That title is misleading. What I really mean is: Are you an idiot?

This is a reply to his post “Question to Mozilla CEO: What do you fear?” and my thoughts on what he said, and why Mozilla CEO John Lilly commented on the whole Safari-on-iTunes update issue

And yes, if you’re a macfag, prepare to be on a rage as you read this. If not and are a Firefox user or heck, a developer then you might even laugh.

Before you read this, read the post John Lilly made about him saying that it is wrong to place a Safari install option on the Update Center used by iTunes (or whatever Apple product that tried to do this.)

Let me quote the guy.

It only adds to the hilarity. Why? In enterprise land, neither browser is likely to be the number one choice down at the PC/laptop image factory. Not even close. Check the stats at W3schools to see what I mean. Mozilla comes in at a miniscule 1.1% while Safari has just hit the 2% mark

tsk tsk tsk. I pity this guy. Supposedly I was about to say that Firefox still dominates blablabla in terms of the knowledgeable, literate side of the internet that knows that there are options of having different browsers, then I checked the link. Then I laughed.

from: W3Schools

These people (in the stats) are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user.

The average user tends to use Internet Explorer, since it comes preinstalled with Windows. Most do not seek out other browsers. 

Gotta love that statistic. They know what I mean about stats like these should be fair on the part that the people in question know that other options do exist, and I mean browsers. Feh, this is getting sidetracked.

Regarding the first quote, my original point was botched but I have a greater point here instead. “Mozilla comes in at a miniscule 1.1% while Safari has just hit the 2% mark” is just a failed statement. Mozilla cares about Firefox here in terms of browser wars, not the old Mozilla suite. In other words, MAN, LOOK AT THE LIST LABELED FX. not MOZ. What’s listed here is this:

Fx: 36.5% | Moz: 1.1% | S: 2.0%

Look who’s miniscule now eh? No wonder they thought of placing Safari as a disguised download on their updates. If I was the CEO, I wouldn’t be shaking in fear you know.

As for the guy, seems he’s looking at Moz, which is obviously 1.1% since no one cares about that much, not even Mozilla itself cause they’re all looking at FIREFOX, not MOZILLA (old).

Get your facts right, you moron.

Oh yeah, and as a counter-argument before you go crying “I’m comparing Mozilla with Safari, not Firefox” is your own words:

And while I’m in Mozilla flame mode, exactly when will Firefox stop leaking memory like a sieve by default and routinely bringing my machine to a grinding halt?

That shows you’re looking at Firefox here. Don’t even try and go burn in a fire, you wretch. Oh and by the way,try Firefox 3 even if it’s a beta. Then say that leaking memory part again.

Here’s another quote to prove him wrong:

What does Mozilla fear? It’s not as if Mozilla Foundation has a market share worth defending except when they’re acting as a Firefox proxy.

Err, do you know why it’s called Mozilla Firefox. They’re not just mere proxies, they’re handling this. Of course, it’s still an open-source project but what the hey. I cant see how market share and free browsers relate but i dont care (that means, dont reply in a flamepost bout this, it’s not as if people would care anyway)

Also, fear lol. I want to ask the question, but in a totally different point because they wont fear anything from a browser called Safari getting dominated by Mozilla Firefox.
Second: Why the CEO said that Apple’s choice of distribution was bad.

i’m betting that the CEO’s point is something like this, and could be explained better if it was a bit more technical:

Here’s a bit of a developer knack in terms of program usability. There are many types of people out there, and most of them would want to get their job done as fast as possible. In a computer program, there are many features, in which a feature is supposed to do only one thing (why? It’s to make the code cohesive as possible. The more things it can do under one function, the less cohesive it turns out to be, which makes software code less flexible. Go look up on code cohesion and software design if you’re curious)

So, if I say I want to bold text, it should only go bold. NOTHING EXTRA.

Would you want it if I say, bold the text, then it should go like this? No.

From that analogy, you should know that update and install are two different things.

Update is there to make your current programs up-to-date. Not install some program called Safari which seems to have the power to make the Mozilla community and its CEO shake in fear /sarcasm

 from a guy named Krazit, who seems to know better than this guy.

Apple made Safari 3.1 a standalone update option, so you can choose to uncheck the box next to the title and download just the iTunes updates. The company tells you exactly what you’re downloading, and offers a link to its site for more information.

Well, at least you quoted someone with a right point.  True, the good thing here is that Apple informs the user by a [checkbox] Safari option on the update screen, at least people aren’t forced to get the browser. Bad thing here is that the interface is misleading. In an update screen, people expect to update, some people won’t even bother reading because they should know right away that “ah! updates! time to give iTunes the functionality it deserves!” Developers have this kind of mindset already, so the idea of placing “install” just contradicts. (Software Design, Usability Inspection, UI Design and along those lines)

Setting this idiot aside, here’s a proposition:

Apple, place the Safari install on a DIFFERENT place or page. It should go on like this:

1. User selects Update

2. User updates iTunes and whatever applies

3. Separate page shows up showing the Safari offer and its features.

4. User refuses offe- uh, i mean Accepts it.

In this approach, people will really know what’s coming and at the same time they’d get to know what Safari can do.

P.S. I tried replying to this guy on his ZDNet  blog but it seems that I have to register beforehand. That totally fails. I do not want to register to a site because I want to flame someone, nor did it deserve to have a new account because of a stupid poster.

EDIT: Quoted from the post “Browser Wars Heat Up, Again” from PC World:

It’s “optional” in the sense that you don’t have to install it, but the installer assumes that you do want it, by default. If you don’t want to download and install 50MB of Safari, you need to uncheck the box manually. This really bugs me. I’m perfectly happy with Firefox, and I see no reason why I should have Apple twisting my arm to load up my system with another browser every time it issues a security update to Quicktime.

Well, I guess that’s another problem there. As I said earlier,the updates screen is something people might overlook since they know that it’s supposed to patch up your files, not add new one.

Hold a tick, Safari’s installer is 50MBs worth?!? That’s quite huge now, isn’t it?