Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

World Firefox Day 251

kbrosnan writes "Are you a fan of Firefox? Want to spread the word to a friend who hasn't heard of it yet? If you can convince just one person to switch to Firefox before September 15th, you'll both be immortalized in Firefox 2.0's source code."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World Firefox Day

Comments Filter:
  • by patio11 ( 857072 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:41AM (#15728123)
    If you want to be known for all eternity as someone who did not spam your friends and family, post here and be immortalized on Slashdot and the will-someday-be-omniscient Google Cache.
  • Alternative Method (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jvalenzu ( 96614 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:42AM (#15728126) Homepage
    How about fixing some bugs, or shrinking that memory footprint. Then you can be immortalized in the code *and* you don't have to be a nuisance to your friends.
    • Screw that. I'm going to fork the code and put my name in every other line.

      Okay, might not be the most scalable solution. So how about displaying a full-page ad in some obscure newspaper? I've got this great idea... make it all yellow, include a picture of Mount Rushmore, and then claim that dead presidents who knew nothing about computers would actually use it because it's FREE FREE FREE. Yeah! Now I just need to start raising money.
  • now this... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by joe 155 ( 937621 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:42AM (#15728127) Journal a good idea, it gets people like us who like firefox, and would secretly like to have their names in the code, to go out and really try to get other prople to use Firefox in a way that costs nothing for them (well, almost nothing). So everyone wins... I'm going to do it now.
  • by lanswitch ( 705539 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:42AM (#15728128)
    Add Microsoft. They make people switch to firefox.
  • by griffjon ( 14945 ) <> on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:43AM (#15728132) Homepage Journal
    So, we all know that as the user-base increases in size and diversifies, the code tends towards bloat, but really, do you have to make it a 1:1 ratio??
  • you'll both be immortalized in Firefox 2.0's source code
    This finally explains the recent bloat in Firefox. :-)
  • Because we know how many people will read through that to find your name... one... you! Anyhow, I think I'll refer tons of people just to get a really large font mention in the source, maybe I can get every other line even. Of course, I'd prefer to have all the variables named after me, carmen electra, and awesome. Awesome = me * carmen electra. That would be sweet!
  • Kids (Score:5, Funny)

    by Joebert ( 946227 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:48AM (#15728163) Homepage
    Amongst some of the names allready registered,

    1) Harry Sachs
    2) Hugh G Rection
    3) Ivana Tinkle
  • Is Firefox taking the Amway route now?
  • by Bodero ( 136806 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:49AM (#15728171)
    What's the point? I'll probably just be commented out.
    • Re:What's the point? (Score:5, Informative)

      by vrwarp ( 624266 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @12:12PM (#15728236) Homepage Journal
      From the FAQ: How will our names be included in Firefox 2? If both you and your friend opt-in to have your names included, we'll add your names to an interactive Firefox friends display that will be accessible from within Firefox 2.
      • by A beautiful mind ( 821714 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @12:48PM (#15728366)
        I'm starting to be afraid that PR is crushing what dare I say, used to be, a geek browser.

        Firefox 2.0 gives us, what:

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

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

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

        I know feature creep is tempting. It gives you a nice feeling that you've implemented something, etc. BUT IT LEADS TO BLOAT. I think inevitably the Netscape -> Mozilla -> Firefox cycle will start again soon. "Hey, let's create a new fast , slim browser and let's call it firebird!" What an innovative idea...
  • by excelsior_gr ( 969383 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:53AM (#15728183)
    ...all the people that I know have already switched to Firefox. The people that refused to switch, I now pretend not to know.
    • A fellow IS worker had me clean up her computer (she had a doozy of an AdArson) didn't have Firefox on her computer so I had to install it for her and went through my 30 minute spiel about how much better it is than IE (she was like "oh I don't want this I love IE" before my speech). There are still a few (though very few) people "in the know" who use IE as their standard browser (then again, how "in the know" is she if she had to have someone else fix her computer). It amazes me that there are still peop
      • I have to admit, I switched from Firefox to IE7. IE7 isn't bad, it's a huge improvement. I never liked Firefox, but when they killed the Mozilla suite, I was kinda forced over. I keep Firefox around on my Windows machine for a few sites that still have bugs in IE7, but hopefully they will get worked out eventually (They are rather rare). Safari on my other computer. I might try FF when it hits 2.0, but I sure as hell won't be compiling from source. F that.
        • Mozilla as a Suite is not dead. Checkout Seamonkey.
        • People like you (as well as the IE developers) are why us web designers are still making IE hacks so that web pages display as frickin' web pages and not shit on a shingle like the default renderring of IE is.
          • People like me? I didn't do anything. Blame Microsoft. IE7 is on the road to standards compliance, but for now it's close enough. Ironic as it is, Firefox will become more viable when IE7 is compliant, because then it will render webpages "correctly" when they are designed with IE in mind. IE7 doesn't really have the extra bloat that Firefox has picked up, either (key word: extra. If I use Firefox, I'm STILL going to have some parts of IE running anyway). Though, I admit, I used Mozilla, which was pre
        • SeaMonkey 1.0 [] It is the community release of what would have been Mozilla Suite 1.8.
    • excelsior_gr (969383) wrote:
      ...all the people that I know have already switched to Firefox. The people that refused to switch, I now pretend not to know.

