Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Firefox Passes 20 Million Downloads

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

January 24, 2005, 10:17 AM

Two and half months after Firefox's 1.0 launch, the Mozilla Foundation has more to celebrate than non-stop media coverage: Firefox has surpassed 20 million downloads. The milestone comes just days after new tallies of Web browser usage shows strong gains by the open source newcomer, which is slowly chipping away at Internet Explorer's dominance.

Last November, Microsoft IE product manager Gary Schare told BetaNews, "We think that getting the first set of early adopters is a lot easier than getting the next set, and then crossing over into the mainstream is pretty difficult." But Firefox is refusing to relent, garnering up to 270,000 downloads per day.

In the past month alone, Microsoft's IE market share has dropped 1.5 percent, according to WebSideStory, while Firefox has picked up a full percentage point. In an interview with BetaNews, Firefox architect Blake Ross said he expects the browser's growth "to remain vibrant as more and more people learn about Firefox and tell their friends and family members."

Before Firefox's official launch, the Mozilla Foundation started the Spread Firefox campaign to get the word out about the browser it calls a faster and more secure alternative to Internet Explorer.

To herald in the 20 million download mark, Firefox team member Asa Dotzler told the 63,000 Spread Firefox members, "You all have demonstrated that open source community can be powerful, committed, and capable of accomplishing once-unimaginable feats."

"Today, we celebrate twenty million Firefox 1.0 downloads. But more than that, we celebrate the community that you all have built and we celebrate each and every one you," said Dotzler.

Add a Comment (38 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By captainahab

posted Jan 25, 2005 - 9:17 AM

Here are just some of the complaints about Firefox and it's bugs.

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewforum.php?f=9

Score: 0

By bjb1959

posted Jan 25, 2005 - 9:52 AM

Have you done research on "some" of the complaints about IE and it's bugs/security issues over the years? do you really want to get into comparisons about software complaints? (Blue Screen of Death ring a bell to anyone?)No software is perfect, never will be as long as it is written by humans but forums like mozillazine are there to help the community fix problems quickly instead of waiting 3 years for a patch to fix hundreds of bugs at once. So perfect FF isn't.... Better then IE, without question to anyone that really cares about competition and choice and isn't myopically connected to Bill Gates teet....

Score: 0

By pjb

posted Jan 25, 2005 - 7:14 AM

A good browser. No problems here. Seems nice and secure. Webmasters should make sure that thier sites are cross-browser accessable.

Score: 0

By markrr71

edited Jan 25, 2005 - 6:04 AM

After installing Firefox, I found that some websites (most actually) did not load the picture content correctly (and I did install all the relative plug-ins). I changed and played around with the settings, but only saw "placeholders" where some pictures should have been. It was weird how it loaded half of the pictures OK and a few were missing.
Anyway after removing Firefox I had to do a system reinstall to get a browser to work properly again. Firefox is a brilliant idea, just wondered if this was a teething problem.

Score: 0

By zridling

posted Jan 25, 2005 - 4:27 AM

It is definitely fast, but until Firefox stops garbling tables, it's of no use to me. It's just too unforgiving of anything it doesn't like, and I hate having to chase down and reinstall dozens of plug-ins that stop working after every upgrade.

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 8:22 PM

the following is written for everyone, no matter their browser.

It is up to the webmasters which browser is usable. Some webmasters can see which browser their visitors are using. Dont let them see that you used a browser that worked if yours doesn't support it. Just do not go there unless you really have to. More important, let them know what brower you are using and that it doesn't work properly. I guaruntee that if it were my page, I would fix it.

Score: 0

By chimpypimpy

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 3:32 PM

So secure that it froze on almost every website I went to!

So secure that my bookmarks dissapeared!

So secure that I no longer can browse with Firefox!

Score: 0

By fewt

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 10:30 PM

It's a problem between the keyboard and chair. 20M other people seem to be able to use it just fine.

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 8:29 PM

interesting, i never heard of such things.

Score: 0

By thehunger

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 6:41 PM

Didn't you know? Firefox is idiot-proof...

Score: 0

By sophist_dreams

edited Jan 24, 2005 - 4:25 PM

If FF is freezing when you visit web sites it generally means the site itself is not written to industry standards for html or the site you have or are trying to visit is a site that utulizes active x to scan your puter. You might not like FF but I have the feeling it saved you a whole lot of grief.

Score: 0

By Squire72

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 3:37 PM

It generally doesn't do those things - might be an idea to run scans with Ad-Aware, Spybot S&D, and a free online virus scanner (Panda's is pretty good)

Generally, when Firefox doesn't work, there's something seriously wrong with the computer it's running on.

