me uncomfortable...

[killjoe]

Companies have marketing departments and ad agencies to get the word out about their products. Open source software has you. Who else is supposed to do it?

Re:One thing that makes me uncomfortable...

[shish]

The product, if it is good will speak for itself

Are you thinking about what you're saying? A blob of code sitting on a webserver and not being downloaded isn't going to talk to anyone -- what you're probably thinking of is "The product, if it is good will have people spread it by word of mouth", which in this day and age, still isn't enough~

You're ass-u-ming...

[Anonymous Coward]

That /.'ers have friends.

Just pointing out the obvious flaw here.

Re:You're ass-u-ming...

[ScrewMaster]

Slashdotters have friends! Granted, most of them are invisible.

done!

[immorak]

It's done! Now i have to wait until sometime after September 15th? Wait, why did i do this again?

got someone ELSE'S confirmation

[dmd]

When I submitted, it gave me someone ELSE'S email address as confirmation, and then emailed me THEIR confirmation, too.

Not good.

Re:got someone ELSE'S confirmation

[ScrewMaster]

No, that's fine. It's the new "social networking" feature of Firefox. Make new friends, etc.

Re:got someone ELSE'S confirmation

[dmd]

Not only that, but the confirmation link they email you doesn't work - it just sends you back to the home page.

My idea of celebrating World Firefox Day...

[Pink Tinkletini]

...is thanking God I use Safari instead. >:-)

Re:My idea of celebrating World Firefox Day...

[metroplex]

... or Camino, which is even better and cleaner in my opinion (if you can live whitout RSS support).

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[wtmcgee]

How is that insightful?

Funny perhaps, but not insightful.

The names will be commented out, therefore will not be complied in any binary that sees the light of day.

parent is a troll

[Eric Coleman]

I have no idea how the parent post got modded as "interesting". Or perhaps since it's posted anonymously the person modded his or herself.

This quote is funny because it's retarded: "I am also forced to download kilobytes (megabytes?) of useless information embedded in comments." News flash, this is slashdot. You download useless information embedded in comments every day. And this is one of them!

NO Mention of source code

[linuxci]

There's no mention at all on the world Firefox day website that the names will be listed in the source. From what I can see this'll just be a link to a site that lists the names (probably accessible from the 'about' box). So there'll be no bloat to the source, not even as a comment.

Re:NO Mention of source code

[zlogic]

Here's the quote from http://www.worldfirefoxday.com/en/faq.php#q11

"How will our names be included in Firefox 2?

If both you and your friend opt-in to have your names included, we'll add your names to an interactive Firefox friends display that will be accessible from within Firefox 2."

It says interactive so I guess there will be some XUL/AJAX hybrid that displays 10 names at a time, probably with a search function.

On the other hand:

"How do I see the names in Firefox 2?

We're working on the details of this and will share this soon."

"That's funny..."

[Sivar]

"...The browser is only 29.2MB, but the source code download is over 11GB."

Re:"That's funny..."

[YU Nicks NE Way]

Well, actually, the Windows .exe is only 29.2MB, but it requires a mandatory optional 11GB download called "requiredoptionalresources.dll", which is a pure resource DLL.

For Linux, of course, you need to d/l the entire tarball.

I'm hoping for better

[fuzzy12345]

Man, if the only memory of me is a comment in some obscure early twenty-first century software written in a language not built to last (*ahem* unlike Lisp), then I've really failed to make my mark here on earth.

Re:I'm hoping for better

[6Yankee]

But there's a Slashdot comment as well, now.

And the legend that will become 6Yankee the Terrible replied to it!

Firefox does a good job marketing...

[cyclocommuter]

I gotta hand it to the Firefox team though... They do a good job marketing Firefox. In this day and age, it no longer is enough to have a superior product or have a better mousetrap especially if the competion has the desktop monopolized... every opportunity to spread the word helps.

Re:Firefox does a good job marketing...

[arth1]

I gotta hand it to the Firefox team though... They do a good job marketing Firefox.

They most certainly do -- it's a well-marketed product.
However, if you don't take hype at face value, and compare it to, say, Seamonkey without mail/irc compiled in, you'll find that it's slower, bigger, and dumbed down (many of the options available in Mozilla and Seamonkey have been removed from the UI, in order to not scare granma and CEOs away). But well hyped, I'll give you, and they do a good job at deliberately NOT letting people know about the alternatives (like Seamonkey).

