<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule">

<channel>
	<title>Unity Behind Diversity &#187; google chrome</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blaise.ca/blog/tag/google-chrome/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blaise.ca/blog</link>
	<description>Searching for beauty in the dissonance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 00:26:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
<creativeCommons:license>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ca/</creativeCommons:license>		<item>
		<title>Is Firefox missing the point in its response to Google Chrome?</title>
		<link>http://blaise.ca/blog/2008/09/16/is-firefox-missing-the-point-in-its-response-to-google-chrome/</link>
		<comments>http://blaise.ca/blog/2008/09/16/is-firefox-missing-the-point-in-its-response-to-google-chrome/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blaise Alleyne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Free Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[google chrome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mozilla]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[seth godin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[techdirt]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blaise.ca/blog/?p=359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[This post originally appeared on Techdirt.] Seth Godin thinks Firefox is missing the point by launching new features in response to Google Chrome. He says the problem now is that &#8220;when your friends switch to Firefox, your life doesn&#8217;t get better.&#8221; Firefox needs to provide people with an incentive to spread it, so that the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[This post originally appeared on <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080914/2322362265.shtml">Techdirt</a>.]</p>
<p>Seth Godin thinks <a href="http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/09/firefox-is-miss.html">Firefox is missing the point</a> by launching new features in response to Google Chrome. He says the problem now is that &#8220;when your friends switch to Firefox, your life doesn&#8217;t get better.&#8221; Firefox needs to provide people with an incentive to spread it, so that the more people use it, the better it gets for users (think of a social networking site &#8212; you have a better experience if more of your friends join). He suggests new communication and collaboration features that <em>only work if you have Firefox</em>.</p>
<p>I think he&#8217;s missing the point.</p>
<p>He ignores the Firefox community. The life of a Firefox user <em>does</em> improve as the user base grows. A more vibrant community means better add-ons, bug fixes, security patches, phishing reports, translations/dictionaries, etc. &#8212; all members benefit. Mozilla is already providing the sort of incentive he describes. Sure, there may be ways to improve, but I don&#8217;t think they&#8217;re missing the point.</p>
<p>Plus, &#8220;only for Firefox users&#8221; <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/about/manifesto">isn&#8217;t the Mozilla approach</a>. Mozilla wants to improve the web for <em>everyone</em> &#8212; not just Firefox users. Mozilla thinks your browser should be like your phone or your car; it shouldn&#8217;t matter if your friends or co-workers are using the same product. You don&#8217;t need to consider which phone carrier your friend uses before making a call, or which car your co-worker has before providing directions; you shouldn&#8217;t have to think about what browser someone uses before communicating with them online. People don&#8217;t need special browser-specific features in order to communicate browser-to-browser, that&#8217;s what web services (or add-ons) are for. Those kinds of features would make life on the web more <em>difficult</em> for everyone if they were Firefox specific, and if they weren&#8217;t, Google could just implement them in Chrome.</p>
<p>The community is one thing Firefox has that Chrome can&#8217;t copy overnight.</p>
<p>If you read <a href="http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2008/09/02/mozilla-firefox-and-google-chrome/">some</a> <a href="http://john.jubjubs.net/2008/09/01/thoughts-on-chrome-more/">responses</a> to Chrome from people at Mozilla, it doesn&#8217;t seem like they&#8217;re missing the point. Competition in the browser market is validation of Mozilla&#8217;s mission for Firefox, and Mozilla plans to compete by continuing to innovate and to involve the community. Seth Godin makes a great observation about giving people an incentive to spread your product &#8212; &#8220;people will recommend something if adoption improves their lives&#8221; &#8212; but he doesn&#8217;t mention the ways in which Mozilla has already taken that to heart. How do you think Firefox became popular in the first place?</p>
<p>[Read the <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080914/2322362265.shtml#comments">comments</a> on Techdirt.]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blaise.ca/blog/2008/09/16/is-firefox-missing-the-point-in-its-response-to-google-chrome/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