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 2:49 PM

if you are just now getting FF, you may want to download the "netscape" versions of macromedia's flash and shockwave plug-ins for greater website compatability.

flash: http://www.macromedia.co..._Version=ShockwaveFlash

shockwave: http://sdc.shockwave.com...e/download/download.cgi?

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 2:29 PM

I went to a website I received in this e-mail. I was pretty sure it was going to be a Identety Hijacking website, but I was curious so I went anyway. FF wouldn't even let the page load, but instead popped up a message saying something like "this port is blocked for securty purposes." So I loaded the site in Konquer and sure enough, it was an ID highjacking website.

In the past, I have read comments where people were concerned about the "extensions" feature, which is similar to Active X; a technology that many sites use to compromise IE. I just wanted you to know, that you can disable Active X in IE, that, in fact would be a very smart thing for you to do. So what about FF's extensions? By default, extensions are only allowed to be installed from FF's site, not some other schmoe's site. If Active X were the same, IE would have more than double the security it lacks today.

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 10:56 AM

...how many of those downloaders still keep using it and how many (like myself) discard it.

No way to know...

Score: 0

By sophist_dreams

edited Jan 24, 2005 - 2:33 PM

I am one of those who downloaded FF when it was ver 0.8, the only time I have discarded it was when I upgraded to a newer version. If more web developers adhered to industry standards for html and rendered web pages properly in FF I wouldnt have an IE based browser on my machine at all. How about a poll of FF users here? Should answer the question posed I think.

Score: 0

By bjb1959

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 2:16 PM

Roj, I have been a windows/linux dual boot person since 1998. when I first started I used windows about 90% of the time but in the last year or two that figure has switched. I still have XP on my machine and use it every once in awhile. You don't have to like Linux or Firefox but unless you have used it non stop for at least a month, which you obviously haven't done, and have installed some of the best features like mouse gestures and tabbed browsing then you come off sounding like an M$ mole. I switched my 76 year old mother over to firefox 1.0 after rebuilding her machine because she had hundreds of spyware componants on it from useing Internet Exploder (fraudian slip) and torched her system. she has been happily surfing, virus and spyware free ever since. I switched my mother in law to linux and firefox after her system was destroyed by a virus 2 years ago and she has been happily surfing virus and spyware free ever since. Even when I am in XP I use Firefox and Thunderbird and I have zero spyware and zero viruses on my system. So let me see do I want an expensive broken browser and email system that can allow any hacker on a whim to trash my system or use it to trash everyone in my address books systems or do I want a FREE browser and email system that isn't broke and won't allow that?? Hummmmmmm....

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jan 24, 2005 - 4:49 PM

Actually I did use it for more than a month. The pre-final versions barfed on the Symantec virus gateway statistics screen I was accessing to check on our daily spam reports. That was finally fixed in the final.

I get all the tabbed browsing and goodies FF has to offer from Maxthon - along with full IE compatibility since Maxthon uses the IE core. Mouse gestures, etc. don't do anything for me. I want a fast, safe browser with full compatibility with the maximum number of sites out there and for me Maxthon provides that. There is no chintzy "browse with IE" button - I just browse.

THAT is why I don't bother with FF and recommend Maxthon instead - I have the best of both worlds in another package.

A browser is no panacea for not having a good AV package (like avast!) and malware preventer (like Spybot) installed. That would be shortsighted at best and damned stupid at worst. Those should be installed with ANY browser. I certainly have them installed with mine. If you don't take proper prudent precautions, you deserve what happens to you and those precautions include more than a browser replacement. If that's what makes you feel secure, might I interest you in some beachfront property I have for sale - in the High Arctic.

All that being said, we're back to "how many people tried it and ditched it" and no one here has (or will have) a satisfactory answer. For every person who answers "not me!" there are likely many more who would say "me!" if they even bothered to read an article about a browser they discarded.

To those praising FF's rendering engine: that's all well and good but in the face of an intentionally weak "quirks mode" which cripples the browser's ability to display all pages correctly and necessitates the "browse with IE" crutch, significant advantage is lost. Neither FF nor Mozilla can fix a lack of capability in the rendering engine and additionally one does not put lawnmower tires on a Porsche if one has any intelligence.

To those tabling the concept that not everyone has the knowledge of how to protect themselves adequately: try that excuse the next time you get a speeding ticket ("I didn't know I wasn't supposed to be doing 100Kph in this 60Kph zone"). This is 2005 and there are no excuses for a lack of prudence (AV, malware blocker, etc.) today.

So, you can pat yourselves on the back all you like, swap your success stories and feel good about choosing a viable alternative - and you have. However, None Of This means that the browser landscape is changing any time soon.

