digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Four Hundred Million Firefox Downloads!

spreadfirefox.com — Mozilla's Asa Dotzler marks a major milestone with a shoutout to the Firefox community: "Firefox has reached 400 million downloads and demonstrated that not even the world's most powerful companies can keep people from a better, safer, and faster Web experience."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • triley5000, on 10/10/2007, -15/+48This is an amazing tribute to the power of the Firefox community! Congrats to to everyone that has contributed to Firefox. Let's push on to 1 trillion downloads!
    • santaliqueur, on 10/10/2007, -4/+46Firefox is great, but let's get to 1 billion before we get to 1,000 billion.
      • humperdeath, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I think i'Ve downloaded it a few thousand times myself. I should start figuring out how to save my work.
        • Trax91, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1or I million million (British billion)
      • brundlefly76, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Firefox is great, but I dont really know what the significance of the download number is since I've easily downloaded different versions for different computers and OS installs at *least* 50 times.
    • RedRummy, on 10/10/2007, -29/+9I've tried, but I just can get into the Firefox hype... Opera FTW... http://www.opera.com
      • CiDaemon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+49as long as it's not IE, we're cool.
      • Jough, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5Why are people digging RedRummys comment down? Opera is just as standards compliant at FF, and probably even more so. It was the first to pass the Acid2 test, and correct me if I'm wrong, is still the only web browser that is out of beta that passes. Also, Opera has many useful tools for developers that firefox lacks including the built in ability to edit source code and view the results (I'm sure there's a FF addon that will do this, but I'm simply talking of the base unit). As far as addons go, Opera supports Widgets, which are far easier to develop and can be just as powerful.

        Don't get me wrong. I'm not against FF in any way. I just prefer Opera.
        • kelson, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Why do people think Opera was the first to pass Acid2? That was Safari (April 2005). Anyone following the Acid2 test from the beginning watched the posts as David Hyatt fixed bug after bug, posting screenshots until the internal builds rendered it correctly.
          http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2005_04.html#007958

          The released Safari 2.0.2 (October 2005) passed Acid2 5 months before Opera's first public test version that that passed (March 2006). Opera 9 was released in June 2006, 14 months after those internal Safari builds.

          Konqueror and iCab almost passed during that time, but no one (including the people hosting the test) noticed that they didn't hide the scrollbar, because it wasn't described in the test guide. Around the time Opera released a passing build, the oversight was fixed.

          Partial timeline with links to articles & announcements (sometimes two-stage, as they'll link to earlier posts on the site, which then link to the referenced articles) here:
          http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2005/11/01/acid2-timeline/

          Run-down of current status in major browsers:
          http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/acid/
        • Jough, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Sorry, I should have stated that I was strictly refering to Windows based applications. Digg me down. We can all agree that Safari is the superior.