Regards,
--
*Art

Tack a magnetic flag on your SUV

[onehippo]

As Bill Maher would say: It's the very least you can do.

One of the prime motivators of OSS contributors is noosphere recognition. I personally think this is the equivalent of tacking a magnetic flag on your SUV.

Immortalized in Firefox 2.0's source code

[EqualSlash]

Immortalized in Firefox 2.0's source code? I guess that's going to be like this /* DO NOT REMOVE THIS!

      John
      Jack
      Joe ...
*/

Its like cake with no Salt.

[AgNO3]

OK I don't like IE but literally to open slashdot then click on this story Firefox is using 66260k. So Just out of curiosity I opened IE. and open the same exact pages leading back to this slashdot story. 35628k WHY? Really why. Oh and uh why every few seconds does the firefox amount increase and IE stays the same?? Really this is not a troll or a flame thing. I just want to know why my IE with google and yahoo toolbars uses less memory then Firefox by near double? Oh and firefox is now using 65964k with out doing anything but displaying the page. REally HELP.

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[Anonymous Coward]

There are many poorly written firefox plugins out there, do you happen to use one of them?

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[qsqueeq]

Has anyone ever tried to hibernate windows with firefox running and a few tabs open? Usually when windows comes back up Firefox is hogging 99% of the cpu and running up the memory usage. IE doesn't do anythinge similar :( I have put this in as a bug a few times, but I think it's still a problem.

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[TheSalzar]

could it be that since MS made IE and most likly ur OS, and they are integrated very tightly. Get sum gigs of ram, if you cant aviod certian plugins. Like adblock in my experince with FF on win98 on 300mhz pII with 96mb of ram (everyday work comp), it works i can have bundles of tabs and shit going on, just gotta watch out for flash and javacrap, install adblock to help with flash. No dice to slow.

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[AgNO3]

could it be I don't use any plug ins. well talk back is installed. It has to do with the tabs and opening and closing the tabs and FF not letting go.

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[TeknoHog]

Is that 'salt' meaning sodium chloride, or perhaps the precious metal salt that leaves dark stains on skin? ;)

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[joseprio]

Seems that Firefox 1.5 is a lot more aggressive at caching pages than previous versions... Also, the ammount of memory that will be used for this purpose depends on the total memory of your system.

You can find ways to configure that here.

Also, if you were using extensions (you already said you don't, but I'm adding this for reference) a good way to detect memory leaks is to use the Leak Monitor Extension.

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[m85476585]

I do all the time with no problem whatsoever. Of course it uses 100% CPU for a few seconds when I restore it (most programs do after hibernation while loading everything from the disk back into RAM), but after that it runs like usual.

Re:Its like cake with no Salt.

[m85476585]

Adblock had a serious memory leak for a while. I don't know if they fixed it, but I use Adblock Plus now.

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[A beautiful mind]

It was a joke.

Although Gentoo users will experience bigger downloads.

It's inexpensive marketing and it works.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called Marketing. They probably hired an individual or an agency with marketing experience. One ultimate goal of this type of marketing is to get people to use your product and/or "make the switch" over.

Don't worry about the man-hours...this was not a hugely difficult thing to code, and if they didn't outsource it, the programmer involved might even have been glad to break away from his/her normal routine, and perhaps increase the popularity of the project.

Don't worry about the "bloat"...we're talking about plain-text, and while it's potentially a lot, it isn't going to kill RAM usage, create incredible download sizes, or introduce more vulnerabilities into the Firefox suite.

And don't worry about your name being in there, because if you think it's a dumb idea, you're not going to go over and fill it out, and you might even have told friends and family about it already via email (complete with a handy link to the Windows self-extracting installation binary).

But for the world's non-nerdy Internet users, this might catch a few in the "net" (no pun intended). The target audience (of the IE persuasion) may take a "recommendation from a trusted computer-knowing friend" + the attractive-yet-gimmicky-to-nerds chance to be written into "source code" and say "why not, I'll try it!"

There's good (switch to Firefox) and bad (marketing has your email) implications to this. But if you consider the minimal effort this will take to give it a try...this really isn't a bad idea folks.

