This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mozilla, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mozilla and its products on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Free Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of free software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Macintosh, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Firefox is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a collaborative attempt at improving Wikimedia content with the help of openly licensed materials and improving Wikipedia articles related to openness (including open access publishing, open educational resources, etc.). If you would like to participate, visit the project page for more information.
This is a talk page for discussing the Firefox article, and is not a reference desk. Any questions should be asked at Wikipedia:Reference desk. Please refrain from discussing matters not related to improving the article and its content.
In the infobox of the article as it currently is, there are 2 references to a "dairy release". Should this read "daily release"? That would be my guess. However, in case there is such a thing as a "dairy release", I won't make the edit myself. I will leave it to others. Oaklandguy (talk) 07:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Yea, all I'm seeing while searching is stuff for Dairy Queen press releases and the like. Question is, how do you change it? I'm not seeing anything saying "dairy release" in the code, and it seems weird that the template would automatically fill that in (I also don't see anything in the documentation that would suggest that it would do that). Supernerd11Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 13:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
"Adware, or advertising-supported software, is any software package which automatically renders advertisements in order to generate revenue for its author." This clearly fits Firefox since 2014-11-15. Therefore, I advise including the category Adware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Usually, "adware" means the software whose main purpose is showing ads, in other words, "adware" is a type of malwares. Who says "Firefox has become adware"? Could you show us reliable sources? Does anti-adware software such as Ad-Aware recognize Firefox as an adware and delete it? There are many many softwares which show ads instead of paying fee, but none of them are not in Category:Adware. --Claw of Slime (talk) 17:30, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
The definition on Adwareclearly defines adware (or "advertising-supported software") in its first sentence. Mozilla Firefox clearly automatically automatically renders advertisements to generate revenue for Mozilla . When there is "many many software" (please state which!) which show ads and are not listed in the Adware-category, then they should also be added to the adware-category! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
First, please sign your posts by using ~~~~ or similar.
Second, you need a reliable source that states it's adware, not just a blog that requires interpretation to determine if the statement is or isn't true.
Third, you've got several editors who disagree and you should try to seek WP:CONSENSUS for a change like this.
Fourth, a discussion of this should be added to the body to explain why it is adware. The opinions of all of your verifiable sources can be added to a summary of their opinions. Recognize, of course, that blogs, forums and other material from non-experts, is likely to be challenged as not reliable so you might as well stick to reliable sources. No references should be added to the infobox.
Fifth, it's not a license type at all.
Sixth, I have the new Firefox and see no ads. So that means either I'm doing something right or it's not classical adware. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:58, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Regarding (2) If you have the definition of Adware (also see  and even ) and Mozilla Firefox exactly behaves like this (shows advertisements to users on the "tiles" then Firefox is clearly adware. It might not be in a magnitude like other adware, but it still is adware. Either that, or the definition of Adware is wrong.
(3) Then I am stating my argumentation here.
(4) Agreed, a explanation why Firefox is adware since 2014-11-13 (corrected date in first post) should be given as well. Sources are e.g. given above.
(5) What do you mean? Are you referring to the software license? Free software can also be adware.
(6) See  for more information and  for an example screenshot.
(7) See my answer to (2). If Firefox is no adware (according to your sources: Microsoft), then the definition is wrong or at least not complete. Firefox definitely uses advertisements to generate revenue. Then it's at least ad-supported software.
I just changed a reference to the archived version but then saw that the original page does contain this information. They just changed "450 Million uses" to "half a billion users". I'm going to remove the archived version again and change the wiki article accordingly to say "half a billion users". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 09:57, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Is the infobox screenshot in the article i.e, File:Firefox-33-xfce.png, actually the 33 version of Firefox? I don't think so. Currently I'm using Firefox 33 on Windows XP, I found 2 differences by comparing with it. Differnces can be seen here. The "Google" search button is replaced by an "magnifying glass icon", there's "Restore previous session" option in down but in the infobox image there is no "Restore previous version" option, and sorry that I've checked the Menu Bar in "View" tab.
Since I'm using XP now, I think I shouldn't upload it on Wiki as XP is retired. I think a new screenshot of the latest version of Firefox running in Windows 8 or 8.1 should be uploaded replacing File:Firefox 29.0 on Windows 8.png and should be assigned in infobox. HPDtalk 14:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
One of the common mistakes that newcomers do in Wikipedia is to delete information about the past and calling it "removing outdated info", not realizing the Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is very much interested in them. (In fact, the only place that keep up-to-date without mentioning the past is infoboxes.) But again, Marawe is not a newcomer. So, Marawe, perhaps you'd like to explain?