          Although I still have not heard from the FireFox fans. What makes FF so much better than Opera?
    • hmunkey, on 10/10/2007, -4/+21One trillion... are you mentally deficient?
    • TheSpook, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9I wonder how those 400 million downloads equates to number of users. I know I've downloaded it at least several dozen times (often times for new version, sometimes after a reload of one of my 10 machines I have at home, and on occasion just playing with a new Linux distro (though the great majority of my FF downloads are for Win32)).
      • tovmeod, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0as it was said before, 25%, so 400 downloads means 100 million users
    • otros, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2there was a story about that a couple of weeks ago, if I remember correctly it was about a quarter of the people who download switched.
      I bet some with a little more time in here could find that fact.
  • xyour925job, on 10/10/2007, -14/+29Fire fox is really a Great browser I really do like the ease of use I really do think its faster and better Congrats to fire fox for this milestone
    • Hayaemsay, on 10/10/2007, -25/+5That was actually a really stupid sentence, and while I'm at it, Opera is better.
      • arcooke, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Well you were right about one thing, that was an incredibly stupid sentence.
      • GeorgeStone, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Opera? Die in a fire.
    • gd1z, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8You win the award for unnecessary capitalization.
  • Youssif, on 10/10/2007, -8/+113It's not about Firefox only anymore, it's about Freedom, Firefox what makes it east to switch, because when you get familiar with it you will forget IE, and because you discovered the sister project Thunderbird, you now thinking to forget Outlook, and you just figured out they are both running on linux, so you get that Ubuntu CD and start seriously to forget about Windows... Firefox was only the beginning. That's why Opera wont make it before ..
    Thank you Mozilla for making my life easier, safer and free.
    • Senn, on 10/10/2007, -3/+27This is exactly what I did with my parents on their computer. Got them used to Firefox instead of IE, then Thunderbird instead of Outlook Express, and then later on wiped Windows and installed Ubuntu. As they were already used to the two main apps they use, the transition was as smooth as you can get. Great stuff.
    • ninjasquirrel, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14Hear hear... my parents have been using Firefox since I switched back in high school (something around .6). They didn't even notice the difference when I swapped the IE desktop link out for Firefox, other than a marked decrease in spyware. They're moving to Ubuntu next week...
    • SierraAlpha, on 10/10/2007, -21/+3Linux will never be successful and Windows will never be forgotten. There are people who struggle to use Windows and you think they will be able to use Linux? Not likely. Also with open source software you get what you pay for.
      • czimmerman, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13Yeah, jackass, and that's why Firefox is gaining so much traction and getting closer every day to IE. But yet, we get what we pay for. Suck it, troll.
      • Wootery, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4"There are people who struggle to use Windows and you think they will be able to use Linux?"
        Would I be right in saying you've never actually used desktop Linux?
        For a basic user, clicking the Firefox icon is the same in every OS. Things like decent package-management (where Linux beats Windows) don't really matter.

        "Also with open source software you get what you pay for."
        Explain how Apache runs half the web.
    • ZxEfR, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0LOL.........you nailed it.
    • Cowfrommars, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I see you enjoy commas.
  • DiscoDave69, on 10/10/2007, -42/+6Come on guys, know your stuff before making judgements.
    Check out this page and tell me if you still think Firefox is the best browser out there:

    http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/FirefoxMyths.html
    • archistudent, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16Oh, bullocks. This page sucks. Most of the information appears to be correct, but I don't think that grabbing a few examples and calling them out on technicalities when they were intended to be generalized statements in any way makes IE better than FF, or makes FF any worse.
      Quote: Myth - "Firefox is not a Religion"
      Answer: Really?
      Quote: Myth - "Firefox is a Solution to Spyware"
      Answer: Who makes this claim? Spyware is in the sites you visit and in the ads served. But FF does provide AdBlock and FlashBlock and Customize Google so that users can avoid most of that if they wish to.
      Just about the only thing I agree with, but won't consider a myth even if that page does, is that FF is a memory hog. But since my laptop has 1GB ram, who cares?
    • mrmacky, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15... Umm, I still think Firefox is the best browser out there...

      http://nanobox.chipx86.com/blog/2005/12/re-firefox-myths.php
    • brandon272, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13What a petty, pathetic list.
    • santaliqueur, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13"Myth - "Firefox is Bug Free" - Example"

      Funny how the only people making a 'Firefox is bug free' example are on a ***** PET LOVERS forum. That's the place where I go for cutting edge technical information.

      Sorry, but the author of that article is reaching WAY too hard.
    • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1Dugg for the link, but dugg down for the comment
    • bscene, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8I've read your page and yes I still think that Firefox is the best web browser out there.
      Not because of all these so called myths either. For myself and the people I work with, it is simply the easiest browser browser to work with.
      - Pages render the way you expect them to. Of course the reality is that we need to make sure pages render fine in IE = more work :(
      - Some of the extensions available in Firefox kick ass and can really contribute to productivity
      - It looks nicer (imho)
      p.s. I noticed you compared Firefox to Opera on the acid test for standards compliance. If you had included a screenshot of IE's rendering you would have seen that the happy face took a shotgun to the face :P

      • knobidy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Holy *****! I had to dust off my IE icon, but it was worth it to see that acid2 test render. That is just too funny. Why was there a scroll box?
      • KaiserArny, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1That was a M$ sponsered site. Not very objective.
    • Synapse84, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Rofl... people still link to that guys site?

