×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

521 comments

First post? (0, Troll)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983778)

Then it's only suitable that the first post should be with firefox.

Re:First post? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983779)

and 90% of the rest of the comments will be with IE.

Re:First post? (-1, Troll)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983817)

Troll? Hey scr00 j00! The topic is firefox you moron. Jeez, it's not like anyone reads slashdot anyway.

BURNIN KARMA BABY.

But wont.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983783)

IE7 pull this back for them with:

Better security
Tab Browsing
Conformance to standards

Re:But wont.. (0, Flamebait)

behindspace (847527) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983802)

IE7 has been said that it won't have tabbed browsing. you all know how "secure" IE is, and IE's got it's own "standards of conformance" Having a browser that's DIRECTLY integrated with the OS is a terrible thing. I'd rather juggle chainsaws then go back to IE from firefox

As a record store owner. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983784)

My business faces ruin. CD sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago. Revenue is down and costs are up. My store has survived for years, but I now face the prospect of bankruptcy. Every day I ask myself why this is happening.

I bought the store about 12 years ago. It was one of those boutique record stores that sell obscure, independent releases that no-one listens to, not even the people that buy them. I decided that to grow the business I'd need to aim for a different demographic, the family market. My store specialised in family music - stuff that the whole family could listen to. I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of.

The business strategy worked. People flocked to my store, knowing that they (and their children) could safely purchase records without profanity or violent lyrics. Over the years I expanded the business and took on more clean-cut and friendly employees. It took hard work and long hours but I had achieved my dream - owning a profitable business that I had built with my own hands, from the ground up. But now, this dream is turning into a nightmare.

Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer CDs. Why is no one buying CDs? Are people not interested in music? Do people prefer to watch TV, see films, read books? I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame. The statistics speak for themselves - one in three discs world wide is a pirate. On The Internet, you can find and download hundreds of dollars worth of music in just minutes. It has the potential to destroy the music industry, from artists, to record companies to stores like my own. Before you point to the supposed "economic downturn", I'll note that the book store just across from my store is doing great business. Unlike CDs, it's harder to copy books over The Internet.

A week ago, an unpleasant experience with pirates gave me an idea. In my store, I overheard a teenage patron talking to his friend.

"Dude, I'm going to put this CD on the Internet right away."

"Yeah, dude, that's really lete [sic], you'll get lots of respect."

I was fuming. So they were out to destroy the record industry from right under my nose? Fat chance. When they came to the counter to make their purchase, I grabbed the little shit by his shirt. "So...you're going to copy this to your friends over The Internet, punk?" I asked him in my best Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry voice.

"Uh y-yeh." He mumbled, shocked.

"That's it. What's your name? You're blacklisted. Now take yourself and your little bitch friend out of my store - and don't come back." I barked. Cravenly, they complied and scampered off.

So that's my idea - a national blacklist of pirates. If somebody cannot obey the basic rules of society, then they should be excluded from society. If pirates want to steal from the music industry, then the music industry should exclude them. It's that simple. One strike, and you're out - no reputable record store will allow you to buy another CD. If the pirates can't buy the CDS to begin with, then they won't be able to copy them over The Internet, will they? It's no different to doctors blacklisting drug dealers from buying prescription medicine.

I have just written a letter to the RIAA outlining my proposal. Suing pirates one by one isn't going far enough. Not to mention pirates use the fact that they're being sued to unfairly portray themselves as victims. A national register of pirates would make the problem far easier to deal with. People would be encouraged to give the names of suspected pirates to a hotline, similar to TIPS. Once we know the size of the problem, the police and other law enforcement agencies will be forced to take piracy seriously. They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?

This evening, my daughters asked me. "Why do the other kids laugh at us?"

I wanted to tell them the truth - it's because they wear old clothes and have cheap haircuts. I can't afford anything better for them right now.

"It's because they are idiots, kids", I told them. "Don't listen to them."

When the kids went to bed, my wife asked me, "Will we be able to keep the house, David?"

I just shook my head, and tried to hold back the tears. "I don't know, Jenny. I don't know."

When my girls ask me questions like that, I feel like my heart is being wrenched out of my chest. But knowing that I'm doing the best I can to save my family and my business is some consolation.

Some people are offended by my blacklist system. I may have made my store less popular for pirates and sympathisers, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make to save my industry from destruction. I am inspired by artists such as Metallica that have taken a stand against the powerful pirate lobby. When everyone believes 2 + 2 = 5, to simply state the truth, that 2 + 2 = 4, is a courageous act.