Typical knee-jerk comments about being a MS mole aside (always shoot the messengers when they tell you something you don't want to hear), a little realism is called for and less pie-in-the-sky optimism.

Score: 0

By Squire72

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 4:48 PM

The quirks mode is a required evil for rendering bad html - and that's all it renders.

Whether the developer intentionally wrote the pages wrong is debateable - that they are coded wrong is indisputable.

Viewing properly coded pages, It's IE's rendering that chokes on code it can't handle more frequently, not Firefox's.

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jan 25, 2005 - 1:29 PM

But right or wrong (and that's not the issue in question) it's also IE that's the de facto standard - not FF.

That's not changing any time soon.

You play with the cards you're dealt. FF by design does not - nor, to judgge by the devs attitudes will it ever. that's a disadvantage in the world of today and the foreseeable tomorrow.

The point is that the vast majority of users don't care if it's coded right or wrong - that's for the nitpickers and they are few and far between in any discipline. Users just want it to be displayed properly.

Maybe the world will be changed by FF and everyone will start to write decent HTML code.

I personally doubt it.

I love how people try to discredit others by calling their motivations and integrity into question. It's a common tactic of small people and so far I've been called a potential MS mole and pirate. You at least have stood up for the spirit of the debate and are to be commended for that.

It's not as if I have anything against FF; if it did what I wanted it to do I would use it. It doesn't so I don't. The only thing I do have against it (and it's not against the browser but against the legions of fanboys drooling over it) is the rampant religion and massive overhype surrounding it, much of which is encouraged by the developers to further their cause.

One has to feel that if they were so secure in their product, they wouldn't have to resort to that. It brings the image of a good product down.

Finally, I would have to say that the FF interface definitely needs work. Maxthon has a MUCH more refined and intuitive implementation of tabs than FF does and overall is far more configurable. I mean, this is supposedly one of the key interface points of the Zillaland browsers and it just ain't there yet compared to Maxthon. I can't even reposition the address bar. At the end of the day, while the browser is a good one, I honestly don't see what all the hype and adulation is about. For a power user who is used to having many browser windows open at once, Maxthon is a much more versatile and powerful product.

That's it for me - I budget my time for these sorts of discussions and this is pretty much the limit since I've made my points.

Score: 0

By Mountain_Man

edited Jan 24, 2005 - 1:32 PM

The key word is perception. The exact numbers are not important and only serve as an indicator or pointer. We know that there have been over 20,000,000 downloads and there are on the average 270,000 downloads a day. Some percentage of downloaders share their download with from one to many hundreds of other people. I use FF because for me it does a better job and I feel safer with it. Many of the people I have given it to also perceive it to be a better browser. Perception is the key word here. IE has a monopoly which is slowly eroding in favor of standard based browers. Where is the tipping point? FF may have already achieved it but it will take several months for analysts and others to realize it. I think MS already knows and is rightfully frightened that they have lost their IE monopoly and that IE only sites are becoming more and more isolated.

Score: 0

By Squire72

edited Jan 24, 2005 - 12:27 PM

and how many keep using it?

I've downloaded it maybe 10 times, then smartened up and burned it to CD, and installed it on 40 computers from the CD.

ALL of those computers use it as the only browser, and I'm the only one that noticed when the change took place... until things started working that never worked with IE.

20 Million Downloads... which only account for downloads from Mozilla.org mirrors, not other sources, CDs, or tech support people who add it to their toolkit, and install it to protect high risk users from themselves.

As well, I've recommended it to maybe 150 people.

All of them still use it, and only it.

The skeptics installed ad-aware, cleaned everything on their computer, then surfed the net, clicking on ads for 5-10 minutes with Firefox.

Ran ad-aware again, still clean.

Surfed the same sites with IE for 5-10 minutes

Ran ad-aware again - between 20-30 infections.

case closed.

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 1:15 PM

I run Maxthon and Spybot. No infections. I ran IE, EMS Free Surfer and Spybot. No infections. I ran IE and SAV 9 and Spybot. No infections.

Let's not cloud the issue with hard and fast pat answers that aren't really an indication of the situation.

Score: 0

By Squire72

edited Jan 24, 2005 - 1:50 PM

You know enough to secure IE by using a more secure shell and proper anti-spyware.

The average user

a) makes no changes to the software preferences
b) knows nothing about protecting their computer

IE is crap out of the box - it's insecure and dangerous. It's fixable, yes, but unlike you, most users don't even know it needs fixing, let alone how to do it.

Firefox is safe out of the box.

Do the test again with a default IE installation, no anti-spyware or popup blockers, and don't play it safe with the sites you choose.

Pretend you're a newbie who doesn't know what settings are.

Firefox will save computers, simply by working properly out of the box.