      He used to use the Alias "MasterTech" and spammed forums to advertise his website..

      Pretty much all the stuff on that page is crap....
      System Requirements? if your system can't run Firefox with the requirements posted on there, you really need to upgrade.
      Memory Usage? why did you even bother buying more memory for your computer if you're gonna complain about... 50,428KB (+Addons).... lets see.. 1gig memory (which pretty much everyone has) or at least 512mb (computers are shipped with that now)
      1024mb - 50mb = 974mb for the rest of my programs and windows... woohooo.
      512mb - 50mb = 462mb for the rest of my programs and windows...

      no real impact on system performance at all.

      bug free? no it's software of course it has bugs... but would ya rather have a bug of copy+paste not working sometimes.. or a bug that exploits the activex to install malware... hmmm....

      enough ranting for now..
      • kahrn, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1If you had a brain cell with any form of consideration, you'd realize that many of us do not give the slightest crap about upgrading. Many people are fine with what they have. Many people have an appliance that was working perfectly fine for the job they were doing before, but then all of a sudden they need more specs to accomplish the SAME task!

        Of course, my beef is I ENJOY experimenting with older computers and old laptops. In which case, if firefox cannot do the job then it is straight to either Opera/Dillo/Epiphany/Lynx.. not all of us CARE about having a new system. I have a perfectly capable Pentium 4, but sometimes I'd rather use my intel pentium 2 system. Of course, on that system I cannot use firefox. This same situation applies to many other people.

        If you're living in another country, you might not be able to afford a brand new computer. Infact even in the rich nations you may not be able to afford a brand new laptop or new computer. Thus you may just buy a cheap second hand laptop.. and that trend is growing. More and more people are using older hardware, and as that happens firefox will simply loose market share to browsers which CAN run on the older hardware.

        Sure, I'll be dugg down by stating the truth, and I doubt anyone that does digg me down will even have the courtesy to argue upon my point. I just think it's time for the "hey!why-don't-you-just-upgrade" idiots to die in a relatively deep hole.
        • Synapse84, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6ok, so since you don't want to upgrade a windows 95 box then the world revolves around you and your "kind"? lol.

          The slowest computer in my house ( I could go slower, but to assume you bought a computer in at least the past 10 years you should match this.)
          eMachines 400i3 (400mhz, windows98, 64mb) hey... it runs firefox just fine. and was 400 bucks at the time + 200 dollar rebate.
          of course my first computer a 50mhz, windows 3.1, ~16mb ram and a 500mb hard drive can't run firefox.. but i don't go crying saying it can't run firefox.. i've moved on from that trash.

          My current computer... eMachines T2341 (1.9ghz single core, Windows XP, 1gig ram) yes.. i can run firefox perfect and this machine is about 5 years old and was ~350 bucks at the time.

          so because you don't want to spend what.... 2 weeks worth of minimum wage paychecks to upgrade we have to hear your rant?... seriously... no one cares.

          wonder what certain expensive crap like... wedding rings will make you rant about..... Just use an Onion Ring, eh?

          off to go cry on the BF2 forums because my computer can't run BF2 because i'm too cheap to spend 400 bucks for a new computer that can handle BF2.... lol....
        • Jack0Neill, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Hey kahrn, I've seen you around before:
          http://www.cad-comic.com/comic.php?d=20031010
          You're the guy in the business suit!
        • kahrn, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Obviously you did not read my comment correctly. I already HAVE a pentium 4 which I use everyday, but I ENJOY experimenting with older machines and they are just as capable as new ones when it comes down to web browsing and such.

          Also, I don't use Windows 95 on my Intel Pentium II system. That would be stupid. I use the very latest kernel from kernel.org, 2.6.22.6. It runs quite well, might I add.