Re:As a record store owner. (1)

ozamosi (615254) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983840)

You DO know that CD sales in US are higher than ever, right? That they are going up, up, up. Maybe your store (and/or the music it sells) simply sucks, and You need to fix Your own problem, instead of blaming everyone but you?

It's not only the book shop across the street that goes great; most other cd stores all across US also does.

Re:As a record store owner. (-1, Troll)

cybertears (778765) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983856)

For someone that trys to portray himself as a good, christian person, you sure like to curse and abuse young children. and, i've been to the bookstore across the street and i know why they are doing so well. you failed to mention it was an adult bookstore.

Re:As a record store owner. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983911)

Umm... He is bullshiting. The christian crap and the abuse stuff is bait for morons like you.

It's called a TROLL.

Re:As a record store owner. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983876)

You sir are a hypocrit christian, and diserve to be poor :P

I fucked your daughter for a choclate bar last night.

A "Beta?" (0, Offtopic)

filmmaker (850359) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983786)

How is it that MS can get away with releasing a 'beta' of 7th generation software? Even if there's legitimate reasons for doing such a thing in general, shouldn't MS have the user/test pool to get the thing tested and reasonable before going massive with it?

At least they're reacting to the marketplace demand for a browser now and not later.

Re:A "Beta?" (1, Insightful)

pbranes (565105) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983807)

There is no way for a Windows sysadmin to deploy and manage firefox on a large number of workstations. At my current job (at a university), I would love to put firefox in all the labs and deploy firefox to all of the faculty workstations, but I can't manage like I can with IE. Using group policies, I can set the home page for all users with a click of a button. I can set security features for all users without leaving my desk.

The point is that Mozilla is ignoring corporate users. Remember that corporations are a much bigger market than home users. Mozilla needs to concentrate on this.

Re:A "Beta?" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983847)

But since you are using windows... I just hacked into your system and used those features to set all your users' homepages to goatse.com

True for a lot of open source software... (4, Insightful)

StandardsSchmandards (828326) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983861)

This is true for a lot of open source software. Developers often ignore the need for more advanced management of applications. A lot of companies will not touch software unless installation and configuration can be managed properly.

I believe that it is quite easy to add this type of support to a lot of open source software. A simple thing like creating an MSI-package for your application will often help deployment a lot.

Maybe all that is missing is a few decent tutorials on packaging and AD integration to get open source software into corporate IT-environments?

Re:True for a lot of open source software... (4, Interesting)

dsanfte (443781) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983896)

Maybe all that is missing is a few decent tutorials on packaging and AD integration to get open source software into corporate IT-environments?


Bingo. Time for Firefox developers to start integrating browser settings with AD, and making deployment easier.

Who would want to use the more insecure browser in a corporation bent on security? You have no choice right now, though; firefox is nigh impossible to deploy effectively without going to every single client machine and configuring the settings manually.

it's not just AD integration. (3, Insightful)

ecalkin (468811) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983928)

a) it's support for (group) policies. which is simply defining control points in the registry and reading from the points and following instructions. this should not be difficult.
b) it's scripted/automatic install *and* repair. there may be some of this in there but i'm not sure.
c) other remote/automatic managenent support for not only ADS but also NDS (SuSE/Novell would be very interested in that).

eric

Re:A "Beta?" (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983909)

http://www.frontmotion.com/Firefox/

MSI Package can be rolled out with Group Policy in an Active Directory domain.

Not entirely true (4, Informative)

wfberg (24378) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983941)

While Internet Explorer can be managed using group policies, which you have to use to lock down windows anyway, that doesn't mean firefox is entirely unmanageable in a network environment.

Firefox accepts a startup flag (-profile d:\foo) that tells it what it's configuration directory is. You can install firefox on a shared directory, and have it retrieve settings from a (read-only) shared directory (or on a per user basis).

While it's not as finegrained as internet explorer's policies (where you might prevent some-one from changing only the homepage, and nothing else, or vice-versa), it's by no means unconfigurable.

This sort of thing should hardly come as a surprise. Applications have been using .ini-style settings or profiles stored in directories for ages. Using shared or synchronized files (with appropriate permissions) to propagate settings has been a common way to manage applications for ages as well.

Now, it's a shame firefox doesn't come with a handy-dandy MSI file, but then, neither does Internet Explorer. Then again, "deploying" firefox is a question of copying/sharing a directory and adding a shortcut with a -profile flag. Much easier and less prone to failure than a (remote/MSI) IE install.

