Janco Reports Firefox Marketshare Increase

Janco has published its assessment of browser market share. Their report (found here) states that Firefox marketshare is over 10%. And the overall marketshare for Mozilla-based browsers is now over 14%. This is phenomenal.
But who is Janco Associates? Well, Janco is best known for its IT career compensation surveys. But over the past few years, they have started to diversify into a number of “survey” related reports. Consequently, I am cautious about endorsing their numbers because their methodology may not be pristine. Nevertheless, if we assume stability of their methods over time, we can use their data as a means of documenting relative changes over time.
For this reason, I offer the following table of stats derived from their recent report:

Apr-05

Jan-05

Net Change

Browser

Rank

Percent

Rank

Percent

Rank

Percent

Internet Explorer

1

83.07%

1

84.85%

-1.78%

Firefox

2

10.28%

3

4.23%

1

6.05%

Mozilla

3

3.81%

2

4.48%

-1

-0.66%

Netscape

4

0.92%

4

3.03%

-2.11%

AOL

5

0.85%

5

2.20%

-1.35%

MSN

6

0.67%

6

0.58%

0.09%

Opera

7

0.41%

7

0.34%

0.07%

And the gist of their research is this: Firefox usage has grown by over 6% (of total market share). Stated differently, Janco reports that Firefox use has more than doubled since January. This is important because the first GA release of the product was in November 2004. Consequently, this growth does not include the initial growth spurt fueled by the first series of press releases. Instead, this represents sustained growth of the production release.
Combine this with Asa Dotzler’s counter indicating over 49 million downloads and you can spot a trend. Keep up the good work, team!
*Note* Amidst all the joy of breaking 10% marketshare, it is important to note where the growth is truly coming from. The largest element of growth has come from the consolidation of the Mozilla product line. More Mozilla and Netscape users turned to Firefox than did IE users. Microsoft suffered a less than 2% marketshare slide. So now that the Mozilla market has consolidated upon Firefox, let’s see how many entrenched IE users will switch over in the next six months.
-CyclingRoo-