          Please, please, please read my damned comment correctly. I'm not trying to insult anyone, I'm trying to make people aware. You seem to want to rant back at me because of it, when I'm just trying to make people aware. It's not about being too 'cheap' to buy a new system. I could go out and buy a new system if I wanted. Sadly most of the world is not as fortunate as you or I, and cannot. We're not all living in the USA or europe.. there are other countries (yup, it's true..)

          So no, the world does not revolve around me and the windows 95 box you seem to think I have despite no remote mention at all to Windows 95. I'm actually running more up to date software on my older machines than you are on your ever so awesome new box. Which goes to show how ignorant people can be when it comes to dealing with older computers. older != less capable.

          At the end of the day though, I guess it does not matter what I say. All the fortunate people like you, and myself, and most on digg will hapily live there lives thinking everyone is as lucky as them, living in the same country as them. But sooner or later, if certain software does not cater for older hardware requirements (that does not mean it has to be less capable) then it will start to loose a lot of share and people will start to wonder why. You were warned.
          • rootstyle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"older machines and they are just as capable as new ones when it comes down to web browsing and such."

            Clearly your definition of older machines is different than mine. I've got a half dozen machines in my crawl space that disagree with you and your internet surfing ways.

            "But sooner or later, if certain software does not cater for older hardware requirements (that does not mean it has to be less capable) then it will start to loose a lot of share and people will start to wonder why. You were warned."

            Buddy, this has been happening for a long ass time. ***** evolves. Mosaic->Netscape->Mozilla->Firefox

            Yea, I could run Mosaic on a 25mhz SPARC box, and guess what, Firefox will run on it under Solaris no less... and it will perform poorly, because its an 18 year old system. Get over it.
    • Humdain, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4I refuse to go to any webpage with "comcast" in the url
    • TheNuminous, on 10/10/2007, -7/+0I had a friend who didn't know much about computers tell me that his Mac would never get a virus, because Macs couldn't get viruses and were inherently superior to PCs. He liked the software he was using, but he wasn't exactly sure why - similar to many Firefox fanboys. Firefox's security and performance is usually exaggerated, but it is still a useful open-source browser with useful extensions like Firebug.
    • mvent2, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Why don't you submit that as a Digg article? Oh wait, you can't because that site has been banned for spouting more ***** than a bovine with diarrhea. LOL
    • frontporsche, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Your page implies that Firefox requires Windows XP. No point in reading further.
    • halleyscomet, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wouldn't downloading the program and deciding for myself be a better measure than a heavily biased, outright hostile article?
  • asadotzler, on 11/05/2007, -3/+74And just to preempt the "a download is not a user" comments, yes, you are right, a download is not a user and we're not claiming it is.

    Today we have about 120 million users, so a little more than 1 out of 4 of those downloads turns into a regular Firefox user.

    Firefox has achieve about 20% of the global internet market and as high as 50% in some countries.
    • fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -17/+3lol @ 20%. I guess you're as good at numbers as you are at quality assurance?
      • fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -13/+2For those digging me down, when Asa's not being a blatent troll on his blog and shamefully representing the Mozilla community he heads the QA team on the buggiest piece of software since Windows ME.
        • asadotzler, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Actually, you're again wrong, troll. I haven't been involved with QA at Mozilla for about 5 years and I was never "head" of QA for Mozilla. I was, at one time in the distant past, a volunteer organizer trying to bring people into Mozilla's QA process but I've seldom done any QA myself and certainly don't do more than the occasional bug report these days.

          Thanks for playing, troll.
      • pcabellor, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Well according to XiTi's latest, Firefox is 28% in Europe, 18% in North America and so on. By July. Got any better numbers you want to share?
        http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/07/firefox-takes-28-market-share-in-europe/
        • fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Sure.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

          TheCounter: 12.41%
          OneStat: 12.72%
          AdTech: 15.5%
          Net Applications: 14.85%
          W3Counter: 25.43%

          And then there's craploads of handheld and mobile devices shipping with Opera and Safari. : )
          • crawf061, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3wikipedia doesn't count... but then again... you can't really trust the numbers on mozilla's site either

            We need a third party that doesn't rely on random users
    • TheSolomon, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4I'm assuming they started the counter at zero, and every *single* download (not within the Mozilla organization--I'm assuming) counts against the grand total. Every reinstall counts, on every operating system, on every computer. (That's easily several per person.) I would even wager every full download performed by the update counts, but we'll leave that out of our calculation. Also we need to include the people who downloaded it and didn't know what to do with it, or stopped using it (which I think a large number of that download count would be).