You're also missing out on Firefox's far superior rendering engine, which exposes IE for the out of date dino that it is - neither "Maxthon" or "Avant" can fix the rendering engine's lack of capability.

Score: 0

By rijp

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 11:29 AM

*EXACTLY* my point. Good one! There is no way to know.. It looks good that people downlaod it, but no way to really know for sure how many people use it. And this bogus BS about "web sites tracking browsers...". That may be true, but just like Tivo, people don't like to be tracked. I know of several major websites, that could care less what web browser you use, and they don't track that stat.. So how does one really know if you are using IE or Mozilla?

A: You Don't.. so you *ASSUME* from downloading their browser. That is a really bad assumption.

I have downloaded it 15 times myself, on different computers.. I use it as an alternate browser whenver I need java heavy scripting done, but in no way shape or form does that mean I abandonded IE, that's what Mozilla.org wants everyone to think.

Score: 0

By Mountain_Man

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 1:36 PM

Mozilla.org is NOT trying to make anyone think any thing. They are merely displaying the number of Firefox downloads.

Calculating the number of active FF users based on the number of FF downloads is just a guesstimate. It is the business of WebSideStory and OneStat.com and even they don't agree on the numbers.

Some interesting information on web browser stats and why it is so difficult to get acurate data is here:

Why Browserstatistics lie ...
http://j3e.de/statistics_lie.html

Score: 0

By Mountain_Man

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 1:14 PM

I downloaded FF once and have it installed on 114 computers. I have had *zero* problem reports or complaints. I do, however, hear an increasing number of positive comments from users as they discover superior features in FF. All I care about is increased security and reduced support.
One of the IT guys next door said they are moving to FF next week...so it seems I'm not alone. I assume they will also install from a single copy.

Score: 0

By Mountain_Man

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 12:01 PM

You track it by looking at the access log of the web server(s). It identifies itself like so:
"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041107 Firefox/1.0" which is different than IE which migh say something like "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.0.3705)"

Score: 0

By roj

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 1:12 PM

Well and good but that still says Zero. One person visits many sites. The fact that a site indicates it was visited by FF is not an indication of a unique FF download still in use.

In short:

We Don't Know.

Neither does anyone else.

Score: 0

By bjb1959

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 2:38 PM

Just curious.... How much did all that extra software cost? ie Maxthon, spybot etc. (unless you pirated it for free)to get the protection I get for free (without pirating anything).

Score: 0

By Squire72

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 3:05 PM

Maxthon and Spybot are both freeware/donationware.

that being said, Firefox is still a far better option for the general populace, as well as anyone who likes the much better CSS and HTML support :)

Or Mozilla, Netscape 7.x, Opera - also excellent choices.

IE is, honestly, a piece of trash. Hopefully MS will address that with version 7, if only on their new OS. MS does make some good software, however, IE is NOT in that category.

Score: 0

By Kalphegor

posted Jan 24, 2005 - 4:00 PM

I wonder if Apple will release a Safari version for Windows, like they do with iTunes.

Score: 0

By Squire72

edited Jan 24, 2005 - 1:49 PM

I've known several people who downloaded Firefox, then went back to IE, or an IE shell at least once - simply because it was what they were comfortable with.

ALL of them use Firefox 100% of the time now, after playing around with it and discovering that the basic feature set is vastly better than IE, and the rendering engine can do things IE isn't even close to capable of... and it also refuses to do inherently insecure things that IE was actually designed to do.

Score: 0

By fishy80

posted Jan 25, 2005 - 7:32 AM

i tried firefox one time when it first came out... and i havent stopped using it since :D firefox is the best... people who say bad things happen with firefox prolly have a firus or are just stupid and doing it themselfs (and and learn to update ur computer ...)

Score: 0

Oct 13 - 5:16 PM ET Everyone talk at once: .NET 4.0 will include Parallel Extensions

Oct 13 - 5:15 PM ET MySpace opens its user-created advertisement platform

Oct 13 - 5:11 PM ET FCC report opens the door for white spaces devices

Oct 13 - 1:03 PM ET Final Silverlight 2.0 to ship tomorrow

Oct 13 - 11:57 AM ET CBS goes after Hulu by aligning with YouTube

Oct 13 - 11:25 AM ET Microsoft finds published exploit of Vista privilege elevation hole

Oct 11 - 11:16 AM ET Things left unsaid, in a recent interview with Sony's CEO

Oct 11 - 11:03 AM ET EU regulations block Italian ISPs from blocking Pirate Bay

Oct 11 - 10:55 AM ET Making it to Apple's App Store by staying out of court

Oct 10 - 7:43 PM ET Wal-Mart changes its mind, leaves existing DRM servers up