Obligatory dictionary lookup

[Adam9]

wastage Audio pronunciation of "wastage" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (wstj)
n.

      1. Loss by deterioration, wear, or destruction: "Disease and desertion still caused much greater wastage than battle" (Theodore Ropp).
      2. The gradual process of wasting.
      3. An amount that is wasted or lost by wear.

Re:Obligatory dictionary lookup

[Smauler]

None of these definitions apply to the OP's use of the word. I think the word he was searching for may have been "waste":

n.

1. The act or an instance of wasting or the condition of being wasted: a waste of talent; gone to waste.

Re:Obligatory dictionary lookup

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to learn to admit when you're wrong.

I wish I could use firefox...

[CrazyTalk]

But too many websites that I use on a regular basis (corproate job search sites, online databases, University websites, etc.) "Require IE 4.x or higher" and don't work properaly or at all on Firefox :-( IE has me in its clutches seemingly forever.

Re:I wish I could use firefox...

[Dewin]

https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1419/

From the website: "IE Tab - an extension from Taiwan, features: Embedding Internet Explorer in tabs of Mozilla/Firefox."

It's also configurable in such a way where you can set it to automatically use IE's view of pages at certain locations instead of Firefox's, but use Firefox for the rest of the web.

parent is funny

[Joebert]

Parent is funny because it's true.

oh, and,

One step forward, two steps back.

Cha cha cha !

Still waiting...

[schattenteufel]

Firefox (for Mac) may open & render webpages pretty quick, but launching the app (on my computer) takes far too long. I'm running it stock; I don't have any add-ons, extensions, plug-ins (whatever you want to call them) and I really don't like to wait all of 1.5 minutes to get my browser open. Uninstalling & re-installing = no change. I'll stick with Safari.

Something is buggy on that page (OOT)

[rupert0]

I got this...

Thanks for Sharing Firefox
*****23@hotmail.com. Click the link in the email to confirm and invite your friend.

To be included on the Firefox Friends Wall and in Firefox 2 you'll need to make sure Ing. Gabriel Rojas downloads Firefox on or before September 15, 2006. Use your power to seal the deal - call, message or cajole them! Whatever it takes, just make sure they download.

I dont know any Ing. Gabriel Rojas and my email isnt *****23@hotmail.com.... let's poke till i get more errors lol

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[Anonymous Coward]

How was that a joke? You can't just say something that's blatanly false and then claim it was a "joke" or that you were being sarcastic. Lame.

Comments don't compile. Therefore, it wasn't a joke, it was misinformation.

Damn

[Goodgerster]

My name is Ben Goodger. People will likely just say "no, that's the lead developer".

Small problem.

[deepb]

People who still aren't using Firefox have no freakin' idea what "source code" is. Plus, to make things worse, some of them don't even know their own last name.

Is it too late to just hand out Blow-Pops or Tootsie Rolls?

Re:Small problem.

[Onesque]

There is no mention of source code on the website :

"we'll add your names to an interactive Firefox friends display that will be accessible from within Firefox 2".

The Firefox Friends Wall is a digital wall that will display the names of everyone who participates in Firefox Day.

Re:Small problem.

[deepb]

Thanks for clearing that up. I feel honored that you corrected my "source code" joke as opposed to the 70-80 others you had to choose from.

Re:This idea is communist

[Anonymous Coward]

"from these liberal tree-huggers"

Ha, cuts both ways oil drum hugger

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[alexmipego]

Maybe they aren't including the name in the source code itself and just do a webservice accessed from the about dialog box. Firefox is supposed to be a browser... so it is supposed to be connected to the internet... that would work :)

MOD PARENT UP!

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally, somebody making some sense!

Duh...

[paynesmanor]

I thought the smart ones checked there links before posting.. It asks me for a login?? WTF!

Re:Duh...

[servo335]

i noticed that aswell. Any one have a log in to spare?

Re:Duh...

[idonthack]

Me too. I think the page changed because nobody else has complained aobut it yet.

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[Anonymous Coward]

Kill yourself now.

