<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Major update to Firefox 3.5 (the day after)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://oduinn.com/blog/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://oduinn.com/blog/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:12:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John O&#8217;Duinn&#8217;s Soapbox &#187; Major update to Firefox 3.6 (the day after)</title>
		<link>http://oduinn.com/blog/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-43112</link>
		<dc:creator>John O&#8217;Duinn&#8217;s Soapbox &#187; Major update to Firefox 3.6 (the day after)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:57:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oduinn.com/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-43112</guid>
		<description>[...] This is very similar to what we saw with the FF3.5.0 release. As far as I can tell, we did not gain 3million *new* users yesterday. My belief, without data to prove it, is that most/all of those 3million people were *existing* Firefox users who chose to do a download install, instead of doing CheckForUpdate. I guess there are cases where a Firefox user might want to do a fresh install, but I would have thought that most people would prefer the easier in-place upgrade of Help-&gt;CheckForUpdates. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This is very similar to what we saw with the FF3.5.0 release. As far as I can tell, we did not gain 3million *new* users yesterday. My belief, without data to prove it, is that most/all of those 3million people were *existing* Firefox users who chose to do a download install, instead of doing CheckForUpdate. I guess there are cases where a Firefox user might want to do a fresh install, but I would have thought that most people would prefer the easier in-place upgrade of Help-&gt;CheckForUpdates. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jim l.</title>
		<link>http://oduinn.com/blog/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33755</link>
		<dc:creator>jim l.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:12:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oduinn.com/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33755</guid>
		<description>downloaded ff 3.5 .everything work,s fine until exit. cpu turns up to 105% .have to end the process at the manager. have switched to google.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>downloaded ff 3.5 .everything work,s fine until exit. cpu turns up to 105% .have to end the process at the manager. have switched to google.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tchung</title>
		<link>http://oduinn.com/blog/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33510</link>
		<dc:creator>Tchung</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:31:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oduinn.com/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33510</guid>
		<description>Hey John, the testing paid off over the quarter, so great props to the team on getting that working!   Question, do you know if there were any indications of failed checkforupdates attempts and any AUS server issues?  I&#039;d be curious on the % of failed attempts if we were able to track that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey John, the testing paid off over the quarter, so great props to the team on getting that working!   Question, do you know if there were any indications of failed checkforupdates attempts and any AUS server issues?  I&#8217;d be curious on the % of failed attempts if we were able to track that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart</title>
		<link>http://oduinn.com/blog/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33509</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:16:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oduinn.com/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33509</guid>
		<description>Why would that be stunning? I suspect the only reason it&#039;s that *low* is that the inability to get previous updates that way has trained a lot of users that it doesn&#039;t work.

I&#039;m very glad that it works right now. Makes a big difference in terms of feeling like Firefox is a solid and supported end-user product.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why would that be stunning? I suspect the only reason it&#8217;s that *low* is that the inability to get previous updates that way has trained a lot of users that it doesn&#8217;t work.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m very glad that it works right now. Makes a big difference in terms of feeling like Firefox is a solid and supported end-user product.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Majken "Lucy" Connor</title>
		<link>http://oduinn.com/blog/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33508</link>
		<dc:creator>Majken "Lucy" Connor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 03:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://oduinn.com/2009/07/01/major-update-to-firefox-35-the-day-after/#comment-33508</guid>
		<description>While there wasn&#039;t an official marketing push, it did get out on twitter that you could use the check for updates option. Might be worth checking how many tweets about it were posted as that&#039;s a really great result.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While there wasn&#8217;t an official marketing push, it did get out on twitter that you could use the check for updates option. Might be worth checking how many tweets about it were posted as that&#8217;s a really great result.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