      If we assume people have had at least a few different computers (when you combine work, home, laptop) on which they have installed Firefox a few times, each, and also remove the download counts that do not indicate a continuing user, we're looking at a number much smaller than the "Four Hundred Million Downloads." I think 400 million divided by--oh let's be conservative--five (to indicate the average number of total lifetime installs per true Firefox user) plus another three (to account for downloads by non-continuing users), equals a much less impressive number: 50 million. Meh.

      I like my Firefox, but let's not get out of hand with our silly download counts.
      • smackjack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9They article clearly states 400 million downloads, not 400 million users
      • kelson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Well, don't forget the copies of Firefox that come pre-installed with most Linux distros these days. Or the people who download it once, then transfer it via LAN or thumb drive to other computers. (I've downloaded v.2 once for Windows, and installed it on at least 10 machines.) Those are cases where multiple installations are counted as only 1 download, or not counted at all.

        But as pointed out in the comment you were replying to, Mozilla isn't actually claiming that 400M downloads = 400M users, and points out their current estimate of active users at 120M
    • bingobongony, on 11/05/2007, -9/+2You are delusional. I love how you pick and choose the surveys that give ridiculous high numbers, but when those same surveys show a drop the next monthy you say "Surveys are *****!"

      If you think there are 120 million regular Firefox usrs, you are not even fit to live a noaml human life. Your parents did a HORRIBLE job of preparing you for a life of reality.
      • TheSpook, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1> "Your parents did a HORRIBLE job of preparing you for a life of reality."

        Hmmm, you should compare paychecks some time :)
        • thomashauk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1bingobongony earns a fiver a week delivering the papers before school
    • aussieNickuss, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5What about those like me....who download it once and then pass it around to a whole lot of people?
    • lowbot, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Well, Im disappointed. From all the hype starting at around 1997-1998 about mozilla, open source, and linux, you'd think in 10 years we'd have 50+ percent of all desktops being open source, open formats for everything, etc. Instead you guys pat yourselves on the back with meaningless download numbers (like the 'citizens' number in SL). Oh well, maybe in the next century.
      • OrangeCrush, on 11/05/2007, -0/+2Internet Explorer took a good 5 years or so to overtake Netscape. It's only been 3 years since Firefox 1.0 and it doesn't have the benefit of being installed by default in the operating system used by the vast majority of PCs. Linux and other FOSS projects continue to be refined and grow in users, but it'll take much more time to whittle down an entrenched monopoly.
    • thomashauk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And of course one download could equal a lot of users. Magazine CDs mass roll out across whole companies and ofcouse most linux distros don't contibute much to download numbers.
  • shinythingy, on 10/10/2007, -20/+9I haven't been impressed by Firefox as much as i thought i would be. It crashes a lot for me IE didn't crash as much when i used it. Opera for me is much much better.
    • LordSkywalker, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9Stop using Windows ME.
      • shinythingy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Using XP, maybe the beloved browser isn't as great you you think it is or want it to be
    • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1I have been crashing on firefox too, but i reloaded it and it was okay
      • natenovs, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1nope. mines a clean install on xp sp 2. crashes weekly. and the crashes have been getting more frequent.
        • zwaldowski, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Weekly? How long to you keep Firefox open?
  • carstairs, on 10/10/2007, -15/+5Those are 4 million very smart people.
    • carstairs, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Oh, whoops, I misread the title. 400 million. Oh well, it'll probably get buried anyway.
      • merreborn, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4And here I was thinking you were trying to sneakily imply that each firefox user has downloaded FF 100 times
    • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5And your obviously not one of those people (400,000,000 not 4,000,000)
  • mrmacky, on 10/10/2007, -3/+49Microsoft should send them another cake.
  • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -7/+11I have downloaded it about 207 times,(computer tech)
    • Niz1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20i downloaded it once and put it on USB memory to share (good computer tech)

