| 6:59 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I noted a comment on a relatively prominent blog this AM that the blogger was happily surprised to see Firefox at 18%. Not a techie blog at all, by the way - the number surprised me, too.
I guess the time is ripe and the product is right.
| 8:47 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing mozilla creep upwards on stats, so I tried it and like it. Now I primarily use it, though not quite exclusively yet. Very fond of the Adblock feature.
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 8:48 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I see people recommending it all the time. The alternative to the "devil" IE apparently...it must be "cool" to have firefox.
// that's without considering the pros and cons obviously!
I doubt their reasons are as technical as the recent firefox thread on this board, either way firefox is "as good or better" as IE and it can only be a good thing that the general internet surfer realises there's more to the net than their home page and IE.
| 10:06 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
More on browser statistics:
I only suppose Mozilla also includes Firefox, which has been popular among developers for some time now.
| 10:19 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Huge 2-page spread ad in the New York Times main section this morning promoting "Download today from getfirefox.com."
Depending on this and that, a full page in the NYT goes for between $50K to $100K. Two pages? That's a humungous amount of money spent to promote something that's free.
How do you calculate ROI?
| 10:34 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
They've been taking donations for months on the Spread Firefox site to publish that ad. It's likely to be a one-time thing, too. It is interesting that they're so keen to advertise something that's free, but I guess there's the "pride" factor at work here. The group wrote it and deserves some recognition.
| 10:38 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|The group wrote it and deserves some recognition. |
A very effective way of doing it.