Also, check out sysinternals. They have some real handy tools like PsExec (in the Pstools package); basically rexec for windows, which can really ease your pain when managing a zillion workstations where some change needs to be applied NOW.

And for more security options, check out windows-2003 server and XPs "software restriction policies"; and the great tdifw [sourceforge.net] firewall (no GUI, just a service configured by copying a text-based file to your workstations and restarting the service, mucht better than any Norton offering) (wipfw [sourceforge.net] might also be nice).

Re:A "Beta?" (3, Funny)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983809)

No testing is necessary; they already tested IE 6, and the first release of 7 will only be IE6 with a new skin. It will be 2008 before SP1 comes out, which will include the new features and security fixes for 2005.

Re:A "Beta?" (2, Funny)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983848)

Funny? that wasn't supposed to be funny dammit. I'm trying to burn karma here. Mod parent down you moron!

* burnin karma all day

Re:A "Beta?" (1)

trboyden (465969) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983844)

It's obviously not just about releasing a "Beta". At this point for M$ to create public interest in anything they sell or giveaway they have to market it. So in this case they anounce to everyone that will listen "Hey we're releasing a new version of our browser and it will be the next greatest thing on earth!". So really it's a marketing "Beta" to test the waters and see what public interest there is in their product. Besides, why shouldn't M$ release a beta of their product at the 7th generation? Just because the Linux community has produced hundreds of point releases doesn't mean their community is going to stop producing betas to test and verify the new features and fixes. It just good software programming practice.

Next IE version. (-1, Redundant)

cesarbremer (701201) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983787)

Could the next Internet Explorer stops the Firefox growth?

Re:Next IE version. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983795)

not at least for me, since IE doesn't run on any of the operating systems I run.

Re:Next IE version. (1)

trickyboy (815240) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983797)

it really depends. firefox is really better than IE (sorry that i'm using IE as my current browser! hehehe)

Re:Next IE version. (5, Insightful)

rbarreira (836272) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983813)

I think it could, and I also think it will be easy for Microsoft to stop firefox growth. They only have to ameliorate IE enough for people not to care about installing and using another browser. The only reason firefox is growing is because IE is flawed and annoying in several ways, so if a part of Microsoft's army of programmers is directed to remove that factor, firefox's growth will decrease greatly, in my opinion.

Then again, there may be some major annoyances that they won't be able to remove for compatibility reasons, such as ActiveX (which as you know is responsible for much of the spyware problem). What people should do is get rid of features like that completely, so that IE can be a secure browser...

Re:Next IE version. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983870)

Yes... most normal people don't know or care about security flaws or technical advantages. If the sites they visit are rendered correctly, they'll stick to that browser. If not, they'll hate the browser (even if it's only the webdesigner's fault). If the browser comes preinstalled with their operating system, they'll rather use that.

I think the main reason for the quick growth of Firefox is that it has UI advantages over IE... like tabbed browsing and other things.You can't convince people by saying "Firefox is more standards compliant, its CSS support is far better, and it has support for MathML and transparent PNGs" etc. -- most simply wouldn't care. We're talking about the mass of normal users here, which are no experts.
The UI improvements, on the contrary, are something that ALL people immediately see and appreciate.

However, still nearly 90% of the surfers use IE... it won't drop much more. I'd be surprised if it drops below 80%. Once Microsoft releases the next version with UI improvements (for example, tabbed browsing will be implemented), I bet many will use IE again on their next Windows installation.

Re:Next IE version. (-1, Troll)

pbranes (565105) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983902)

There is no way for a Windows sysadmin to deploy and manage firefox on a large number of workstations. At my current job (at a university), I would love to put firefox in all the labs and deploy firefox to all of the faculty workstations, but I can't manage like I can with IE. Using group policies, I can set the home page for all users with a click of a button. I can set security features for all users without leaving my desk.

The point is that Mozilla is ignoring corporate users. Remember that corporations are a much bigger market than home users. Mozilla needs to concentrate on this.

Re:Next IE version. (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983945)

Remember that corporations are a much bigger market than home users.

You can count small businesses with home users here. The many that are small enough that installing per machine is easier and cheaper than central control.

Do you have any evidence that this market is much smaller than the corporate market? I'd imagine a minority of PCs in the world are centrally managed.

Re:Next IE version. (1)

trickyboy (815240) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983910)

Microsoft really can easily stop firefox growth. If they are to suppress Windows users in having other browsers rather than IE, then IE sure could topple down other browsers, considering the fact that there are more Windows users than any other Operating Systems. But again, the previous versions of IE is really not that good, especially when it comes to tabbing.