      The friends I call worthy of being friends have by now switched from Firefox to one of the many less bloated and more configurable alternatives (many of which use the same underlying Gecko engine).
      Firefox is so yesteryear.
  • Waste of bandwidth (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:53AM (#15728184)
    Lets say I download firefox 2 source to compile on my linux boxen. I am also forced to download kilobytes (megabytes?) of useless information embedded in comments. What is the point in this? I would like a dollar amount for what this campaign is costing in bandwidth and man hours. Would this be funds donated to the Mozilla Foundation in order for them to improve their browser? This wastage annoys me.

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

    One step forward, two steps back.
    • I have no idea how the parent post got modded as "interesting". Or perhaps since it's posted anonymously the person modded his or herself.

      This quote is funny because it's retarded: "I am also forced to download kilobytes (megabytes?) of useless information embedded in comments." News flash, this is slashdot. You download useless information embedded in comments every day. And this is one of them!
    • I would like a dollar amount for what this campaign is costing in bandwidth and man hours.

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

      Fuck you for diluting the language.

      • wastage Audio pronunciation of "wastage" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (wstj)

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

        Oh, come now. I found it perfectly cromulent.
    • by FooBarWidget ( 556006 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @01:07PM (#15728408)
      Text can be easily compressed by 80-90% by bzip2. Suppose that there are 100.000 names in the code, and the average length of a name is 15 characters. Counting newlines and comment prefixes (in the form of " * [name here]"), the space taken will be 100000 * (15 + 4) = 1900000 bytes, or 1855 KB. If the file is compressed by 85% then it'll become 278 KB. In comparison, the current Firefox 2.0b1 source tar.bz2 is 32 MB. 278 KB is about 0.8% of that. Hardly significant comparing that you as a Slashdotter probably has a broadband connection.

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

      Besides, marketing is important! You as a geek may not realize it, but crappy products can be more popular than your oh-so-mighty technically correct ones if the former is marketed better than the latter. While you're screaming on forums about the technical superiority of product B, everybody else is using the 'inferior' product A and couldn't care less what you moan about.
      • Better yet, store the names in a Bloom Filter []. Sure it's lossy, but it can fit an unlimited number of names into an arbitrarily small space.
      • You as a geek may not realize it, but crappy products can be more popular than your oh-so-mighty technically correct ones if the former is marketed better than the latter.

        What, in the browser market? Surely you jest.
      • There are many things to worry about but worrying about wasting bandwidth on names is just rediculous.
        But... think of the tubes!
      • It won't just be in the source it'll be in the actual program itself. 278k can take several minutes to download on dialup, just for something you'll never see.
        • And that 3-4 minutes is significant compared to how many hours it takes to download the entire file?

          I've found that even modem users these days usually don't care how long it takes to download something, as long as it's easy. If people care *that* much about download time then:
          - Everybody would have switched away from MP3 to Ogg/AAC (which offer the same quality for less space).
          - Commercial developers wouldn't bundle dependencies with their installer, but instead would ask people to download dependencies se
  • Ok so... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by vivin ( 671928 ) <> on Sunday July 16, 2006 @11:53AM (#15728185) Homepage Journal
    This is just bragging rights... right? I guess at the very least you convince someone to switch to Firefox. I mean... so they put umptybillion names into Firefox Code, that would be accessible from Firefox 2 []? Isn't that unecessary (and frivolous) bloat? Unless they plan on having you access it online - which means I guess you won't be able to view it offline... hmm...

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

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

    I'll go try it anyways...
    • I am not sure about the technical details about this project but no matter how they accomplish it, none of it will be in Firefox 3.* The code for Firefox 2 is already on a CVS branch. This means that code changes on the branch are not reflected on the trunk uless someone makes a check in to the trunk. *unless they apply same marketing strategy for Firefox 3. But I doubt they would marketing people like to try different things.
  • I recommend my fiends and family to at least try firefox, regardless of any google/firefox incentive. Firefox is just a good browser - period.

