Download Firefox 3, set a world record

Set a Guinness World Record, enjoy a better web. It's the goal of the Spread Firefox group when Firefox 3 goes final this summer.

"Sounds like a good deal, right? All you have to do is get Firefox 3 during Download Day to help set the record for most software downloads in 24 hours - it's that easy. We're not asking you to swallow a sword or to balance 30 spoons on your face, although that would be kind of awesome," the site says.

This will take approximately a week after the attempt date to know if the record was broken. Judges from Spread Firefox and Guinness World Records will need to review download logs and validate the record attempt. This is the first record attempt of its kind so there is no set number to beat, although the group looks to the number of Firefox 2 downloads on its launch day, which was 1.6 million. 5 million seems to be their target for Firefox 3.

One of the biggest hurdles faced is the fact that a "download" is the transmission of the entire, fully functioning Firefox 3 -- not just an update.

The official release date for Firefox 3 has not been announced yet, however, Spread Firefox claims to be posting on their site "soon."

View: Download Day 2008

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Comcast DNS record comprimised

Next Story

Trend Micro reports whitehouse.org serving up malware

65 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

i'm sticking to the topic and its firefox all the way baby!

to ie7& safari- i tried both of you and you failed me in numerous ways. i cant even make you pretty and talented.

I put this in the same catagory as those stupid Mac comericials bashing Vista. If the Mac was that great then they would need no advertising, just like Firefox needs none, if its so great.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
EXACTLY!

oh man, and that vista bashing commercial ****es me off so much... ive had vista for almost a year now, and i havn't had any real problems. only stuff that happened was hardware related issues (me trying to get non vista compatible stuff to work)

There's not much enthusiasm anymore similar to what we have in the first launch. You cannot use the hype card twice if you failed to satisfactorily deliver the first time with all the memory leaks, breaking add-on updates, etc.

Wow, people really take things seriously.. it's just a fun little marketing stunt, if you don't like it.. don't participate.

(macel said @ #25)
Wow, people really take things seriously.. it's just a fun little marketing stunt, if you don't like it.. don't participate.

Exactly, they need to lighten up really.

I'm surprised nobody brought up the fact that Foxkeh is so cute in that pose and costume. :p

Back on topic, GO FIREFOX!

More marketing BS to push a sub-par browser for a record that doesn't yet exist will give more ammo as an argument as to how FF is the best browser

(bluarash said @ #17.1)
Sub-par browser, FF3... wtf. Are you serious?


With out question. Fanboys look facts in the face and still spit out tripe, "its the fastest, its the safest, the new one doesn't use much memory and blah blah blah"

Heres what its done http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html

Heres what its doing http://nontroppo.org/timer/kestrel_tests/

and check Secuna for the safe factor

then there is the fact that just about every other browser is more feature rich out of the box. Yes it has plugins but that is thanks to the community and not the browser. Proof of that is most plugins break on updates. Now it hasn't been very buggy for me over the years which is a big plus but the memory use which is still 5x that of Opera (with the same things open and no plugins), the load speed which is still slow and the lack of functions without the aid of its users make it a sub-par browser because other browsers simply perform better. Of course none of that matters when you have good marketing, just ask Apple

(Blaxima said @ #17.2)

With out question. Fanboys look facts in the face and still spit out tripe, "its the fastest, its the safest, the new one doesn't use much memory and blah blah blah"

Heres what its done http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html

Heres what its doing http://nontroppo.org/timer/kestrel_tests/

and check Secuna for the safe factor

then there is the fact that just about every other browser is more feature rich out of the box. Yes it has plugins but that is thanks to the community and not the browser. Proof of that is most plugins break on updates. Now it hasn't been very buggy for me over the years which is a big plus but the memory use which is still 5x that of Opera (with the same things open and no plugins), the load speed which is still slow and the lack of functions without the aid of its users make it a sub-par browser because other browsers simply perform better. Of course none of that matters when you have good marketing, just ask Apple

The first link has nothing with Firefox 3 and the second link was all tested before Firefox 3 was even in beta. I'm not sure what beta version it was but I know the javascript engine got quite a boost in one of its beta releases. As for being feature rich out of the box, that is generally a user preference in that some people just want the basic **** right out of the box. I agree the memory problems are and have been an issue but for me it has still been less of a problem then running IE6 (haven't messed with 7 much at all 'cause I cant stand the out of box UI at all). Most addon's only break because the major/minor version number changes. This is to avoid potential unknown problems but is often not a major deal and the addon can be unlocked to work with the new version. Even then though most of the major/good addon's are updated to work pretty quickly.

All and all it comes down to personal preference though

this is especially dumb, in addition to all of the previously stated reasons but....

THERE IS NO CURRENT RECORD. which means the record has absolutely ZERO meaning!... although i never had any respect for the book of world records, the stuff in there is stupid. "person to balance the most spoons on their nose while petting a dog and rubbing their stomach' <- thats the kind of crap in there.

darkpuma said, " although i never had any respect for the book of world records, the stuff in there is stupid. "person to balance the most spoons on their nose while petting a dog and rubbing their stomach' <- thats the kind of crap in there. "

your right, but im sure there's also some more respectable world records in there to ... but even the so called 'stupid stuff' even though somewhat pointless aint easy to do in some cases.

How very pointless .. a browser should get download because it is a good browser. Not because of some stupid world record with pledges ... this is just pointless.

Then again .. Firefox fanboys fap over this kind of crap...

i agree with MMaster23 ... but i think at the end of the day all that 'cheerleading' adds up to advertisement and getting the browser more out in the open ;)

p.s. i been using Firefox myself since a little before the v1.0 release as my main browser i aint used IE much since then.

