Igniting the browser wars



ZDNet reported a couple of days ago that Firefox's market share figures are inflated, according to Jon S. von Tetzchner.

Jon actually had a long talk with the journalist, but it seems that they decided to go with this particular story, which made it sound like he was attacking Firefox.

I personally don't think it was meant that way at all, but the browser wars are probably something a lot of people are interested in reading about, so that's what journalists often write about…

And yes, download numbers are unreliable, just like other kinds of browser stats. You are preaching to the choir, James 😉

Update: I have to mention this one. The Register has its own take on the whole thing. It's an amusing and informative read from a publication which "ignites the flames" by being a bit different (in a good way, from my point of view) 😉

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Igniting the browser wars

  1. Thanks Haarvard, I was mildly amused by the comments on ZDNet by the amassed heathen! In addition, I found The Register's article most amusing, especially they way they've put their unique, and entirely truthful (the part about opera being best) spin on things! Keep up the posting, or I'll get too bored! 😉

  2. You see, the problem with the Opera Blogs filters is that you have to have the word "Opera" in your post for it to show up. So while your post was most assuredly about Opera, it's not filtered as relevant. Though even if you edited the post to put the word in, that works. Opera Blogs Unofficial FAQ: http://forum.fallingbeam.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38

    I'd be happy to subscribe to your feed, but wouldn't it be better if I could get your posts in aggregated form with the rest of the people who write about Opera? That way I don't have to subscribe to 10 feeds when one would do just fine. Similarly, people who want to cover Opera, or find out more about Opera, would find it easier too. http://my.opera.com/community/takeaction/blogs/

    My perspective on what the reporter did is simple. You guys were using them to get your message out. They use you guys to get a good story. What exactly is it about that arrangement that you guys pretend not to understand? http://newblog.fallingbeam.org/blog/archives/2005/06/opera_crimes_mi.html

    There's times when people rending their garments about how the media treats them becomes very much like a surreal version of crying wolf.

    The idea that Opera and Firefox are going to hold hands and skip is simply a rather carnivalesque fantasy. My suggestion is that you put a leash/muzzle on your CEO, and learn how to put a more professional face on what it is that you do (and do well) – after all, you guys (unlike other attack dogs) are the ones getting paid for it.

  3. Please do not jump to conclusions. We did NOT get them to write that article. And I see no reason to put a leash on him as he did not say anything wrong.

  4. I'm not saying you asked ZDNet to write you a rather ambivalent article – that'd be just silly. Someone approached someone and you guys had a chat – the understanding being, on your part at least, that you were going to get good press about the fact that you have a good browser (because you do).

    But in case someone didn't tell you, reporters write stories they think will interest people, they don't re-print press releases for you. The press aren't the people with whom companies like yourselves hold hands and skip.

    Of course what he said was entirely true (which I made very clear in my post) – that's not the point. If you say the words, they will print it – that's what they do.

    Lashing out at the press is probably as helpful as your lashing out at browser stats companies – I'm sure you could get a lot more done if you asked them nicely. And if they say no, then you can wail about it in public. I again refer you to: http://newblog.fallingbeam.org/blog/archives/2005/06/opera_crimes_mi.html

    The fact that the issues raised are still there to be raised, begs the question why these things aren't already resolved. If there was no tension, no notion of Firefox and sugar daddies, he wouldn't say the words, even in jest, and reporter wouldn't bother – it's only juicy because there's something behind it and people can smell it. Which part of this being called "browser wars" don't you guys understand?

    You guys do great things when you throw down the gauntlet and challenge the other browsers – like Hakon did with CSS compliance – but you have to be in the driver's seat, not being taken for a ride by some hack of a journalist.

  5. Yes, sometimes journalists make stories out of nothing or distort facts. But I recommend that you take this discussion to the forums instead, as that's what they are there for.

Comments are closed.