  • by gihan_ripper ( 785510 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @12:01PM (#15728209) Homepage
    Firefox has reached sufficient popularity and code maturity that it doesn't need to encourage evangelism. Sure, I use Firefox and I'd recommend it to most Explorer users, and I've already converted those close to me. However, I'm not going to go on a Firefox Crusade as that would stink of zealotry and probably hurt the cause. As other posters have said, Mozilla should put their efforts into bug fixes and usability issues. Yes, I know this isn't a zero-sum game, but we'd all be more likely to recommend Firefox if they could clear up the excessive memory usage 'feature' and the odd keyboard scrolling problem [] that took me ages to figure out.
  • Ah man... (Score:2, Insightful) if firefox wasn't already bloated enough! :D
  • One thing that makes me uncomfortable is being asked to proselytize. If someone wants FF, great. but it is not my job to convince them. I learned a meditation technique and was turned off when the class teachers asked to get my friends to do it. World FF day makes me feel the same way. People can make their own decisions.
    • I know where you are coming from. I once applied for a job selling knives until I saw them cut a penny with the kitchen shears and then proceded to shove a clipboard in my face. They wanted the names of friends and family BEFORE I was even offered a "position". (Naturally I left the interview).

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

      An informal poll of my office revealed that about 80% have never heard of Firef

    • Companies have marketing departments and ad agencies to get the word out about their products. Open source software has you. Who else is supposed to do it?
  • It's done! Now i have to wait until sometime after September 15th? Wait, why did i do this again?
  • When I submitted, it gave me someone ELSE'S email address as confirmation, and then emailed me THEIR confirmation, too.

    Not good.
  • by linuxci ( 3530 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @12:23PM (#15728269)
    There's no mention at all on the world Firefox day website that the names will be listed in the source. From what I can see this'll just be a link to a site that lists the names (probably accessible from the 'about' box). So there'll be no bloat to the source, not even as a comment.
    • Here's the quote from []

      "How will our names be included in Firefox 2?

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

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

      On the other hand:

      "How do I see the names in Firefox 2?

      We're working on the details of this an
  • "...The browser is only 29.2MB, but the source code download is over 11GB."
    • Well, actually, the Windows .exe is only 29.2MB, but it requires a mandatory optional 11GB download called "requiredoptionalresources.dll", which is a pure resource DLL.

      For Linux, of course, you need to d/l the entire tarball.
  • Man, if the only memory of me is a comment in some obscure early twenty-first century software written in a language not built to last (*ahem* unlike Lisp), then I've really failed to make my mark here on earth.
  • by cyclocommuter ( 762131 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @12:32PM (#15728306)
    I gotta hand it to the Firefox team though... They do a good job marketing Firefox. In this day and age, it no longer is enough to have a superior product or have a better mousetrap especially if the competion has the desktop monopolized... every opportunity to spread the word helps.
    • I gotta hand it to the Firefox team though... They do a good job marketing Firefox.

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

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

          Joe ...

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

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

    Don't worry about the "bloat"...we're talkin
  • But too many websites that I use on a regular basis (corproate job search sites, online databases, University websites, etc.) "Require IE 4.x or higher" and don't work properaly or at all on Firefox :-( IE has me in its clutches seemingly forever.
  • I've convinced almost every person with whom I personally associate with to switch to Firefox if they didn't use it already...

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

  • Immortalize all those names into the source code?

    Come on! What a waste of space.

    And you think IE is bloated!
  • ...when the content provider shuts the site down so you can't see what it's about.
  • This could actually be enough to convince me to switch AWAY from Firefox! There's plenty of other browsers that come with Debian, and many of them are reputed to be quite good. If Firefox is going to be switching their focus from quality to marketing, well, that's not the kind of thing I want to be associated with. I'm definitely not going to submit my name for this list (even though I'm well qualified to be on it--I converted three people this month alone). And I'll even continue to recommend Firefox t
    • Mmm, as an alternative, you could tell them to try Opera. After getting fed up with Firefox over its tab memory leak "feature" and a few other things, I finally gave Opera a serious try.

      I spent about 10 minutes changing options, and now it acts just how I want it. I do miss Adblock, though...
  • Everyone I know ive switched to Firefox. I run a computer repair buisness and ive switched all my customer(except those damn AOL users). I dont know anyone to switch. Anyway I to want to know why we'er putting all the names in the source code. I mean if its a comment all the names arent going to be in the binary why not just put them on a web page?
  • Firefox Jumps the Shark Day.

    Nice ring to it.
  • Yeah, right.

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

    No thanks.

Earth is a beta site.