Download Firefox 3, set a world record
Posted by Michael Stanclift on 29 May 2008 - 17:21 · 68 comments & 19862 views
About the Author
Full name: Michael Stanclift
Forum name: Marshalus
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Michael Stanclift
Forum name: Marshalus
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(3 replies)
#1 Posted by semifamous on 29 May 2008 - 17:30
- 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.
-
#1.1 Posted by Marshalus on 29 May 2008 - 17:31
- (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. -
#1.2 Posted by semifamous on 29 May 2008 - 17:48
- 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.
-
(1 reply)
#2 Posted by Mathachew on 29 May 2008 - 17:32
- 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.
-
(8 replies)
#3 Posted by ecotrojan on 29 May 2008 - 17:49
- why would anyone want to use firefox when IE7 rocks?
-
#3.1 Posted by artnada on 29 May 2008 - 17:56
- (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!
-
#3.2 Posted by vanacid on 29 May 2008 - 18:12
- Because I can't use IE on my Mac, I must use Firefox
(and sometimes Safari, but I miss Firefox add-ons with Safari). -
#3.3 Posted by OblivionStalker on 29 May 2008 - 19:54
- (artnada said @ #3.1)(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!
Because it is a personal choice. -
#3.4 Posted by bluarash on 29 May 2008 - 21:54
- For the majority of individuals, IE is not a choice but a product that they get locked into. A rather poor one at that.
-
#3.5 Posted by Gamerhomie on 30 May 2008 - 03:49
- 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. -
#3.6 Posted by guruparan on 30 May 2008 - 10:56
- (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) -
#3.7 Posted by ToastedJellyBowl on 30 May 2008 - 15:28
- (artnada said @ #3.1)(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!
It's personal choice buddy, and if personal choice makes one a fanboy, then that also classifies you as a fanboy.
-
#3.8 Posted by bluarash on 30 May 2008 - 22:32
- (guruparan said @ #3.6)(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)
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?
-
(1 reply)
#4 Posted by superkid on 29 May 2008 - 18:06
- There's gonna be a heavy load downloading on the day then.
-
#4.1 Posted by advancedboy on 30 May 2008 - 20:14
- Remember when MS released the public Vista beta, and it actually slowed down some of the internet? I anticipate that to happen again.
-
(4 replies)
#5 Posted by TRC on 29 May 2008 - 18:15
- 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.
-
#5.1 Posted by cyberdrone2000 on 29 May 2008 - 18:37
- Your wish be granted!
Oldbar Addon for Firefox 3.0 -
#5.2 Posted by +Dakkaroth on 29 May 2008 - 18:55
- I love it honestly, but it's all about preference I guess.
-
#5.3 Posted by TRC on 29 May 2008 - 19:50
- 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. -
#5.4 Posted by Pc_Madness on 29 May 2008 - 20:26
- (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. :s
-
(3 replies)
#6 Posted by
neufuse on 29 May 2008 - 18:26
- Is it just me, or are all these "download" statistic and stunts getting annoying?
-
#6.1 Posted by waruikoohii on 29 May 2008 - 18:58
- Very annoying, especially since we know that the numbers aren't terribly accurate.
-
#6.2 Posted by +shakey_snake on 29 May 2008 - 19:37
- 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?
-
(3 replies)
#7 Posted by Xero on 29 May 2008 - 18:30
- 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.
-
#7.1 Posted by PureLegend on 29 May 2008 - 18:35
- 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.
-
#7.2 Posted by C_Guy on 29 May 2008 - 19:11
- 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. -
#7.3 Posted by LTD on 30 May 2008 - 10:14
- (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.
-
#8 Posted by ghos on 29 May 2008 - 18:32
- 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.
-
#9 Posted by exotoxic on 29 May 2008 - 18:59
- you just know there will be a few people that use some script to download it over and over
-
(1 reply)
#10 Posted by PrEzi on 29 May 2008 - 19:16
- Another advertisement of FF fanboys for FF fanboys... yay.
