Re: Removing Firefox Version Number
Asa Dotzler <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mozilla.ui |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Tyler Downer wrote: > However, there is a major flaw behind your example, which has been > pointed out before. With a website, 100% of users are using the latest > version, Always. They have no choice, there is no action that needs to > be taken on their part. The website is deployed on the server, that is > it. With Firefox, we SUCK at getting people to upgrade to the latest > version. 66% or even worse, 52% of users running Firefox 5, and it's > been 6 weeks since it was released. That is a total failure. IF we had > a way of getting even 95% of total users (no Asa, not just the newest > users, all users) on the latest version, then we can think about > getting rid of the version number. But we don't, and Mozilla sees > unlikely to change anything in how Firefox updates until, oh, version > 9 or 10. By that time, what numbers will we have? 30% running the > latest version? Tyler, you're painting a picture that's just not accurate. We haven't tried to get 3.6 users on to the new system. They're still supported wiht security and stability updates and we've agreed to continue to do that for them while we sort our any plans we might have for enterprises. You cannot count those as rapid release users when you want to talk about how rapid release updates are a failure. (No one is suggesting removing the version number from 3.6.xx anyway.) The only fair way to measure the success of our rapid release migration story is to look at the migration from 4 to 5 and starting today from 5 to 6. We're doing far better than the bleak picture you paint when you include 3.6 users which are not yet a part of this change. You also lament that we won't have a better system until Firefox 9 or 10 (which is not completely accurate -- we've got changes we can put in place for 7 and 8 if we decide to that will make update much easier -- like add-on compat by default with a blacklist instead of a whitelist) and you seem to miss that the version number removal is a proposal that wouldn't see the light of day until just such 8 or 9 releases. - A