Re:Next IE version. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983857)

firefox will continue to innovate, and will be a more secure browser - constantly. IE doesnt have enough reasons to emply an army just because it wants to maintain its leadership. they are an ideal capitalistic organisation - they want everyone to signup to thier products and they want all of the money allocated, ever - to software & entertainment - the 2 major cash cows. until everyone parts with thier booty. they will go on with thier arm twisting.

Nearly 30% on my site (5, Interesting)

ttlgDaveh (798546) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983788)

For a site I run [ttlg.com] Firefox is nearing 30% usage for Feb-Mar 2005 (some 20 million hits) Internet Explorer 59.3 % Firefox 28.5 % Opera 6.9 % Mozilla 3% Netscape 1 % Safari 0.5 %

Occam's razor (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983827)

Your site is a gaming site. It attracts techies and geek gamers who are more likely to use a browser other than IE.

Now if your stats can show that John Q. Public or Jane Q. Soccermom is visiting your site and using FF, then that's completely different.

Re:Occam's razor (1)

Misanthropy (31291) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983900)

Exactly. Google should release browser stats. EVERYBODY uses Google. That would surely be the most representative sample of browser distribution on the web.

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983832)

Your website looks messed up in opera, the masthead is all split up.

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983836)

I'd bet a lot of those "Firefox" hits will actually be Internet Explorer users, spoofing their user-agent strings, so they can "sneak" into poorly written Gecko-only sites...

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983875)

For the site I run, about 5000 real users per day,

20% Firefox and other Mozilla derivatives
60% IE6
10% IE5
8% Safari

Everything else (Opera, Konq, lynx, ns4, ie4, etc) is noise.

My site is tech-neutral in both user class and browser compabitility.

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (5, Funny)

trboyden (465969) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983895)

Yeah well my site gets 100% Firefox users.

Sub BrowserDetect()

If Browser != "Firefox";

RedirectBrowser("www.getfirefox.com");

End If
End Sub

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (2, Interesting)

mic256 (702811) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983912)

According to this site [ranking.pl] in Poland it is:
  1. IE: 84.6%
  2. Gecko: 10.2%
  3. Opera 4.9%
IE is going down at a pace of 0.2%-0.3% per week. How about other countries ?

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (1)

Phylter (816181) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983916)

Your site is geared towards what could be condsidered early adopters.

I am also considered an early adopter so the fact that I use Firefox doesn't count as much, so I'm told.

Thanks for you statistics though. It's nice to see Firefox gain suck a lead in so many places.

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (1)

mepislover (869099) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983920)

Nintendo's Aus/NZ Website stats show mozilla (in general - mainly firefox though), well above 10%.

Re:Nearly 30% on my site (-1, Redundant)

pbranes (565105) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983922)

There is no way for a Windows sysadmin to deploy and manage firefox on a large number of workstations. At my current job (at a university), I would love to put firefox in all the labs and deploy firefox to all of the faculty workstations, but I can't manage like I can with IE. Using group policies, I can set the home page for all users with a click of a button. I can set security features for all users without leaving my desk.

The point is that Mozilla is ignoring corporate users. Remember that corporations are a much bigger market than home users. Mozilla needs to concentrate on this.

What about Mozilla? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983789)

It's good that Firefox is gaining market shares... but what about Mozilla?

The whole mozilla projet (mozilla + firefox) is what *really* matters, not only Firefox!

Re:What about Mozilla? (2, Informative)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983804)

Obviously it's not growing every month. Firefox is the one that's had the publicity behind it, it's the one people have heard of, it's the one people are using.

Re:What about Mozilla? (1)

zootm (850416) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983853)

Do you mean Mozilla Suite? It's no longer being developed by the Mozilla Foundation [mozillazine.org] (well, there's no plan for a version 1.8, so "no longer" soon). There is a group of people who are planning to fork the code, and continue work on it, but it's likely that the Suite is not gaining popularity because it is considered deprecated now.

Re:What about Mozilla? (1)

ralphdaugherty (225648) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983925)

Do you mean Mozilla Suite? It's no longer being developed by the Mozilla Foundation [mozillazine.org] (well, there's no plan for a version 1.8, so "no longer" soon). There is a group of people who are planning to fork the code, and continue work on it, but it's likely that the Suite is not gaining popularity because it is considered deprecated now.