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[chmod a x mojo]

One quick question, what the hell is up with everyone complaining about "bloat"? on my machines the launch times have been simular between FF mozilla and opera. are you poeple still using ~100MB disks or what? maybe you only have 32 megs of ram and no swap space? really, does it take you THAT long to download the extra hundred K or so? i mean look at the mozilla suite, everyone says it is bloated, yet how much disk space does it take up to have a browser with a seperate irc client and emeil client installed? how much more rame will it take up to run all three at the same time instead of all three from one process instance?
no i am not trolling, i really want to know why people complain about "bloat", it makes no sense to me....

Why God Why

[Cythrawl]

I havent used Firefox for an age now, nor do I use IE. I'm quite happy using Maxthon complete with its 6mb Footprint in Ram.... Ta very much..

I couldnt care less if Firefox had anyone's name in it or not... what does it prove? Nothing...

World Firefox day.. Pheeshaw!! Why dont we have a World "Losers Day" too.. or World "oh my big toe hurts day"... Or World "Like I give a shit day"...

A better idea would be World "Dont use the Internet and go and do something useful like go outside and get rid of your Glasgow Tan" day..

Really the whole thing is getting ridiculous!

Re:Why God Why

[mouse_clicker]

You sure give enough of a shit to rant about it...

Re:Why God Why

[Cythrawl]

Because its stupid and a waste of time thats why!

Testtify!

[quakeroatz]

"I want a secure, fast, technically elegant, standards supporting browser with a flexible extension system."

Stand up, load and proud with the rest of your .0005% market segment and say:
"I'm statistically irrelevant! Listen to meeeeeeeeeeeee!"

Re:Testtify!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahhaaa. It's too bat you will be modded "troll", because thats really quite funny!

Re:Testtify!

[glassjaw rocks]

you win at the internets

Re:Testtify!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://carcino.gen.nz/images/index.php/00b9a680/46 3c5922

Re:Testtify!

[Anonymous Coward]

Waaaaa! Everyone that disagrees with me is a big stupidhead!

too late for me

[noamt]

Already converted about 30 people.

You sure about that?

[XanC]

Maxthon is just an interface on top of IE, right? Are you sure there's not an IE process there using up resources?

Re:You sure about that?

[Cythrawl]

No there isnt... Check it for yourself and you'll see :)

Re:You sure about that?

[m85476585]

That's what I thought, but then I looked up Maxthon, and it seems that it only uses the Trident layout engine (I haven't heard of it before), not IE itself. I liked it better than Firefox, but I switched because I thought that it was just as insecure as IE, being an IE "shell". Does anyone know if Maxthon is more secure than IE?

Switch your User Agent String!

[icefaerie]

Sometimes this issue can be solved by using the User Agent Switcher extension to mask your browser as IE. On Gap.com for instance, it appears they won't let you shop without IE--until you change your UA string to an IE one. Then it works just fine. Unfortunately this trick won't work for sites that require things like ActiveX, just for ones that are silly and require IE exclusively for no apparent reason. :(

You vs. The Many

[Frosty Piss]

BUT IT LEADS TO BLOAT.

An increase in functionality, a "feature rich" application always leads to a larger binary. Is that "bloat"? Is there something intrinsically wrong, bad about a large application? I don't think so, but if they keep with the plug-in extension paradigm, you will always be free to strip out what you don't need from those included as standard with the install. Perhaps they could even make it custom install option.

Re:This idea is communist

[TheSalzar]

Ha, Sucks both ways oil drum sucker! Ride a bike, or carjack some one

Somebody who haven't heard of Firefox yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly, I don't know anyone. Even my mother and girlfriend have been using Firefox for a long time already. Wonder if anyone in Finland uses IE anymore...

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. You really don't understand what a joke is, do you?!

Huh????

[mark-t]

I've convinced almost every person with whom I personally associate with to switch to Firefox if they didn't use it already...

I've been doing that almost ever since Firefox became stable.

The website doesn't even work...

[trogdor8667]

Entered my mother. Asks me to confirm the blurry text, won't take it. Won't take it again. Finally get it to go through, and it confirms that my name is Sally and my email address is suchnsuch@hotmail.com. Only problem is, thats not me. Go back, fight the blurry images again, and get through.

Five minutes later, I get an email from Firefox asking me to confirm by clicking a link. Ok. Click the link and get prompted by an HTACCESS password protection scheme.