Ted, Scoble, and Dave on Corporate Activism

It’s been a busy weeked for bloggers, podcasters and politics. On Friday, Ted Hu inundated me with a stream of political comments on a variety of subjects. Indeed, Ted opened the firehose on his email list. Ted, I love the fact that you have mastered multi-channel marketing of your political thoughts. But, sometimes, it’s too much. I got your fifteen emails on Friday. You might try rolling some of these into your blog (which I love, when you take the time to post). Ted understands how to speak his political opinions (which I usually disagree with). It is refreshing to see how he manages to be a product evangelist for Microsoft yet can still proudly espouse his personal political sensibilities. He walks a fine line – and does it fairly well.
But not everyone in Microsoft follows the same approach as Ted. The Scobleizer has gotten himself into quite a political discourse. Over the past few days, he has taken issue with politcal positions that Microsoft has taken. Stated more precisely, he has taken issues with Microsoft’s _withdrawal_ from certain political issues.
In the past, Microsoft executives have taken very affirmative stances on gay rights. Recently, Microsoft has received a good deal of criticism from its local community and the more conservative members of the company (and its shareholders) for taking such public stances on political issues. Consequently, Steve Ballmer made a point of noting that Microsoft needs to maintain a certain degree of separation from obviously political agendas. Most Microsoft shareholders have not invested in Microsoft stock because of its historical stances on gay rights. Instead, Microsoft shareholders have invested because of the economic returns associated with Windows and the Office product family.
But how does a corporate leader adequately separate his/her own political opinions and sensibilities from the needs of the shareholders (whom he/she serves)? That is a tough question. I have rarely been able to compartmentalize myself in such an easy (or clean) fashion. Apparently, Scoble cannot quietly compartmentalize himself either.
Therefore, Scoble is in a pickle. He feels quite strongly about the human rights issues involved. Yet he is now part of the Microsoft brand (not just an employee). His words and actions have a greater impact upon brand identity than the average Joe Programmer in Redmond. And he may even have a modest impact upon stock prices (albeit indirectly, as expressed through individual shareholder transactions). Consequently, his public statements have public impact upon the brand and how it is viewed by the growing number of blog readers.
So a cautious person would recommend that Scoble just drop the issue. But here is the rub. Scoble (and the entire blogging community) is predicated upon commentary and not just reporting. In a lot of ways, he is like Fox News Channel. I am sure Robert will hate the analogy, but it is apt. Fox News is watched because people want to hear the side comments from Fox & Friends and not just hear someone read the facts out loud. Indeed, a strict recitation of the facts can be gotten from any number of other sources.
But blogs are a means of getting news – and a whole lot more. People want to hear the news from people who care. They want to reach out to the personality that they have come to trust. People reached out to Walter Cronkite because they invested in who he was and what he said. Whether you were conservative or liberal, you would listen to Walter Cronkite because you trusted him to provide honest news.
Well, people trust Scoble’s thoughts on technology. And people invest in Microsoft. And those two paths have been synonomous for some time. But now there is some divergence between the two. So what should Robert do? I don’t have a clue. I don’t know him well enough to speak for his heart and soul. If I were in his shoes, I would urge Robert to listen to his heart and spirit. I disagree (vehemently) with Robert on this issue. But I find myself urging him to maintain his voice of honesty. Sometimes, you can do this and maintain your voice as a spokesperson for the company. Sometimes, you can’t. But in the end, you have to be able to look at yourself in the mirror and like the person you see.
BTW, Dave Winer has even gotten in on the discussion. While I think he agrees with Robert (from a political viewpoint), he disagrees with him from a corporate viewpoint. Dave believes that Microsoft is correct in removing itself from this political discussion. And I think Dave is right. The company is not a “non-profit” or “not-for-profit” organization with a political mission statement. Rather, it is a “for-profit” corporation with a specific mission: make profits for the shareholders. Consequently, the managers of the company must refrain from injecting their own political opinions that might otherwise divert the company from its core mission. Now, if the board wants to approve a change to the corporate mission statement, then that’s a different situation.
Starbucks is a good example of this. Their publicly-stated core mission is larger than just a good cup of coffee. Take a look at their recent press releases regarding the acquisition of Ethos Water. Clearly, the brand and corporate mission are larger than just coffee. Starbucks has a clear mission (articulated from the board) that includes political activism.
But this is not the case for Microsoft.
Dave Winer’s recommendation is that the company [Microsoft] disengage from such overtly political matters. So what is Dave’s advice for Robert? Should Robert continue to pursue his personal sense of “right and wrong” or acquiesce to the needs of the corporation? Only Robert can answer that. In my estimation, Robert is doing the right thing in taking the matter directly to board members (like Ballmer). Robert is trying to change the mission statement to extend beyond profitability and product. But Robert is doing this out in the open. That is his biggest challenge. By making his challenge publicly, he is not giving the board (or its members) any room for a quiet or thorough discussion. He may be forcing the issue into the realm of the soundbite. That’s too bad. My basic recommendation to Robert is to take this issue out of the blogosphere (and say so in your blog). Then take it up privately with relevant board members. Only then will mission statement reconsideration be plausible.
-CyclingRoo-

Tags:

"It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when."

This quote comes from Scott Horn of Microsoft. He was speaking about whether or not wireless phones will become the primary platform for carrying around music. But this is not the only vision for portable music. Which vision of mobile music will prevail?
Apple and Motorola are banking on the computer-centric vision. While the iPod is a great device, it is hardly a “platform” (let alone a mobile platform). It does not include classic bi-directional communication capabilities. It does not transmit. It is a “receiver” and a player. But it will need to become far more. The iPod first needs to have the capability to receive songs “on the fly.” Currently, new songs are only accessible by attaching to your computer – or by using esoteric specialty devices Similarly, there is no means to “share” (i.e., send) your songs/playlists with friends without using a computer. Again, specialty vendors are stepping in (e.g., Griffin’s iTrip). But the base platform has no wireless/mobility sense to it.
Over the past year, there have been rumors about something called the iPhone (iPod + wireless phone). Pictures exist for the iPhone (http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=816). Unfortunately, the current news for the iPhone is not good. According to Apple Insider (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1010) both Verizon and Sprint have apparently declined to launch products with the Apple/Motorola product. In my view, the iPod will remain a niche (albeit hellishly profitable) unitl it embraces communications capabilities as part of its core capabilities. Indeed, something as simple as inclusion of 802.11 capabilities would be fantastic. But for now, iPod enthusiasts must roll their own or wait upon the uncertainty of products from technology vendors.
On the other hand, wireless phone carriers (and Microsoft?) are focusing upon a “telephone-centric” vision. While many carriers have toyed with the idea of iPod-based phones, Business Week believes that the phone companies will release their own products (http://yahoo.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_17/b3930001.htm). These new products will fuse compute platforms into telephone form factors. BTW, this is exactly what the carriers and phone manufacturers have done with digital photography. The “mobile” view is simple. We have a platform that is (by its very nature) “connected.” We can both send and receive data. And MP3 encoders (like CCD camera chips) can easily be fitted onto the “airframe” of the phone. Indeed, Sanyo already has a really cool product in the MM5600 phone.
While the phone carriers have capable platforms, they don’t have the same measure of “buzz” (or marketing savvy) that Apple has demonstrated with the iPod. But I think that’s where Microsoft comes in.
But what is Microsoft’s play in this game? First, Microsoft is deeply invested in SmartPhone technology. Why? Because it’s another platform whereby Windows can be licensed. Second, Microsoft has always been in competition with Apple. It’s a Cain v. Abel kind of thing. Now that Apple is successful in music, Microsoft wants to get in on the market. And since they have a mobile platform with connectivity (i.e., the SmartPhone), they have a field upon which they can aggessively compete with Apple/Motorola.
What they don’t have is a retail store/presence to exploit. Therefore, I am wondering if Microsoft might crack open the war chest just a bit. If I were building a strategy, I would be looking to buy Real or MusicMatch. Real has appeal – especially because its acquisition would finally eliminate the threatened lawsuits. But the Real brand has lost so much traction, it may not meet the need for a functioning store. Couple this with the Crossfader emphasis and I’m starting to see some real movement – and it’s not in the “MSN Music” brand.
In any event, this will be fun! I can’t wait to see what comes next. In the end, it will mean more capability in the hands of the consumer. And this is what it’s all about.
Note – I work for a wireless phone provider. However, I do not work on platform development. Hence, I am not providing any “inside” information. Just casual insights from someone on the inside.
-CyclingRoo-