Whether Mozilla 1.7.x is gaining popularity or not, as the poster said, it counts too. IE is not gaining popularity either.

rd

comeback (5, Informative)

Sv-Manowar (772313) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983790)

Microsoft are hoping that by taking leaves from Mozilla's book, such as Tabbed Browsing and putting them into IE7, the will stop the users who are not very tech savvy from changing to firefox, therefore still keeping the larger user base

Mozilla has an advantage with the fact that they can release a new version practically anytime, with updates nightly or anything. IE updates have to go out to everyone using it, and in general the people will not know as much, therefore creating more trouble.

Re:comeback (4, Interesting)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983806)

Actually by including tabbed browsing they are taking a leaf from Opera's book, same as Mozilla did. Credit where its due.

Re:comeback (1)

404 Clue Not Found (763556) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983854)

I thought Opera was the first to use a MDI to display sites, but not the first to use actual "Tabbed Browsing"?

Does anyone have an actual chronology of tabbed browsing?

Re:comeback (5, Informative)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983871)

IIRC tabbed browsing first apeared in NetCaptor an alt IE GUI browser , then in opera 4.
Wikipedia seems to agree with me
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetCaptor [wikipedia.org]

Re:comeback (3, Informative)

404 Clue Not Found (763556) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983927)

Actually, I wrote that Wikipedia entry* and I originally stated that NetCaptor is one of the first browsers to use tabbed browsing. That, as far as I know, is true.

But then an anonymous user came along and changed "one of the first" to "very first" -- this I cannot verify. More research into the tabbed browsing timeline would be needed. Another site claims that a browser known as "Booklinks InternetWorks" was actually the first, but I can't verify that either.

*Look in the edit history. User Clueless is me. 67.101.182.118 changed it to "very first".

Re:comeback (1)

croddy (659025) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983873)

actually, by including a tabbed interface, they are taking a page from OS/2's book, same as mozilla and opera did. credit where it's due.

Re:comeback (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983893)

That is very true , i remember that being one of the best features of os/2 froma navigation point . ;) but to be super pedantic , does anyone know the name of the guy who invented the tabbing system for file folders (as in , the physical object), the ones i have loads of laying around that im too lazy to digitise

Re:comeback (2, Interesting)

Artifakt (700173) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983867)

Firefox is likely to release much more often than IE, and to continue to grow, but they will get slower expansion from a typical upgrade. If a new release has some feature as useful as pop-up blocking, or even tabbed browsing, Firefox attracts a big bunch of new users. Unless there's a really impressive feature in some new release, expect incremental growth, and a long struggle with Microsoft.
Full CSS implementation for the net will be sweet, and will probably come about partly through Mozilla Foundation, but it won't draw customers as fast as pop-up blocking did.
Microsoft has one inherent advantage - they load IE as part of windows, so the average user doesn't see the load time. If it weren't for that, they would have lost a lot more share already. Making Firefox smaller and faster, and plugging aledged memory leaks needs to happen, so as to "minimize drag". It's not glamorous work, but doing it minimizes MS's one remaining big advantage in the browser wars.
For firefox coders, if you don't have a feature at least as useful as tabbed browsing to add, it looks like it's all a matter of improving bloat, security, or stability.

Re:comeback (1)

tedric (8215) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983899)

Does anybody have a link about the new features that are coming with IE7? On the one hand, I'm glad that Firefox is gaining market share because variaty is good in this case, on the other hand I hope that IE5 and IE6 users will move at least to IE7. Why? Because I have to maintain a Java Applet for my company and I hope that IE7 comes without a MS Java Plugin, so I finally can get rid of all this Java 1.1 code.

Uhh (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983793)

It's 6 freaking perecent. It's not much. It's nothing to get excited about, nor is it news.

Re:Uhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983878)

6 percent is tens of millions of users

Oh, it most certainly IS news, my fren'. (1)

rah1420 (234198) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983883)

I think that if you were a Microsoftie and you uttered this in BillG's earshot you would quickly find yourself on the streets of Redmond sans job.

It IS news to MS. Their hegemony is threatened. Anything that reverses their dominance in the market is sure to be news to them.

And a word to MS: If you don't take heed, if you think that it's "Inconceivable!" that FF can upset your apple-cart, then you may be in the same unenviable position that the railroad barons were after the ascendancy of the automobile.

As you recall, these guys were the ne plus ultra of their time. Now railroads are largely irrelevant. [1] And the railroad barons at the time thought the same thing, no doubt: "It's six freaking percent. It's not much. It's nothing to get excited about, nor is it news."

Oh it is. It's the zephyr before the storm-blast.