      just kidding im sure your good too :)
    • tobikow, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Interesting that you mention this, because when i saw the headline i thought "but that dosent necessarily mean 4 million Firefox users, but just 4 million hits on their download link. i mean, i've probably downloaded it about 20 times myself. Either way, Firefox is awesome, congrats to all those who helped develop it, It made a huge impact on the web.
    • Xanium4332, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1your not a very good netizen :P
    • bromac, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I have a couple floors full of users and I'm considering this in the image. But I don't think that the On High is up for it yet. Damn MS overlords

      /sysadmin
  • av4rice, on 10/10/2007, -11/+3Don't you have to re-download it everytime you upgrade versions?
    • bsmedberg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9No. Automatic update usually provides updates to new versions, and these are not counted as "downloads".
    • NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Auto-update FTW... =P They are not counted as downloads.
  • RabidFurby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14Love Firefox. Digg. Rock on.
  • kvaldes44, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5viva la revolution
  • advwar, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Don't get carried away like you normally do, people of Digg. This is not amount of people using FireFox.
  • tradwolley, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3only 200million behind iTunes!
    • Xanium4332, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4firefox - web browser
      iTunes - music management

      Is it me, or is it hard to draw a link between the two.
  • niner9, on 10/10/2007, -11/+9Not sure about "faster" anymore.
  • anarchytv, on 10/10/2007, -12/+5Wonder how many of these downloads were discard & overwritten in 'upgrades'. At least 80%. Firefox stole tabbed browsing from Opera, and even improved on it. All the better. Now if only they could work out all the bugs for powerusers who open 100's of windows.
    • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Why are we still talking about stolen features in 2007. I'd have thought most people would have attached their brain by then.
  • kwolf, on 10/10/2007, -7/+12retetion rate is 25% ...

    http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/07/mozilla-looking-for-ways-to-increase-firefox-retention/
    • TheSpook, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Not sure why this was buried... It's on-topic, and Asa himself confirmed as much in a post to this topic.
  • litebulb1, on 10/10/2007, -13/+1I love that free firefox DOMINATES IE any day!
  • KotoOni, on 10/10/2007, -12/+0Yes, but will it blend? That is the question. ^_^
  • JasonCox, on 10/10/2007, -16/+10Mozilla, last month: We need to really increase our retention rates
    Mozilla, this month: OMG OMG OMG! LOOKS AT ALL THE DOWNLOADS OF OUR PRECIOUS!
    • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8At constant retention rate an increase in downloads still equates to an increase in user base.

      I suspect the entire Linux market isn't counted in this as well (since most distros ship their own version from their own servers). If that is the case then there are an extra 20m Firefox users to add.
      • Toupee, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3That makes 420!

        And speaking of celebrating...
  • saranya21, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3I'd be more interested in how many "unique" downloads there were. Probably no where near 400million.
  • rowlodge, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3i wish safari would offer a stripped down version that ran like firefox, i still wish i had the "OEM" that my mac came with, it's like, why did i buy this mac in the first place but using a foreign web browser?
  • Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15I wonder how many actully know how to change a skin
    or add an extension.
    • dr3d, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2You feel superior? .. Why is this important?
    • TheSpore, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2How many people know how to do that in IE? Or Netscape? Or Opera? Or any other browser?