“It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.”

This quote comes from Scott Horn of Microsoft. He was speaking about whether or not wireless phones will become the primary platform for carrying around music. But this is not the only vision for portable music. Which vision of mobile music will prevail?

Apple and Motorola are banking on the computer-centric vision. While the iPod is a great device, it is hardly a “platform” (let alone a mobile platform). It does not include classic bi-directional communication capabilities. It does not transmit. It is a “receiver” and a player. But it will need to become far more. The iPod first needs to have the capability to receive songs “on the fly.” Currently, new songs are only accessible by attaching to your computer – or by using esoteric specialty devices Similarly, there is no means to “share” (i.e., send) your songs/playlists with friends without using a computer. Again, specialty vendors are stepping in (e.g., Griffin’s iTrip). But the base platform has no wireless/mobility sense to it.

Over the past year, there have been rumors about something called the iPhone (iPod + wireless phone). Pictures exist for the iPhone (http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=816). Unfortunately, the current news for the iPhone is not good. According to Apple Insider (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1010) both Verizon and Sprint have apparently declined to launch products with the Apple/Motorola product. In my view, the iPod will remain a niche (albeit hellishly profitable) unitl it embraces communications capabilities as part of its core capabilities. Indeed, something as simple as inclusion of 802.11 capabilities would be fantastic. But for now, iPod enthusiasts must roll their own or wait upon the uncertainty of products from technology vendors.

On the other hand, wireless phone carriers (and Microsoft?) are focusing upon a “telephone-centric” vision. While many carriers have toyed with the idea of iPod-based phones, Business Week believes that the phone companies will release their own products (http://yahoo.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_17/b3930001.htm). These new products will fuse compute platforms into telephone form factors. BTW, this is exactly what the carriers and phone manufacturers have done with digital photography. The “mobile” view is simple. We have a platform that is (by its very nature) “connected.” We can both send and receive data. And MP3 encoders (like CCD camera chips) can easily be fitted onto the “airframe” of the phone. Indeed, Sanyo already has a really cool product in the MM5600 phone.

While the phone carriers have capable platforms, they don’t have the same measure of “buzz” (or marketing savvy) that Apple has demonstrated with the iPod. But I think that’s where Microsoft comes in.

But what is Microsoft’s play in this game? First, Microsoft is deeply invested in SmartPhone technology. Why? Because it’s another platform whereby Windows can be licensed. Second, Microsoft has always been in competition with Apple. It’s a Cain v. Abel kind of thing. Now that Apple is successful in music, Microsoft wants to get in on the market. And since they have a mobile platform with connectivity (i.e., the SmartPhone), they have a field upon which they can aggessively compete with Apple/Motorola.