----
[1]Well they are unless you take the PATH tubes into Manhattan in the morning instead of driving. :)

XUL IDE (5, Interesting)

haeger (85819) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983800)

Great news.
What I'm missing is a good XUL IDE. I hear that KDevelop is going to support XUL soon and there are others, but one thing that Microsoft does really well is to help the developers to get started. Now if there just were a good IDE with syntax highlighting, completion and testing I think XUL apps would really take off. Don't you?

.haeger

Re:XUL IDE, try Komodo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983901)


Komodo is a XUL IDE that is also based on XUL and related Mozilla technologies. It's put out by Activestate and is not Free or free, but it should be nice to use and I've heard good things about it.

It's fairly cross-platform and will run on Windows, Linux, or Solaris.

So you don't have to look it up:
http://www.activestate.com/Products/Komodo/
Personal/Education: $30
Commercial use: $300
evaluation: $Free

I wonder (5, Interesting)

Ckwop (707653) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983803)

Are we at the peak of Firefox adoption or is this the calm before the storm?

I would never want to see Firefox reach the level of dominance that Internet Explorer has reacher. Having a 90% market share leads inexorably to the stalling of innovation.

A much better position would be for there to be lots of browsers with around 15% market share. This would foster creativity and would hammer home the importance of standards compliance.

I want the days of the software monopoly to come to an end, and Firefox may be the a catalyst for the wide spread disintegration of such monopolies.

Simon.

Re:I wonder (-1, Flamebait)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983828)

You suck. This thread sucks. Slashdot sucks. Too many low-IQ dumbasses who can't think rationally. It's this kind of thinking that got companies like SCO into trouble in the first place! Go home you insolent bastard.

The views expressed in this flame do no necessarily reflect the views of the true owner of this slashdot account. Viewer discretion is advised.

Re:I wonder (4, Insightful)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983860)

That is certainly important. Free Software encourages diversity. back in the day, even in the world of proprietary software, people had alternatives, they would ask you what OS you run, if you had a gui or not, what word processor you used, or what spreadsheet, what browser, etc.

Now, people using proprietary software uses a given set of applications, for a given set of basic tasks, and there is allmost no variation, besides versions.

Free Software encourages the necesary diversitiy in the software that is used. I Think there are not 2 geeks that has the same setup on their Free Software Box. We have various OSs to choose from, and we do, in the case of GNU/Linux, we have different distros, we use various browsers, terminal emulators, editors, office suits, IM programs, media players, mail clients, etc,etc, etc.

ALMAFUERTE

Re:I wonder (2, Insightful)

etymxris (121288) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983866)

Having a 90% market share leads inexorably to the stalling of innovation.
I don't think this is true for open source projects. I know Apache doesn't have 90% market share, but it is dominant, and still continues active development. It is continually developed because the people working on it feel that it needs new features. Conversely, new features are not added where a package does everything it needs to do. Closest I can think of is grep. For things like Firefox, I expect that will be a long time in coming.

In contrast, commercial products keep adding features where they aren't really needed. I'm going to whip out the old example of MS Word. I'm sure someone's going to respond saying how invaluable some new whizbang feature just added to the latest version of MS Word is to them, but such people are certainly in the minority.

Microsoft didn't add anything to IE for so long because there was no money in it. They only reason they had a browser was to head off Netscape becoming a platform unto itself. Once Netscape was thoroughly squashed, no more reason to develop. Word is a standalone product, so it is subject to different rules. And finally, the entire OS is a mixed case because while there are those who upgrade, the vast majority of OS software is bought with a new PC. And with a virtual monopoly on OEM installs, MS could afford to let its OS stagnate for years.

Re:I wonder (3, Insightful)

404 Clue Not Found (763556) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983869)

Only if they are all standards-compliant. The SAME standards.

The last thing we need is another browser wars and having to design redundant pages for 9 different browsers.

Re:I wonder (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983934)

I would never want to see Firefox reach the level of dominance that Internet Explorer has reacher. Having a 90% market share leads inexorably to the stalling of innovation.

Whoa there, slow down now! You must be new here. I think you meant to write, "Microsoft leads inexorably to the stalling of innovation."

Remember kids, use the Preview button!

;)

User-Agent cloaking (5, Informative)

quokkapox (847798) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983812)

Any statistics of Firefox usage based on http log analysis will have to be adjusted upwards by some unknown factor based on how many people surf as MSIE using the User Agent Switcher Extension.

Re:User-Agent cloaking (1)

404 Clue Not Found (763556) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983881)

No, there just has to be a general unknown factor. Firefox isn't the only alternative browser that disguises its user agent.

