Only 25% of Firefox Downloaders Are 'Active Users'

bheer writes "The Guardian points out a page on the Mozilla wiki noting that 'only 50% of the people downloading Firefox actually try it out, and only a further half of those continue to use it actively.' ZDNet has some commentary on the browser's retention rate. While a 25% retention rate isn't necessarily bad, Mozilla is trying to improve these figures with a 12 point plan that includes more TV and media advertising, a better start page and several installation tweaks."

Comments

My numbers are a bit different.

[Jack9]

I see about 80% retention in the past. Granted I'm in tech, so you might think that geeks usually go for the most reliable technology that offers the best tools and such, but I dont introduce FF to techs...they are already using it. I see about 80% retention from non-techs that I introduced it to. Now that tabbing is a feature of both browsers, 25% still seems very low.

Re:My numbers are a bit different.

[AlexBirch]

Both of my ex girlfriends are using Firefox... I'm glad to see that our relationships weren't wasted completely.

Re:My numbers are a bit different.

[jez9999]

Both of my ex-girlfriends use Firefox together.

In bed.

Re:My numbers are a bit different.

[gad_zuki!]

I wouldnt exactly brag about driving two different women to lesbianism.

How do they measure this??

[Andrewkov]

I use Firefox as my main browser, but I've downloaded it many times to different PC's (which I may use only occasionally). I wonder how this affects their numbers.

Re:How do they measure this??

[mhall119]

It's ok, I've installed it on multiple PC's from the same download, so I cancel you out.

This is what normally happends.

[jellomizer]

Person A computer really messes up.
Geek B fixes it and puts firefox to help them out.
Geek B tells them to use Firefox so their computer doesn't mess up.
Person A Ignores Geek B advice because what does he know he only fixes computers.
Person A Computer gets really messed up.

Re:That's still a lot

[croddy]

Think about what the internet was like in 2002, when Mozilla 1.0 was first released. We encountered IE-only sites daily, Safari didn't exist, and MSIE definitively dominated the web landscape. Anyone complaining to a bank or power company about a Mozilla problem just claimed to be using Netscape -- the Gecko browser people had actually heard of -- and rarely got anywhere. Those of us using Mozilla preferred it for a variety of reasons, and hoped for wider adoption so that our preferred browser would receive acceptable support from webmasters.

Today, Firefox is a decidedly mainstream browser, listed on most "supported browser" lists, and Firefox-only sites are about as common now as the remaining IE-only sites. Do we need more adoption? If Firefox is serving its existing users well, is it worth the cost of an advertising blitz to capture a few more?

Twelve Step Plan

[Reason58]

1. We admitted we were powerless over IE--that our lives had become unmanageable.
2. Came to believe that a browser greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of Firefox as we understood Him.
4. Made a google search and fearless moral inventory of bloat.
5. Admitted to Firefox, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our standards breaking.
6. Were entirely ready to have Firefox remove all these defects of browser.
7. Humbly asked Firefox to remove our security vulnerabilities.
8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly installed a patch for it.
11. Sought through addons and extensions to improve our conscious contact with Firefox, as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the plugins to carry that out.
12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to IE-aholics, and to practice these principles in all our browsing.

Re:That's still a lot

[jamstar7]

Could be, they're using FF masquaraded as IE to use IE-only sites.

Re:Why download?

[moore.dustin]

Of course this is common. These people not using FF after downloading are the same people that have AOL icons on their desktop they never use. Have old trial version software all over their comp, pre-installed or not. As nerds and geeks, we usually uninstall stuff we do not need, but you are telling you that you have installed and used everything you have downloaded? I know I run a pretty tight ship when it comes to my machines, but I know I have downloaded things and not used them for whatever reason.

Back to the average Joe, they do this way more often then us. They get the link to download for whatever reason and download it with good intention, but not everyone installs it. Of those that do install, they try to use it, realize it is too different or whatever and go back to IE without bothering to uninstall... that is not important to them. To them, having 100 programs installed is the same as 1 - they know no better.

If you realize that you, being a slashdot reading computer user, are not the "average computer user" then you may be able to put these numbers into perspective and understand how they came to be.

Alright!

[iknownuttin]

Ok. I have Firefox 2.0.0.4. When I first downloaded it, all of a sudden I started getting these "update errors".

Now, being a good F/OSS geek, I went up online to find out WTF the problem was. Well, there was this series of directions to follow. I followed them to the tee. Still nothing. Then I saw a post about my "Firewall" being the problem. Well, I turned it off - no change. BUT, when I was logged in as an Admin, no problem. Interesting. The Firefox folks were insistent that it's my firewall.

So, I went in and gave the Mozilla directory full access rights (this is in Windows XP) and everything is working now.

So, is Firefox on my machine secure?
Would the typical user have to deal with this security problem with IE - (NO)?
How many of you are going to call me or imply that I'm an idiot for not being able to use Firefox correctly?

Users want to know.

Re:Alright!

[Anonymous Coward]

The typical Windows user is logged on as an Administrator, out of the box. Therefore the typical Windows user will never see this issue, nor need to work around it.

Those who don't login as an administrator either know what they're doing (and therefore have the skills to understand the problem), or they're a large enough business that their IT department should be familiar with problems like this. Firefox is hardly the only program that expects to be able to write to it's program directory, which isn't allowed by normal users.