What they don’t have is a retail store/presence to exploit. Therefore, I am wondering if Microsoft might crack open the war chest just a bit. If I were building a strategy, I would be looking to buy Real or MusicMatch. Real has appeal – especially because its acquisition would finally eliminate the threatened lawsuits. But the Real brand has lost so much traction, it may not meet the need for a functioning store. Couple this with the Crossfader emphasis and I’m starting to see some real movement – and it’s not in the “MSN Music” brand.

In any event, this will be fun! I can’t wait to see what comes next. In the end, it will mean more capability in the hands of the consumer. And this is what it’s all about.

Note – I work for a wireless phone provider. However, I do not work on platform development. Hence, I am not providing any “inside” information. Just casual insights from someone on the inside.

-CyclingRoo-

Cringely Borrows “A Cup of Bandwidth”

Robert Cringely is always fun to read. He does stuff that we all have done – or wish we had the nerve to do. In his April 14th article, he writes how he has “borrowed” bandwidth from his neighbors (details can be found here). A summary of his efforts is as follows:

  1. He helped his neighbors set up their wireless routers (WRT54G, of course).
  2. He informed them (during installation) that he would keep a “back door” avaialble – just in case they needed support.
  3. He exploited that back door to do some experimentation
  4. The experimentation is nothing exceptional. He put some antennas on his home and he connected to his neighbors routers. He used Vicomsoft’s Internet Gateway as a management tool and Sveasoft as the router software. Note: It’s not clear if he put Sveasoft on the neighbors router originally. If he did, I wonder whether or not he complied with Sveasoft’s licensing terms and conditions! 😉

All Bob’s efforts at authorized bandwidth theft aside, I wonder how many folks truly realize how insecure their wireless home networks truly are. I have written and delivered a number of presentations on the subject. Nevertheless, I am still amazed at how many people have wide-open access to systems that store their financial and personal information.

If you have a wireless network at home, please take extra steps to secure your systems. If you need help, drop me a note or check out the following sites:

  • Microsoft has some good articles that offer hints.
  • PC Mag has a bunch of articles. Here is a good start.
  • Check out Practically Networked guide on the subject.
  • Check out About.com’s guide. I used parts of this guide for a recent KCCMG presentation. It is simple and executable for most computer-literate folks.

-CyclingRoo-

Cringely Borrows "A Cup of Bandwidth"

Robert Cringely is always fun to read. He does stuff that we all have done – or wish we had the nerve to do. In his April 14th article, he writes how he has “borrowed” bandwidth from his neighbors (details can be found here). A summary of his efforts is as follows:

  1. He helped his neighbors set up their wireless routers (WRT54G, of course).
  2. He informed them (during installation) that he would keep a “back door” avaialble – just in case they needed support.
  3. He exploited that back door to do some experimentation
  4. The experimentation is nothing exceptional. He put some antennas on his home and he connected to his neighbors routers. He used Vicomsoft’s Internet Gateway as a management tool and Sveasoft as the router software. Note: It’s not clear if he put Sveasoft on the neighbors router originally. If he did, I wonder whether or not he complied with Sveasoft’s licensing terms and conditions! 😉

All Bob’s efforts at authorized bandwidth theft aside, I wonder how many folks truly realize how insecure their wireless home networks truly are. I have written and delivered a number of presentations on the subject. Nevertheless, I am still amazed at how many people have wide-open access to systems that store their financial and personal information.
If you have a wireless network at home, please take extra steps to secure your systems. If you need help, drop me a note or check out the following sites:

  • Microsoft has some good articles that offer hints.
  • PC Mag has a bunch of articles. Here is a good start.
  • Check out Practically Networked guide on the subject.
  • Check out About.com’s guide. I used parts of this guide for a recent KCCMG presentation. It is simple and executable for most computer-literate folks.

-CyclingRoo-

HyperWRT Manual – Now on a Wiki

Avenger has just released his HyperWRT manual – in the form of a Wiki. I’m gonna start adding (or modifying) content – but probably not for a couple of days. In the meantime, I wonder how many folks are using wikis for collaborative electronic manuals. I know it’s the “in” thing to do. But I wonder if a) general/basic customers will use such documentation, b) how document consistency can be strictly enforced, c) whether or not this consistency breaks down with large numbers of contributors, and d) whether there are any special documentation “quality control” steps that should be applied for any “customer-facing” documents. Any insightful comments would be greatly appreciated.
-CyclingRoo-

Even Leaders Need to Take a "Leak"