      Firefox makes it super-easy to download themes and extensions and customize the look of the browser. Not to mention the huge library of useful extensions that Mozilla hosts. But honestly, the default theme is good already, I don't think people have to download more stuff just to see the benefits of Firefox.
    • stephant, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Instead of making some comment that tends to hide what an ass you are, just come out and say it: "Most people leave firefox because they don't know how great it is. They're not as smart as me and, therefore, have no idea what firefox is capable of. If they weren't so dumb they'd love it." You're that guy on the World of Warcraft, Southpark episisode, aren't you?
  • fatdog789, on 10/10/2007, -12/+3FF 2 blows. Stick with FF 1.5.
  • paisano1231, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3fire fox rocks!!!!
  • BavarianTomcat, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4Great thing ..so lets get the 1.000.000.000 too ;.-)
    • TheSpook, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3We surpassed 1 download long ago. In fact, I'm pretty sure the dude who uploaded the binary probably did at least one download to test it...
    • thomashauk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0The firefox 3 relese should add a few due to updates
  • 711groove, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9"not even the world's most powerful companies can keep people from a better, safer, and faster Web experience"
    I don't know... mozilla is doing a good job of keeping me from using Opera.
  • DokGonzo, on 10/10/2007, -9/+01.21 Jiggawatts !!!11!! o.O
  • truegodofwar, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10These numbers are actually low. Some people use firefox without downloading it.

    My firefox came bundled on my ubuntu live cd.
    • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1Yeah, OK. what planet do you live on if you think that 4500 million unique people have ever even HEARD of Firefox!
      • lowerlogic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2RTFT, 400 million downloads != 4500 million people
  • kahrn, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5Averaged out, it's probably around 100 million downloads and not 400 million due to some people downloading it more than once, or twice, etc..

    Iv'e probably downloaded it at least 20 times over different systems and after formats and such.
    • userundefine, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6And I've likewise downloaded it at least 20 times from Ubuntu repositories, not their official site so it doesn't get counted. It all gets balanced out.
    • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3It is a LOT less than that.
    • TheSpook, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3> "Averaged out, it's probably around 100 million downloads and not 400 million due to some people downloading it more than once, or twice, etc.."

      No, I don't think you get it. I believe they have a counter that actually keeps track of the number of downloads. Now unique USERS, OTOH, is a different story.
  • MScrip, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17Why is McDonalds still counting? How insecure is this company? 40 million, 80 billion, trillion zillion …. Is anyone impressed anymore? Oh 89 billion sold! Alright, I’ll have one. I’m satisfied. Who cares?! I would love to meet the chairman of the board of McDonalds and just say to him: Look! We ALL get it ok? You’ve sold alot of hamburgers. Whatever the hell the number is, just put up a sign saying "McDonalds... we're doing very well." We are tired of hearing about every god damn one of them.

    /Seinfeld
  • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -12/+4Wow! And less than 1% actually using it!
  • smakusdod, on 10/10/2007, -12/+7IE has over 1,000,000,000 downloads!
    • arcooke, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1That's because M$ forces it down peoples' throats.
      • Darcy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3No they don't. They ask if you would like to upgrade to the latest version, it's up to you whether you choose to install it or not. Firefox, opera, itunes and many other apps do the same thing.
        • thomashauk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0But of course unlike the rest which shut up, at least until the next version, Microsoft keep pushing and pushing

          I dugg him down anyway for the $
    • schoate09, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3No, most people don't download IE, it comes pre-infected.
  • FyberOptic, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6"better, safer, and faster"

    Anyone with any fact checking capability whatsoever would know that all of these statements are wrong. Firefox isn't even faster than IE, and that's without extensions, therefore making it the SLOWEST browser. It's not hardly even safer since it's been riddled with security flaws since its inception, making their usage of the word extremely relative. And "better" is pure opinion.

    Not to mention, Asa Dotzler is an asshole.