Re:User-Agent cloaking (1)

nmoog (701216) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983949)

I should hope that by 2005 it is 0% - it fucking should be! I don't know if this is an excuse make us Firefoxers feel good about themselves or just a leftover misconception from 1997, but no one uses useragent cloaking, and if they should then they are a pretty low level nerd... All us nerds learnt to stop that practise when they found out it hindering us.

It seems that the only reason to bring up user-agent cloaking on slashdot is to try and grab some mod points.

(Hope it works!)

Sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983816)

The company claims its updated browser will offer better protections against phishing, malicious software, and spyware.

Better than Linx?

Re:Sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983843)

Offering better protections against phishing is to be welcomed. But why are they going to continue offering malicious software and spyware? That's what put people off in the first place.

Does anyone know of a graph? (1)

DoorFrame (22108) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983823)

Does anyone know of a graph that shows broswer usage over the last few years and actually has up to date numbers? Just wondering.

slashdotted? (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983825)

How come the article is not yet slashdotted? Is it because it is the weekend or what? This is one of the very few times I have been successful with an article within its first minutes of posting. That was good news though. Go Firefox go...!

Re:slashdotted? (-1, Offtopic)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983838)

Because slashdot SUCKS and nobody READ it.

keep burnin' that karma. Gotta get to "sewage" level.

Re:slashdotted? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983885)

as of this fine post, that makes 7 of 38 posts in this thread from you nuclear elephant. dontcha think its about time you
  • SHUT THE HELL UP

Re:slashdotted? (1)

bcmm (768152) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983919)

Obviously. We play Quake at weekends.

Slashdot is only fun when you're looking over your shoulder for the PHB...

I Would like to think that IE is loosing ... (3, Insightful)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983833)

But Most of the users that are currently switching are users that allready used browsers other than IE (That is, Opera, Mozilla Suite, Netscape, etc. users). I would like to see actual numbers, not numbers that cames from the logs of some website, but stats that let's us track individual browser use, and see who is switching from what to what.
Most Internet Explorer market is people with default windows installs, and that is at least 70% of the market. That people is not going to switch anytime soon. So the grow of firefox will sadly certainly encounter it's roof soon.

I Would also like to make something clear, this is not a victory for Free Software like many people understand. This is not a victory against propietary software. Most of the people that installs Firefox doens't undestand or care about the fact that firefox is Free Software. Most firefox installs are under windows.
We will be talking about the victory of Free Software when people understands why Free Software is important, and why proprietary software shouldn't be used, and NOT when some specific piece of Free Software gains marketshare.

This is good but... (2, Insightful)

Krankheit (830769) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983834)

I am worried about the future. With IE7 on it's way, is this going to slow down the adoption of Firefox by the masses? Is Microsoft going to start advertising everywhere that IE7 is on the way so users will think "Nevermind Firefox, I can just use IE6 because IE7 will be out soon and it will work better with my sites"? (re: vapourware effect, not that I don't think Microsoft won't release it) Also, the bug that causes the user to lose the entire contents of their hard disk drive while uninstalling Firefox 1.0 is worrysome. But I've warned all my coworkers, relatives and friends (who run Firefox 1.0) to not upgrade by uninstalling and installing Firefox 1.01.

Re:This is good but... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983926)

Who's waiting for IE7? Microsoft has just begun to talk publicly about what features they might include in a new version. Is anyone expecting a new Internet Explorer this year? Let's speculate that IE7 will be the one new feature of Longhorn that acutally makes it to release. :)

Other browsers gained more. (5, Interesting)

dannytaggart (835766) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983835)

use of Firefox rose to 6.17% from 5.59% in January.
Firefox's gain comes at the expense of Internet Explorer, which dropped to 89.04% market share, from 90.31% in December.


So, IE has dropped by 1.27% and Firefox has risen by 0.58%. That means other browsers have risen by 0.67%, which is more than Firefox.

Re:Other browsers gained more. (3, Insightful)

fruey (563914) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983863)

I think you're miscalculating. The set which includes all other browsers has risen more than the single browser Firefox, but as long as that set has even share in growth, that means Firefox is still very much the leader.

Often Wonder (3, Funny)

The Dobber (576407) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983877)

use of Firefox rose to 6.17% from 5.59% in January

I always like how they manage to get these results out to the second decimal place.

I converted, IE evil, FireFox good. I'm warming to ThunderTurd.

10% Market Share.. then BOOM! (1)

POds (241854) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983886)

I remember from somewhere that growth rates of products increasily rapidly once their market share reaches 10%. What out for it!