Now, logically, since you are a technical user, and set your primary account as a normal user, you should know that normal users can't write to %ProgramFiles%. Therefore when you attempt to run an update, that you know damn well requires writing files out to %ProgramFiles%, you shouldn't be surprised to see problems or errors.

Instead of giving your normal user account full access to the program directory, you should maintain security and install updates after logging in as an administrator. The normal user can see when an update is available, which gives you the push to login as an administrator and install it, but obviously the normal user shouldn't be able to do it.

That everyone pointed to every other problem under the sun instead of this illustrates the overwhelming number of Windows users who run as administrator. I've got a couple dozen programs installed that refuse to run if the logged in account isn't an administrator. At least Firefox manages functions just fine for everything except program updates.

Not unusual

[MobyDisk]

I work for a company that offers a downloadable product with a monthly subscription. We find that people actually login, enter their credit card number, download the software, and never run it. There's another group who never click the download button. It's really quite amazing. We've worked hard to make it as easy as possible - make sure the download link is visible on all screen resolutions, browsers, not require scripting or the latest softare, etc.

Re:Why download?

[Scoth]

I've been sitting with "average" users while they show me something or try something and you'd be surprised how many of them click on something that sounds neat that they want to try, it downloads, they close the download window, then say something like "Where'd it go? Oh well..." then move on to something else. This was partly the rational for Firefox's default to download straight to the desktop.

I'd bet some people are downloading the installer, lose it, and just never bother to find it.

My 12-Step Retention Plan

[andrewd18]

Pfft. That 12-Step Retention Plan sucks. Here's a better one:

1. Change Firefox icon label to closer resemble action of getting to web. No longer shall the icon on the desktop be called "Mozilla Firefox", but instead, "U CAN HAZ INTRN3T".

2. Force the Firefox icon to easier to find location. <img src="firefox.png" alt="U CAN HAZ INTRN3T" height="768" width="1024" /> Problem solved.

3. Alter the default browser settings path for better user choice. Embed an audio file of Arnold Schwarzenegger saying, "Use Firefox! Use it now!" into the IE startup path.

4. Major outbound brand marketing program driving brand recognition and differentiation. A full page NY Times ad with the "Walkthrough Cat", its text changed to "GIT UR INTERN3T ON".

5. Improve download page and first run pages. Download page must be similar to NY Times ad, so the imbeciles we're trying to reach can actually remember wtf they're downloading. The first run page must have "HAI! U GOT INTRN3T!!" in large letters, preferably with blink tags and links to pron.

6. Launch support.mozilla.com SUMO If Firefox sees another bloated browser installed on the computer, it will challenge it to a wrestling match, the winner becoming the new default browser. A small side-effect may be a userbase increase in the Asian market.

7. Make common plug-ins work out of the box. The MegaRotic Toolbar will now be part of the initial install, as will an RSS feed of Digg.com.

8. Make add-ons and personas more accessible. The Mozilla Store will now ship free wizard hats and robes with every Firefox download.

9. Make the web feel more human. Male users will find their browser displaying all text in capital letters approximately once every twenty-eight days. Female users will find their browser doesn't remember their user preferences or date of birth form fields.

10. Improve messaging through communication channels. We will also improve messaging through non-communication channels. Yes, our code monkeys are that good. 11. Stickier start page. If you left-click anywhere on the new start page, it will take three right-clicks to get your cursor to move again.

12. Change Firefox icon image to closer resemble action of getting to web. In keeping with steps 1 and 7, the new icon will show Ceiling Cat, as we all know what most of our users will be doing on the internet.

Re:That's still a lot

[Stormwatch]

While I use it when I'm on a Windows PC ... I really can't stand it on the Mac

Then you should try Camino. "Mozilla power, Mac style."

Re:That's still a lot

[Nimey]

Believe it or not, I've made an HTML page that was Lynx-only. It would display with e.g. Mozilla or Opera but would look like poorly-formatted shite.

Lynx supports a tag of the form <tab indent="90" id="t1"> and then later you can set up a pseudo-table using <tab to="t1"> or arbitrary tabs.

Obviously this would only work with a fixed-width font anyway.

hmm... the Lynx documentation says that the tab tag is from HTML 3.0.

Re:That's still a lot

[Skreems]

Let me have 2 minutes alone with your computer, and I guarantee you'll change that opinion. Goatse theme ftw!

Re:That's still a lot

[Curtman]

FF on XP does a pretty good job of integrating into the OS

When you click a link in an MSN conversation, it opens in IE regardless of what your preferred browser setting is. Most people that I know begin their web browsing by clicking on the MSN link to open Hotmail, and they get IE. When that changes those numbers will look better. I'm afraid it will take a court ruling to change that though.

Re:That's still a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not entirely true.

MSN Messenger uses IE when it needs to past things through HTTP POST, eg. to authenticate you as Curtman123@hotmail.com to MSN Spaces. This is necessary because there's no real standard way to pass HTTP POST to the default browser over the command line. I think some other clients have got around this in the past by making a temporary HTML file, having code to send the HTTP POST and then opening that in the default browser. For links in MSN messages, I find they all go the default browser.