    And now the zealots can digg me down for saying everything they didn't want to hear.
    • Progrockusa, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1sure np. enjoy your spyware .
      personally i've been using opera lately.
      only thing that keeps me from using it regularly as a main browser is the widgets suck, no Add-ons that integrate into the browser. and the content blocker is a limtied poor excuse for an ad blocker.
      otherwise i'd say it's the fastests and most innovative browser
      • FyberOptic, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Where did I say that I use IE?
      • deannalp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Yea...I would have guessed not IE, but perhaps a bitter Opera user who has never personally met Asa Dotzler.
  • Richandler, on 10/10/2007, -16/+11Opera > Firefox > IE
    • thegreatanti, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Oh noes, the opera police is here. Too bad the majority of the world thinks different. Opera: a bloated producted only used by geeks.
      • dannychen16, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I don't why you assholes always have to bash, Opera is just as good as firefox and vice versa, hell i'd use opera if it supported stumble.
        • fr34k5h0w, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Where in the Title/Description did it say that Firefox is better than Opera that brought in all the Opera fans say how much better their browser is?
      • brotherfranciz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"Opera: a bloated producted only used by geeks."

        Wow, I just assumed everyone on Digg were geeks and proud of it. I guess that's everyone minus thegreatanti then...
  • salvadorwii, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2lets wait for FF 3.0
  • evildeadguy, on 10/10/2007, -10/+9It's rather funny how "better, safer, and faster" is more fitting for Opera.

    As long as people are not using IE i really dont think I can complain.
    • Darcy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Well, people are using IE, so I think you should continue your complaining.
  • pwnies, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I defiantly contributed about 20 to that count. I feel special.
  • mrogi, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3"How come we dont get as much love as Firefox? We were here first. It just aint fair." -Netscape
  • 3leggedHorse, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3I love FF but how many of those DL's are regular users.
  • ortucis, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5"Firefox has reached 400 million downloads and demonstrated that not even the world's most powerful companies can keep people from a better, safer, and faster Web experience."


    Soo, does it include all the users who have downloaded it and then ditched it for something better?
  • Midnitte, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2400 million? wtf? why so low. I easily downloaded firefox 1 million times to install it on XP everytime it needed to be reinstalled due to failure to load errors.
  • V1ncent, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3It's not the amount of downloads that counts, its the number of people that still use it that counts!
  • singapor3, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Good news for firefox!

    They deserve their popularity, I have not encountered any problems with Firefox so far, with all its superb plugin capability.
  • OutThisLife, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I download Firefox at least 2 times a month, reformatting and all.
  • sammysoul, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Number of downloads or usage rate doesn't really say much about the quality of a product (look at Microsoft software). Firefox has become pretty bloated over the years and leaks memory like there is no tomorrow (I regularly get 250 MB memory usage with a couple of tabs open). Plus there is the 100% CPU load problem; Google it and you'll see what I mean. Don't get me wrong, Firefox is still my most used browser, mainly due to all the extensions I have personalized it with. But Opera comes with many useful features already included (bittorrent, RSS reader, mouse gestures, etc.) and is way faster. Only reason I'm not using it that much is that many websites don't support it. If we really want a revolution on the browser front, I'd say we should press every website to comply with the standards (http://www.webstandards.org/) so it won't matter anymore what browser you're using. I'm all for web standards and open-source software!
    • thomashauk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Umm turn of the cashing of pages in memory. You'll find it drops. But if you aren't running out of memory why complain? PLuss I bet those tab had a lot of embedded media in...
      • goffy59, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2umm..... because what if i want some of that memory being used on another program? Rather then being raped by firefox? FIrsfox is better on ubuntu anyhow.
    • comrade693, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Because memory usage implies memory leaks!!!!!
  • adaire, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1Sorry guys, actually one of those billion is mine... damn Windows reformats
  • samuel514, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Congrats to Firefox and all the peeps who made the web a better place for all of us web developer.
  • bobtcat, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5It's weird to get on other people's computers without FF and see these annoying as crap ads everywhere and like, three separate address bars underneath the main one, and not being able to open things in tabs and... yeah. You just forget about those things, lol.
  • nonks, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4i use firefox and all it's great but im running opera 9.5 alpha an it already blows away firefox cant wait for FF 3 though
    • scrag10, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3lol, i did the same thing today. I'll miss my 40ish plug-ins, but Opera runs faster on my aged computer. But I will still use both, probably still Firefox more.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 90 of 90 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.