I gave up at that point. So, if this has plagued them since they began, I can only imagine how many successful entries they've had.

Bloatware.

[GISGEOLOGYGEEK]

Immortalize all those names into the source code?

Come on! What a waste of space.

And you think IE is bloated!

WHY?

[Anonymous Coward]

I use firfox because its a good browser, but one question baffles me. Why on earth do you ro anyone else want to have your name in the source code? It serves no purpose. Its not even cool graphiti like writing your name on the moon. Its just lame. Why do you or anyone else want the recognition, or the "fame"? Do what you do because you think its what you should do.

I've got a better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Howabout they have a World Firefox Bug-fix Day, where competent hackers from all over fix problem reports, security holes, plugin bugs, replace crummy code, and improve the infrastructure for blocking bad javascript and filtering out other undesirable web page junk? Much better idea.

Replace God with a dinosaur logo?

[PrayingWolf]

We're all human, I know that: scared of losing our security and smelling strange odors, trapped inside our comfort zones... and Firefox is a part of it. Now you are called to advertise firefox with the hope that it won't go away if you just try to get people convinced. But don't you see what you're doing?

Hey! Hackers, geeks and other nerds! You are being called to maintain and uphold status quo!
Can't you see? Already the crippling force of fear is starting to affect the so young OSS ppl!
But what else can you expect when you've turned away from the source of creativity - the creator Himself.

So the red dinosaur has become an idol, another in the long line of replacements for God and Jesus His only begotten son - our salvation.
Good news of the kingdom of God has been replaced with "good news of firefox"
And the tower of babel is being built: the man-made structure of OSS code that you might think will save the world - only it won't...

It's still not too late. Awake thou that sleepest, and rise from the dead!

Re:This idea is communist

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're fearing linux since it's 'communist'? Well here's what you can do to eliminate your fear.
Go find a cliff or a bridge somewhere, then take your entire fucktarded family. Have all of them jump off to their death, and after that jump to yours. Once that is done, your fear should be eliminated.

the story is moot...

[Yonder Way]

...when the content provider shuts the site down so you can't see what it's about.

What will I get....

[Bing Tsher E]

What will I get for convincing a few more people that a rather heavy 'light weight' web browser is a mistake. Namely, what will award do I get for promoting the classic Mozilla Suite (is it still called Seamonkey?) If I convince a few people to upgrade from Firefox to Mozilla is there honorable mention in the tarball of the fork? (The fork, now that the 'Firefox' people have stripped out 'the good stuff.')

Firefox uses more mem than IE because

[jsharkey]

Remember how IE is tied directly into the Windows core? "iexplore.exe" says it's using 32MB, but remember that any memory used by SHDOCVW is being handily rolled into another process like "explorer.exe" or "System." Firefox doesn't live by those shady tactics, and shows you its actual memory usage all in one process.

Re:Firefox uses more mem than IE because

[AgNO3]

ok so I wanted to check that so I am but as of this reading FF is using 111816K with just one window open. I did just have 3 windows and like 5 tabs (total but all that is closed and I am still at 110000K. So I am now opening all those links in ie. IE has just hit 85000k with 3 windows and 6 total sites open (2 tabs and 3 tabs and 1 tab) no other processes changes in my processes window (with show all processes selected)So it appears that the system is not taking that memory. I have now closed all the windows. So FF has this window open and ie has the main slashdot window open. ie is now down to 60000K and FF is still at 105000k. Tabs in IE achieved through the use of yahoo toolbar. again neither system or explorer grew in size. Turst me I use FF most of the time. oh and don't tell me to change some config setting in a text editor somewhere. I am not going to go through that and NO SHOULD HAVE TO. I do use FF as my main browser in case anyone is thinking I am a IE lover. This is being typed in FF which is now using 107204K of memory for one window.

Re:Firefox uses more mem than IE because

[VGPowerlord]

Great. Opera 9 is currently taking up 31.3MiB (That's 32,040KiB in the task manager) displaying this thread. Care to explain that one?

Re:Firefox uses more mem than IE because

[AgNO3]

Umm I loaded a bunch of tabs first then closed them as I had orginally done to in the browsing when I first came to the story. I didn't just open the page. I don't know maybe Opera has good memory management. OPen a bunch of tabs then close them all and see if it lets go of all the memory

Ok, now.. what do you do..

