This forum requires Javascript to be enabled for posting content
Mozilla's innovative rapid release program for the Firefox browser has come under heavy criticism from the corporate sector who are not well equipped to handle the quick-fire releases.
Corporate spokespersons (note the politically correct terminology ) are stating, and with some justification, they do not have the resources to deploy the Firefox newer versions at such a rapid rate. This blog excerpt from one such spokesperson:
[i:2hrebqnt]"I have 500,000 corporate users on Firefox 3.6. We just completing a test cycle of Firefox 4 on many thousands of internal business web applications. Many hundreds of application owners and their test teams have participated. We gave them several months to ready themselves. We worked with dozens of internal Add-On developers and product teams to prepare their add-ons for Firefox 4. We're poised to deploy Firefox 4.01 in 3Q when the corporate change freeze lifts...The Firefox 4 EOL [end of life schedule] is a kick in the stomach. I'm now in the terrible position of choosing to deploy a Firefox 4 release with potentially unpatched vulnerabilities, reset the test cycle for thousands of internal apps to validate Firefox 5 or stay on a patched Firefox 3.6.x. By the time I validate Firefox 5, what guarantee would I have that Firefox 5 won't go EOL when Firefox 6 is released?"[/i:2hrebqnt]
Mozilla's response to date has been a blunt......tough bickies!!
Seems traditional corporate Firefox users may be forced into changing over to a browser with a longer life cycle for each version. Surely that means Chrome would definitely be out of the equation, which would leave Internet Explorer as the prime candidate.
Is Mozilla possibly cutting off its nose to spite its face?
I'll play the devils advocate and simply say, "beggars can't be choosers". Browers are FREE. If we do not like one, we can more onto another, and these chaps know this. Caring about the public (us folks), died years ago. The big wigs are competing against themselves and we're just collateral damage (so to speak). I don't like this attitude, but, I'm not blind to what's happening, Mindblower!
"For the needy, not the greedy"
This feels like a continuation to the discussion over at the thread about Firefox 4.
[quote:39g15esh]If we do not like one, we can more onto another, and these chaps know this. Caring about the public (us folks), died years ago.[/quote:39g15esh]
No matter how I think about it, it makes no sense to me to ignore what makes the user base stay with one browser.
Mozilla feld threatened seeing that it steadly loses market share to Chrome. But instead of differentiating itself from Chrome, a.k.a. support/ improve the stuff that makes it unique [b:39g15esh]and[/b:39g15esh] adding things people like about Chrome, it got (self)trapped into this "Chrome wanna be" obsesion. On one hand, loyal users lose a bit of what they like in Firefox with every new version; when everything or a saficient percentage has gone, they'll seriously start consider moving to another browser. On the other hand, non-users don't get enough incentive to come to Firefox - why use an emulator if you can get the original? So, to me it looks like a lose-lose situation. Which brings me to the question:
How is Mozilla (or any of the others) going to increase market share/ user base if users move onto other browsers?
Dismissing corporate users seems like one more mistake on the route to self-distraction: corporate use = multiple users added to user base at once.
Lets not forget that the public sector of a number of countries have moved from IE to Firefox. How long do you think before they'll get fed up with Mozilla's frantic update/ upgrade rate?
Firefox 5 still feels (and is) very resource intensive on older systems and no one seems to care to fix this. Even for newer systems, why is it acceptable if I have 4GB RAM that the Internet browser can hog on one of them? Just because I have three more?
As Mindblower said, it's all about competing against eachother - I recently read in the mozillaZine forum (lots of complains there) something in the lines of "lately, it seems that Mozilla thinks everything Chrome does is good to follow".
I also find the following worth keeping in mind: "Seems that Mozilla are going down the same route that Netscape did with the irtransition from Navigator 4 to Navigator 6. Will be interesting to see if history repeats itself and their golden tower comes crashing down, again" (yes, have been a Navigator user).
Mozilla seems to have decided to annoy (even piss off) a lot of people - all of them at once: home users, corporate users, public sector employees and add-ons deverlopers. If add-on updates won't keep up with Mozilla's rate, while having dismissed corporate users, who will be left to use Firefox?
I am human
Cogent and logical points FD...you'll get no argument from me!!
I too believe Mozilla are making a big mistake by not heeding the backlash from the corporate sector.
Mindblower encapsulated their current attitude nicely ....[i:15mqpfqs]"The big wigs are competing against themselves and we're just collateral damage"[/i:15mqpfqs]
I guess, as with most things, time will tell.....and hindsight will once again provide 20/20 vision.
[quote="ozbloke":26kvcq0q][quote:26kvcq0q]There's always Opera. I don't think it's had an update in some time.[/quote:26kvcq0q]
Ironically, a new version of Opera (11.50) was released the same day you posted your comment Zig!!! LOL[/quote:26kvcq0q]
Hrm. Well, I never said I [b:26kvcq0q]used[/b:26kvcq0q] Opera.
Here's an excellent (imho) take on the subject:
[url=http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/firefox-5.html:3jfhnmk7]Firefox 5 - Completely irrelevant and totally pointless[/url:3jfhnmk7]
The above article links to another interesting read which in turn links to a number of interesting reads.
So, instead of me ranting here, go read them if you have the time and mind.
I am human
Jim Hillier
Richard Pedersen
David Hartsock
Carol Bratt
dandl
Jason Shuffield
Jim Canfield
Terry Hollett
Stuart Berg
John Durso
1 Guest(s)