Instead, he jumps to another argument entirely in the second half: Firefox's lack of an "app ecosystem". This is truly delusional. Firefox has just as much of an app ecosystem as IE: it runs code on websites you go to. It's true that it lacks Chrome's app store (which right now amounts to little more than a glorified link directory and alternate bookmark system), but if that's a disadvantage it applies equally to IE.
* Relatively slow only with sufficient handwaving: call IE's platform previews equivalent to Chrome's full releases, then dismiss without justification Mozilla's new accelerated schedule for Firefox.
0: http://code.google.com/chrome/apps/docs/developers_guide.htm...
The ability for the Chrome store to deliver local apps, which I suspect you were referring to, is mostly unused and irrelevant. HTML5's offline features can duplicate that functionality on any browser that supports them.
I switched from Netscape to IE when I realized the application had become bloated beyond recognition. I didn't need an email client inside of Netscape, I didn't need a news reader inside of Netscape, I didn't need all of these things.
I'm seeing shades of this in Firefox. Specifically, Firefox Sync.
It's a great idea, for some people. However in my scenario my tabs and bookmarks in one location are completely different from my tabs and bookmarks in another. I don't need the ability to bridge them. It would be a neat add on, but I don't need it built into the core.
That is what made Firefox great in the first place. Add ons. That's why I've stuck with Firefox. Add ons. Features like Sync are cool, but in my opinion they should be optional add ons.
Did Ed Bott have some skin in IE6, and he's upset that Firefox blew a hole in the side of Microsoft's lack of maintenance on IE6?
I don't follow the reasoning since I don't really see why I have to use Internet Explorer to use a Microsoft web app just as I don't have to use Chrome in order to get my Gmail.
Now I don't think that's enough to hurt Mozilla in any significant way, and these types of features will probably be standardized down the line, but it is true that these other 2 browsers have some special capabilities.
I expect better researched articles from ZDNet.
1) A continued slow release cycle will kill Firefox. Very true. Which is why Mozilla is switching to a 3 month cycle.
2) An app story is required. I'm not sure if I buy it, but Mozilla also has an answer to that: https://apps.mozillalabs.com/
To the average Joe - what makes the new Firefox any different to the last version?
Javascript and rendering performance tweaks are great - but the UI still sucks.
