<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Firefox Retention</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/</link>
	<description>When in doubt, sample it out...</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 01:37:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: mawrya</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6243</link>
		<dc:creator>mawrya</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 05:18:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6243</guid>
		<description>I think I might have a clue about what happens to a large number of the people who download but never installed Firefox.

If you visit the download page 

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.html?product=firefox-2.0.0.12&#38;os=win&#38;lang=en-US

I know lots of people who would get lost on step 2. Where is this mysterious "continue" button that they should click? I tried downloading in both IE6 and IE7 and the process didn't seem to match at the instructions exactly. Does the download page sniff the browser and change instructions based on this info? It should. And the instructions should be exact and dead simple. The page is close but could be made even better. Its a shame to think that people get to the point of downloading but just can't figure out how to do the install due to confusing instructions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I might have a clue about what happens to a large number of the people who download but never installed Firefox.</p>
<p>If you visit the download page </p>
<p><a href="http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.html?product=firefox-2.0.0.12&amp;os=win&amp;lang=en-US" rel="nofollow">http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.html?product=firefox-2.0.0.12&amp;os=win&amp;lang=en-US</a></p>
<p>I know lots of people who would get lost on step 2. Where is this mysterious &#8220;continue&#8221; button that they should click? I tried downloading in both IE6 and IE7 and the process didn&#8217;t seem to match at the instructions exactly. Does the download page sniff the browser and change instructions based on this info? It should. And the instructions should be exact and dead simple. The page is close but could be made even better. Its a shame to think that people get to the point of downloading but just can&#8217;t figure out how to do the install due to confusing instructions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kkovash</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6127</link>
		<dc:creator>kkovash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6127</guid>
		<description>Justin,

thanks for the comments.  I didn't fully explain it within this post, but we did adjust the daily usage numbers according to our findings here: http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/01/03/what-factors-affect-firefox-usage/

So, for the drop-offs in AUS numbers that we typically see with updates being released and with holidays, we did "smooth" our the daily numbers that you see in the graph (e.g., that burp around Christmas was actually much more extreme when looking at just the raw data).

With that in mind, this funnelcake sample should be extremely representative of other samples.  We're continuing to consider further funnelcake editions and other methodologies to both confirm and enhance our findings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Justin,</p>
<p>thanks for the comments.  I didn&#8217;t fully explain it within this post, but we did adjust the daily usage numbers according to our findings here: <a href="http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/01/03/what-factors-affect-firefox-usage/" rel="nofollow">http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/01/03/what-factors-affect-firefox-usage/</a></p>
<p>So, for the drop-offs in AUS numbers that we typically see with updates being released and with holidays, we did &#8220;smooth&#8221; our the daily numbers that you see in the graph (e.g., that burp around Christmas was actually much more extreme when looking at just the raw data).</p>
<p>With that in mind, this funnelcake sample should be extremely representative of other samples.  We&#8217;re continuing to consider further funnelcake editions and other methodologies to both confirm and enhance our findings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Dolske</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6122</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Dolske</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:00:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6122</guid>
		<description>It would be interesting to compare these results with another Funnelcake sample... EG, do we always lose ~30% of users over the first 60 days, or were there other factors specific to October and November that contributed to that?

In particular, I was thinking of FF updates released +14, +28, +43, +47, and +116 from the Funnelcake date. I guess there's isn't an obvious correlation, though, now that I look.

Also interesting that the burp in the +80s matches up with the Christmas holidays.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would be interesting to compare these results with another Funnelcake sample&#8230; EG, do we always lose ~30% of users over the first 60 days, or were there other factors specific to October and November that contributed to that?</p>
<p>In particular, I was thinking of FF updates released +14, +28, +43, +47, and +116 from the Funnelcake date. I guess there&#8217;s isn&#8217;t an obvious correlation, though, now that I look.</p>
<p>Also interesting that the burp in the +80s matches up with the Christmas holidays.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcelo Wolfgang</title>
		<link>http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6102</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcelo Wolfgang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 20:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.mozilla.com/metrics/2008/02/29/firefox-retention/#comment-6102</guid>
		<description>That's a impressive mark, but I really like to know what happened to the people that downloaded and don't even installed it ... it's weird you have to agree with me</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s a impressive mark, but I really like to know what happened to the people that downloaded and don&#8217;t even installed it &#8230; it&#8217;s weird you have to agree with me</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