[mysidia]

If you've already convinced everyone you know to switch Firefox, in the past? Darn...

What's next?

[Catastrophator]

Hanging out at the airport in orange robes handing out pamphlets?

talk about annoying!

[Xtifr]

This could actually be enough to convince me to switch AWAY from Firefox! There's plenty of other browsers that come with Debian, and many of them are reputed to be quite good. If Firefox is going to be switching their focus from quality to marketing, well, that's not the kind of thing I want to be associated with. I'm definitely not going to submit my name for this list (even though I'm well qualified to be on it--I converted three people this month alone). And I'll even continue to recommend Firefox to Windows users (who need all the help they can get). But I see no reason to waste my own disk space on such nonsense!

Re:talk about annoying!

[Anonymous Coward]

If Firefox is going to be switching their focus from quality to marketing,

Because it's not possible for them to have people who specialize in programming work on the quality end, and people who specialize in marketing work on the marketing end?

Re:talk about annoying!

[VGPowerlord]

Mmm, as an alternative, you could tell them to try Opera. After getting fed up with Firefox over its tab memory leak "feature" and a few other things, I finally gave Opera a serious try.

I spent about 10 minutes changing options, and now it acts just how I want it. I do miss Adblock, though...

But ive switched everyone...

[nukem996]

Everyone I know ive switched to Firefox. I run a computer repair buisness and ive switched all my customer(except those damn AOL users). I dont know anyone to switch. Anyway I to want to know why we'er putting all the names in the source code. I mean if its a comment all the names arent going to be in the binary why not just put them on a web page?

Good Morning!

[High Hat]

*Knock*
"Good Morning! We'd like to talk about Firefox with you! You too can be saved!"

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[Snuggly_Soft]

"The names will be commented out, therefore will not be complied in any binary that sees the light of day." Maybe I can get a variable named after me, then...

tiers of doom

[treak007]

they should make it that if you switch x amount of people, your name will appear in the credits, or if you switch y amount of people, they make you the name of a variable or something. then at least there would be an incentive to get more then one. People will wake up, see that and be like "OHH, I WANNA BE A CLASS NAME IN FIREFOX" *converts entire neighberhood.

Memory Cache!

[The MAZZTer]

All of the major browsers use MEMORY CACHES. Because it's FASTER than a disk cache.

If you want to fool around with the memory cache size you are free to install the Fasterfox extension for Firefox, or go to about:config and figure it out yourself.

I could do that and get Firefox's memory usage low, easily. But why would I want to? It's pointless, because if it takes up too much memory it just gets swapped out to disk by the virtual memory manager anyway, and it's also slower to access the disk cache.

Re:Memory Cache!

[AgNO3]

Right so when my 70 year old grandfather downloads FF I need to drive 3000 miles to his house and configure his system so it doesn't hog all his memory? Right HELLO of course geeks will be able to resolve the problem. I don't feel I should need to configure something right out of the box to be less of a memory pig. I like to run multiple things at once. You know like how Linux and the mac OS manage memory. or even how you know IE lets go of the memory after you close the windows.

Re:Memory Cache!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would you drive 3000 miles to do something that could be done over the internet? Windows XP has Remote Assistance built in if you really feel Firefox needs to be tweaked, if your grandfather is using something else and you want to provide tech support for him, you should have set up some alternative for to use the last time you visited.

Memory usage is only really an issue if you keep Firefox open for long periods with many tabs open or you use an extension with a memory leak, this means it is mostly geeks that would have this sort of usage with it not being a real problem for casual users.

/. is being uncontrollably silly.

[BurningRanger]

First of all, the bloat is not an issue. A couple of thousand names being written into the source code will NOT increase the memory footprint by more than a few hundred kilobytes. That's assuming they were even going to code it into the program at all - which they won't, no one will be able to see that. They'll put it on a website somewhere, most likely. Second of all, I for one think this is brilliant. I put my name up with my lady of choice, she thought it was adorable. (She's been using Firefox for years, ever since I told her she should.) I guarantee lots of people will do this with others that already use the program - much in the same spirit that a petition rallies support, so will this Wall of Firefox bit. Finally, I'm seeing complaints that reflect the idea that as Firefox usage increases, its usefulness decreases. That's just silly. The furthering of OSS's stature in the world will see nothing but benefits. IF OSS can become a household term one day, maybe one day Firefox won't have a memory bloat problem?