Firefox for the masses... (5, Insightful)

asciimonster (305672) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983905)

If the uses of firefox increases, shouldn't we think about makeing this broser more appealing for "the masses"? In other words how do we make a better browsing experience for everybody? (I mean: How do we have Firefox protect John Doe from doing dumb things on the internet?)

I was thinking about the following: Every time the is a security warning, such as "Do you want to install this programme?" or "Do you want this java applet complete access to your hard disk?", shouldn't there also be a button marked "I have no idea what this means" and make it the default button. This button has obviously the same function as cancel.

Until IE7 comes out - that is.... (3, Insightful)

sproketboy (608031) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983907)

I hate M$ but I'm realistic. Once IE7 comes out - matter how badly it will support standards, people will go back to it.

Re:Until IE7 comes out - that is.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983936)

people will go back to it

I won't, my parents won't, my wife won't, my friends won't, my colleagues won't, my irc-friends won't.

I know I don't know many people, but I really don't know anyone that would go back to IE after Firefox. And I can't see any reasons why anyone would? Because it has *some* of the features that Firefox has?

Real world stats? (1)

greypilgrim (799369) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983913)

These stats give useful worldwide usage. But what about local? Have you guys all seen a similar trend on your own websites? I know that on my website, which is not really a tech site, firefox currently accounts for 27.9%, and it has been steadily increasing.

Not sure this makes sense (4, Interesting)

bblazer (757395) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983924)

I am having problems with this calculation - I may probably not thinking clearly this morning. If Firefox has 6 percent and IE is now below 90% (granted they don't give an exact figure) then that means that other browsers like Safari, Opera, Netscape, Mozilla and Conquer total for only 4% of usage? Since Apple has about a 5% market share, and Safari is the de-facto browser for Apple, doesn't that mean that mean that all of the other bowsers I mentioned basically are not used by anyone? My website statistics do not show that. I would guess that IE is WAY below 90%; maybe even approaching somewhere in the 70% area.

How Firefox Adoption Effects Linux/*BSD Adoption (1)

Krankheit (830769) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983933)

In my experiences with users, I have noticed you almost never see a user go from using MSIE/Outlook and Windows to migrate to *BSD or Linux. It seems an MSIE/Outlook Windows user will migrate to Firefox (typically) for their browser. Then, they will migrate to Thunderbird or gmail. After that, they get interested in Linux (it seems almost impossible to explain to them about the *BSDs). Based on this logic, I think Firefox (and sometimes Thunderbird) is where the migration to OSS starts for the typical user. For corporations, this may be different because Firefox is harder manage using traditional means (no group policies), but I think you could have a bunch of X terminals setup to go to one machine and one Firefox installation instance for all users of a particular group on *nix.

Speed issue (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983935)

As long as firefox does not fix it's speed issues, the market share will not beat IE. There are bug reports about memory leaks and regular slow downs after a while for about half a year now. As long as they they are not willing to fix this, some people will not switch to firefox as their standard browser.

Besides, it makes me really suspicious that they cannot handle this bugs. Doesn't leave a good impression on me.

Microsoft could easily win this (minor) war (5, Interesting)

FlynnMP3 (33498) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983938)

All they would have to do is completely support CSS 2.1. Maybe even do CSS3 support with all the extension for accessability for webpages. Bump up of the control of the printing device. Have CSS selectors that act for some of the less used options that are dead if they aren't there. Geek support will gradually come in. They won't like it, but they'll have to eventually admit standards are supported.

Then for the final business reason to keep IE. Make a .NET control that gives complete control over the manipulation and creation of Office documents. Yes, this will put at least 3 companies out of business. But this will also ensure (ensnare?) businesses.

Then everybody will have what they want. Business types just want excel/office for browing the Internet and the tech types will be able to code standards compliant web pages for their intranets.

Oh...and as a side note. Work on security a bit too. Personally, I don't see how they are going to fix it with backward compatability a overriding requirement. If they can't get rid of ActiveX, then their security problem won't go away.

-I hate unripe sigs.

We... Can't win like this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11983939)

You are going to mod me as troll, but we can't win like this. The reason we can't win like this is because we are becoming complacent. We can't let our own arrogance and pride be our downfall. Until we make Internet Explorer go the way of the Dodo bird, we have a real problem.

We need to keep fighting as hard as we can and not slow down for anything.

Lotto in the UK (1)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 9 years ago | (#11983946)

Hopefully this will prompt the National Lottery's website in the UK to let me access the Subscriptions part without telling me that my browser isn't secure enough.

Try going here [national-lottery.co.uk] using FireFox and you'll see what I mean.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...