Hope they fix the critical security holes in the final version. -
#10.1 Posted by Exosphere on 29 May 2008 - 19:29
- (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.
-
(1 reply)
#11 Posted by Magallanes on 29 May 2008 - 19:41
- how cute logo.
-
#11.1 Posted by LipSmacker on 30 May 2008 - 11:56
- It has a nice Olympic touch to it! :-)
-
(1 reply)
#12 Posted by brianshapiro on 29 May 2008 - 19:45
- I'm going to download on a different day, just so my download doesn't get added to the count. I hate Firefox cheerleading
-
(2 replies)
#13 Posted by MMaster23 on 29 May 2008 - 20:08
- 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... -
#13.1 Posted by ThaCrip on 29 May 2008 - 21:49
- 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. -
#13.2 Posted by giasens on 30 May 2008 - 09:39
- (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
-
#15 Posted by scaramonga on 29 May 2008 - 21:15
- No getting away from the Fox
-
(1 reply)
#16 Posted by darkpuma on 29 May 2008 - 21:28
- 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. -
#16.1 Posted by ThaCrip on 29 May 2008 - 21:51
- 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.
-
(4 replies)
#17 Posted by Blaxima on 29 May 2008 - 21:42
- 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
-
#17.2 Posted by Blaxima on 29 May 2008 - 22:07
- (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 -
#17.3 Posted by SOOPRcow on 29 May 2008 - 23:11
- (Blaxima said @ #17.2)(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
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
-
#17.4 Posted by macel on 30 May 2008 - 05:00
- (Blaxima said @ #17.2)Heres what its doing http://nontroppo.org/timer/kestrel_tests/
Wow, Opera fanboy site found Opera to be the fastest browser! Shocking!
Here's a firefox fanboy site that finds Firefox 3 to be the fastest browser ™, http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=630259
Very Very Strange!
-
#18 Posted by Saarineames on 29 May 2008 - 22:16
- Completely unnecessary. What a reach.
-
#19 Posted by night_stalker_z on 29 May 2008 - 22:50
- It be funny if they ran out of bandwidth on the day and only got around 100 downloads.
-
#22 Posted by Cyber Dog on 30 May 2008 - 03:25
- How many downloads do you think they'll get after the influx of traffic farks their servers?
-
#24 Posted by rpgfan on 30 May 2008 - 04:17
- I'm surprised nobody brought up the fact that Foxkeh is so cute in that pose and costume. :p
Back on topic, GO FIREFOX!
-
(1 reply)
#25 Posted by macel on 30 May 2008 - 04:51
- Wow, people really take things seriously.. it's just a fun little marketing stunt, if you don't like it.. don't participate.
-
#25.1 Posted by Sub_Zero_Alchemist on 30 May 2008 - 05:11
- (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.
-
#26 Posted by em_te on 30 May 2008 - 05:23
- What a clear advertisement to hackers to infiltrate any of Mozilla's edge servers and plant a rootkit!
-
#27 Posted by Unplugged on 30 May 2008 - 07:54
- Can you download something straight into the recycle bin?
-
#28 Posted by Jebadiah on 30 May 2008 - 09:38
- All this hoopla over the download, but what's the date? Anyone?
-
#29 Posted by LTD on 30 May 2008 - 10:17
- I don't know how Safari worked its way in here.
This isn't even about Safari.
In any case, until Firefox is written in Cocoa, Safari still has, by default, the best integration with OS X (i.e., Keychain, etc.)
Which isn't to say that FF hasn't come a long way. As I had written in a thread a few weeks ago, FF 3 is quite impressive.
-
#30 Posted by Cyranthus on 30 May 2008 - 10:24
- i think it would help their cause alot more if they had a release date... rather than just 'soon'
-
#31 Posted by ArKeYa on 30 May 2008 - 10:47
- 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.
-
(1 reply)
#32 Posted by Night Prowler on 30 May 2008 - 11:18
- 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.
-
#32.1 Posted by darkpuma on 30 May 2008 - 21:18
- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
-
#33 Posted by 3rd impact on 30 May 2008 - 13:15
- 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.
"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."