Re:/. is being uncontrollably silly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Code comments are not compiled, silly.

Uh huh

[Mr. Underbridge]

"It's not a leak it it's intentional - it's simply huge memory usage."

Yeah, that's taking the whole 'it's not a bug, it's a feature!' thing a little too far. Has anyone ever said, 'I wish my browser took up more RAM'?

Re:Wow, an explanation I've been waiting for so lo

[Anonymous Coward]

The best jokes are blatanly false. Obviously by the moderation, you are the minority and just don't get it... It's okay though... sometimes it takes a while to aquire a sense of humor.

populism

[Anonymous Coward]

Populism Anyone?

Firefox, the browser of the people! has your name on its source!!!

dududududu

btw who bougth firefox recently? it was gates' wife? gah.

run for your sanity!

I'd laugh if I had a soul.

[Ivan Matveitch]

Web technologies are the stuff of nightmares and firefox is a noxious nest of code.

Simple alternative: Write a graphics/video/sound/network/keyboard-mouse-events library; web pages would then be programs linked against this library. Your browser simply downloads and runs such programs in a sandbox; they render to the browser window in response to keyboard, mouse, and network events. Let page authors link in shared libraries, which the browser caches, dynamically retrieving a necessary library if it is not already cached.

All that's about five thousand lines of code, no kidding. Straightforward elaboration: consder the above as implementing the "screen interface" for a given site; sites could then implement other interfaces with other conceptual structures like RSS feeds, printed pages, audio-based interfaces, whatever. (CSS2 makes a half-hearted attempt at this.) So, one logical site (say, google.com) might implement many of these interfaces, and you could use that subset of them which your platform supports. From the author's point of view, a site becomes a sort of class that implements N interfaces, the mechanism for this always being to produce a program for each interface, to be ultimately downloaded and run by the browser. (There would be many frameworks to do this, in various ways.)

switchbackster treason

[Anonymous Coward]

I did switch back that bastard, but he switched back to ie next week. idiot.

Let's change the name to...

[rinkjustice]

Firefox Jumps the Shark Day.

Nice ring to it.

for real

[Danzigism]

*taps his foot and waits for all the complainers to simply code a better browser*

But I already have my name in Firefox!

[Anonymous Coward]

And it's in a long list of names nobody ever reads too!

Try it, it's about:credits

Apparently, it's such a hit, they felt they had to make another one.

geeky ways

[uioreanu]

one point in nowadays market share expansion is to not only run a technically/usability fit product, but to find geeky ways to sneak it through the I'm-smarter-than-everybody-else crowd.

bottom line: despite bad quality of this particular marketing campaign; how helpless you are in telling your all geek friends about it, isn't it?

Secondly, what a great way to build social networking features into firefox! How about sharing bookmarks with your referred friends, and instead of the crappy google syncronizer, have a built-in tool to centralize user prefs and data?

I've already converted several people...

[Anonymous Coward]

They were having windows/ie troubles, I showed them firefox, and the troubles were cut to less than 1/10th of what they originally had been.

I need not be immortalized in firefox's code. that's just silly.

If you are going to do something, do it because it is a good and worthwhile thing to do, not for something retarded like a few bytes in a piece of source code very few people will read.

Children

[Madcowz]

Yet again /. has become a playground for little nerdy children to argue.

yawn,

/Mad

Spam

[KlausBreuer]

Yeah, right.

I'll put the Email of a friend in a place where it'll be easily found by the spamming bastards. Whereupon she'll receive SPAM until she changes her Email.

No thanks.

Re:This idea is communist

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL

"What do you think, SlashDott?"
DOTT!! Great Game!

The Wife

[hansamurai]

I invited my wife who's an IE brat and refuses to use Firefox (guess who gets to clean up her machine every few months?). I think I'll go into her email and just download it so I get credit. Or maybe she'll do it when she finds out we'll be immortalized as X loves Y on some random website she'll never go to.

re..

[Anonymous Coward]

why even switch to FIREFOX when i.e.7 handles CSS so much better... hhmm maybe firefox should be focus on that