(ThaCrip said @ #13.1)
i agree with MMaster23 ... but i think at the end of the day all that 'cheerleading' adds up to advertisement and getting the browser more out in the open ;)

p.s. i been using Firefox myself since a little before the v1.0 release as my main browser i aint used IE much since then.


yeah. back then when it was still called firebird 0.6

Another advertisement of FF fanboys for FF fanboys... yay.
Hope they fix the critical security holes in the final version.

(PrEzi said @ #10)
Another advertisement of FF fanboys for FF fanboys... yay.
Hope they fix the critical security holes in the final version.

Exactly, it's like Apple fans - they think they have a better product than anyone else.
Well I know which is better thanks.

I'm willing to bet there is a way to turn off that history if you don't care for it, by using about:config. Not as elegent as a option choice but workable.
I personally like it, it helps for sites I don't have bookmarked but still visit occasionally.

Its not that big of a deal to download a full install, but I really don't see the point. Its just a record, who cares.

Pretty sad attempt to get a wider userbase, I'd rather use Safari, much more polished. Although the Mac version of Firefox is looking much better than 2.0 so I'll give them that.

Safari is too polished in the sense that they spent more time polishing than actually adding features. The Firefox feature set blows Safari's out of the water.

Very sad attempt. Mozilla sure thinks highly of themselves.

I don't agree with Safari looking more polished - FireFox looks and performs better than Safari.

(C_Guy said @ #7.2)
Very sad attempt. Mozilla sure thinks highly of themselves.

I don't agree with Safari looking more polished - FireFox looks and performs better than Safari.

Except it isn't written in Cocoa. As such, Safari still has the best all-around integration with OS X by default.

Actually, the numbers are about as accurate as it gets when it comes to counting downloads. ;)


Now if you want to interpolate usage statisics from those numbers, you get muddy.
But I don't see anyone attempting to do that, do you?

I might use it once there's a way to turn off that hideous history bar that drops down every time you type an address.

Cool, thanks.

I understand what they were attempting to do, but with all the different fonts and sizes it just looks like a big mess.

(TRC said @ #5.3)
Cool, thanks.

I understand what they were attempting to do, but with all the different fonts and sizes it just looks like a big mess.

I used to think the same, but its kinda grown on me now.

(ecotrojan said @ #3)
why would anyone want to use firefox when IE7 rocks?

There's always one little fanboy that pops up out of the woodwork! :suspicious:

Because it's terrible.

I actually reformatted my computer a few months ago because I thought that's when they were going to release the final version of Firefox 3. Well it didn't come and I thought, well, I've always used FF2, I'll try IE until Firefox comes out in June.

Well I didn't give up on it the first day but looking back I might as well have. It has probably crashed every other day since March, it locks up, it's slow, bookmars are sluggish to deal with, I miss all the extensions from Firefox, and ironically, I've had more websites screw up in IE than in FF.

(bluarash said @ #3.4)
For the majority of individuals, IE is not a choice but a product that they get locked into. A rather poor one at that.

You are wrong, i am not Locked into IE since i can download firefox as well...but you know what? i use IE, bcos as the other member said its the users choice..and firefox maybe great in certain features...but for me, who work for corporate company & visit secure websites, we are used with IE & program for the same (browser IE)

(artnada said @ #3.1)

There's always one little fanboy that pops up out of the woodwork! :suspicious:

It's personal choice buddy, and if personal choice makes one a fanboy, then that also classifies you as a fanboy.

(guruparan said @ #3.6)

You are wrong, i am not Locked into IE since i can download firefox as well...but you know what? i use IE, bcos as the other member said its the users choice..and firefox maybe great in certain features...but for me, who work for corporate company & visit secure websites, we are used with IE & program for the same (browser IE)

I never said that you didn't have a choice. What I said was that the majority of individuals really don't. Anyone who visits this website is capable of installing Firefox (or Opera). As for secure websites... IE is not secure, no web browser is period. It dos not matter if it is running in protected mode. The only safe web browser is one that is not connected to a network and I am not sure what the purpose of that would be... other than to run code (test) or use it as an engine to render other work (net apps).

The only real reasons to use only IE is licensing, poorly designed intranet services (pick your fav MS book) or maybe a website that uses a lot of activeX. VPN? SSH?

I have FF2 and FF3 RC1 loaded and a Web/Home key on my keyboard. FF2 is what opens when I push the key (daily out of habit). When it opens, I'm presented that page. I close it and open FF3 and go to that page as well. Opening FF2 will yield the same result, again, so that number could be skewed.

They should go for a record of *installs* instead. Each time it's installed, it loads that "You've installed Firefox 3" page. They could just count hits on that. Counting downloads is pointless. It has ZERO meaning whatsoever.

(semifamous said @ #1)
They should go for a record of *installs* instead. Each time it's installed, it loads that "You've installed Firefox 3" page. They could just count hits on that. Counting downloads is pointless. It has ZERO meaning whatsoever.

That would be too easy to fake I would think.

Still:

One of the biggest hurdles faced is the fact that a "download" is the transmission of the entire, fully functioning Firefox 3 -- not just an update.

So all of the people who have RC* and update to the final build from that won't get counted.
What about people who download the file once and install it on a 10-15 computer network like me here at work?
Counting downloads is stupid. There must be a better way.

It's going for the world record for the greatest number of downloads. It doesn't have to "mean" anything. As long as it is downloaded more times in 24 hours than anything else, it'll be the world record holder.