GetFree Script Automatically Downloads and Installs Mozila Firebird and Mozilla Thunderbird

Monday October 20th, 2003

OpenSourceAdvocate writes: "Industry surveys show that Mozilla holds 1-2 percent of the browser market, and Internet Explorer has the vast majority.

"A Brazilian programmer just released a script to automatically download and install the latest version of Mozilla Firebird, Mozilla Thunderbird, and Gaim on any Windows computer.

"The goal is to increase the internet security via software diversity. Open Source Software is less vulnerable to Windows virus and worms.

"Developers are invited to download, modify and redistribute the source code. (The script is open source and dedicated to the public domain.)"

#1 not to be a party pooper

by chowychow

Monday October 20th, 2003 8:24 PM

how many average users have Activestate's Perl installed on their machine?

#2 Re: not to be a party pooper

by theantix

Monday October 20th, 2003 9:01 PM

From the linked article:

"You'll probably want to generate an executable before sending the script to your friends. To generate an executable, use: pp -o getfree.exe (pp is part of PAR, a Cross-Platform Packaging and Deployment tool) You can also use ActiveState's PerlApp or IndigoStar's Perl2Exe. "

So it seems that there is a pretty simple way to distribute this script if you think it is worthwhile.

#3 'Industry surveys'?

by leafdigital

Tuesday October 21st, 2003 2:01 AM

Are you referring to those, to put it kindly, 'dubious' statistics from or TheCounter?

I think these counter sites under-represent real Gecko usage, among all their other biases.

If you look at the best real numbers available from a large general site, (in the Zeitgeist section; to get numbers, you have to do calculations on the graph), you'll see that Gecko has almost a 5% share. What's more, numbers on other sites I have access to (the ones which aren't computer technology-related, so should not show browser bias) bear this approximate figure out. All these numbers show Gecko in the 5% range, not the 2% range (where, incidentally, Opera fits in, but only if you have a statistics program that accurately counts it - the vast majority do not). It may be different for your own site, or it may not.

Of course, IE really does have 90% so this doesn't change the point of the post or anything... but even so I think it's better to avoid quoting the 1-2% figure, which is dubious at best.


#7 Re: 'Industry surveys'?

by Yacoubean

Tuesday October 21st, 2003 8:30 AM

If you refer to Google's Zeitgeist (, Moz based browsers do have around 2% market share. At least, that's what their graphic /looks/ like. In my opinion, google is an excellent place to get true net statistics, as EVERYBODY uses google! :)

#10 Did you count the pixels?

by leafdigital

Wednesday October 22nd, 2003 3:21 AM

Bear in mind that obviously the top of the graph where IE6 places is only around 60%, not 100%.

I measured the pixels for each browser category on the graph, and scaled those numbers to percentages that sum to 100; Mozilla gets about 4.7%, but since the numbers aren't accurate enough for that, I just rounded to nearest %.

Here are the numbers (this probably won't format correctly on these forums, sorry, but you should be able to figure it out):

Pixels Share IE6 94 64% IE5.5 20 14% IE5.0 18 12% Gecko 7 5% NN4 4 3% IE4 3 2% Total 146 100%


#12 Re: 'Industry surveys'?

by schapel

Wednesday October 22nd, 2003 3:21 PM

Yeah, I would say Gecko use is in the 2-4% range overall, not 1-2%. Bear in mind that individual web sites, especially geeky ones, might have a much higher percentage of Gecko web hits. A look at the chart in the upper right of shows actual websites that are in the range 4-15%.

I doubt that Opera is being seriously undercounted. Can you point to any solid evidence that statistics programs don't accurately count Opera, or point to any data that show that Opera has recently accounted for more than 1% of page hits on a large segment of websites for an extended period of time?

#4 Doesn't cygwin's setup program do this?

by rkl

Tuesday October 21st, 2003 3:15 AM

When I last installed Cygwin on Windows, it had a setup program that would tell you what the latest versions of packages built with Cygwin were and would let you download and install them. Assuming this is still the case, why not put the programs this guy mentioned into the Cygwin repository (they may already be there, I must confess to not having looked) and then tell people to install Cygwin? Seems like a bit of wheel re-invention going on here...

#8 Re: Doesn't cygwin's setup program do this?

by luserSPAZ

Tuesday October 21st, 2003 8:51 AM

Because installing Cygwin is an exercise in masochism?

#11 Re: Doesn't cygwin's setup program do this?

by jensend

Wednesday October 22nd, 2003 6:50 AM

The windows versions of Mozilla, OpenOffice, Gaim, etc are all regular win32 apps, not cygwin apps. Otherwise they'd have to run under Cygwin's xfree86 for windows implementation, etc. They do not fit as part of a cygwin installation. Furthermore, Cygwin is not something 99.99% of Windows users would ever want to install; they have no reason to want a Unix environment and the setup isn't something you'd want to try on anybody not familiar with the spectrum of Unix programs.

It's possible that this is wheel-reinvention, but it certainly isn't reinvention of cygwin setup.

#5 No Win Firebird nightlies in almost three weeks

by bandido

Tuesday October 21st, 2003 4:23 AM

I am wondering what's happeining to Firebird for Windows nightlies. They have not posted any nightly for Windows since OctoBer 2.

#6 Re: No Win Firebird nightlies in almost three wee

by Anthracks

Tuesday October 21st, 2003 7:06 AM

The machine used to build them was down for one reason or another. It looks like it just came back up though, as (on some mirrors, some don't seem to have picked it up yet) there's an October 21 nightly build for Win32 available. Thanks to whoever was responsible for getting this back on track :).

#9 Re: No Win Mozilla nightlies either?

by abischof

Tuesday October 21st, 2003 4:00 PM

Is that that why there aren't any win32 talkback nightlies either?