You know it’s bad when the Three Stooges analogies start to emerge. In the proprietary software world, folks love to point fingers at Larry Ellison, Scott McNealy, and Bill Gates. And if the analogy is supposed to mean that these three men have done some incredibly bone-headed things (amidst all the great things they’ve accomplished) , then the analogy may have merit.
But now the open source community has its own set of humorous “bunblers.” In a recent article, the Register points to Larry, Mungo and Tridge. In this case, we are talking about Larry McVoy (BitKeeper proprietor – and not an open source luminary), Linus Torvalds (Linux uber-geek) and Andrew Tridgell (Samba leader and Bitmover reverse engineer) . Added to this august trio is Bruce Perens (open source maven and former HP exec) who threw a few barbs in Linus’ direction over his recent “Tridge-trashing” comments.
So what’s up with these folks. Well, I won’t spend a lot of time, but here are the highlights:

  • Linus was having trouble coordinating all the changes that were going into the Linux kernel. So he worked a deal with Larry McVoy to move the kernel development from a cvs-based system to BitKeeper (a proprietary system). This decision was not met with unanimous consent. Indeed, it resulted in quite a furor within the community. But Larry worked a deal so that the Linux developers could have a limited license through the use of gateway technologies.
  • Tridge decided to start a pet project to reverse-engineer the Bitmover / BitKeeper “on the wire” protocols. BTW, this is exactly how Samba started – and exactly what Samba accomplished regarding Microsoft’s SMB implementation.
  • Larry took offense at the reverse engineering and decide to pull the license under which kernel development was proceeding.
  • Linus began to raise the issue of how best to conduct kernel development given the BitKeeper license changes prompted by these problems. That question is not yet resolved. But in the meantime, Linus has made some highly inappropriate comments concerning Tridge and his character.

Once Linus began his very public commentary, things got quite heated. Tridge is being conspicuously quiet (probably because of legal concerns over Bitmover). Since Tridge won’t speak, others are stepping up to his defense. As noted earlier, luminaries like Bruce Perens are even starting to speak up.
I will not comment upon the people (or their conduct and comments) in this unfortunate mess. But I will note that this proves that all people can make mistakes – regardless of how luminary these people are.
All of this reminds me of a few scenes from Star Trek: First Contact. In that movie, the Enterprise is thrown back in time. While in the past, they meet the “inventor” of the warp engine. As the crew from Enterprise are working to prepare the very first human warp craft (that will be flown by Zefram Cochrane), many crewmembers start to talk about Cochrane and his accomplishments. There is even the off-hand discussion about “first-year Academny” warp mechanics classes that were inspired by the events that were about to occur. During all of this reminiscence (and downright idol worship), we hear Cochrane utter the following: “You think I want to go to the stars? I don’t even like to fly–I take trains.” And at one point, Cochrane is trying to hide from all the intense adulation. But he is found by Geordi while he is taking a “leak.”
Sometimes, I think we treat the open source leadership like the Enterprise crew treated Zefram Cochrane. We forget that these folks are normal people who sometimes do human things (like take a “leak”). Hopefully, this will all turn out well. But I have always found that the best way to overcome such human frailties is to offer something extraordianry and altogether super-human: forgiveness. A number of community leaders probably need to step back and humbly ask for (as well as offer) forgiveness. Not to the community, but to each other. Too bad that the open source community does everything in public view. This “openness” may make such displays of contition quite difficult. So let’s give these men the time and ability to be real leaders.
-CyclingRoo-

Even Leaders Need to Take a “Leak”

You know it’s bad when the Three Stooges analogies start to emerge. In the proprietary software world, folks love to point fingers at Larry Ellison, Scott McNealy, and Bill Gates. And if the analogy is supposed to mean that these three men have done some incredibly bone-headed things (amidst all the great things they’ve accomplished) , then the analogy may have merit.

But now the open source community has its own set of humorous “bunblers.” In a recent article, the Register points to Larry, Mungo and Tridge. In this case, we are talking about Larry McVoy (BitKeeper proprietor – and not an open source luminary), Linus Torvalds (Linux uber-geek) and Andrew Tridgell (Samba leader and Bitmover reverse engineer) . Added to this august trio is Bruce Perens (open source maven and former HP exec) who threw a few barbs in Linus’ direction over his recent “Tridge-trashing” comments.

So what’s up with these folks. Well, I won’t spend a lot of time, but here are the highlights:

  • Linus was having trouble coordinating all the changes that were going into the Linux kernel. So he worked a deal with Larry McVoy to move the kernel development from a cvs-based system to BitKeeper (a proprietary system). This decision was not met with unanimous consent. Indeed, it resulted in quite a furor within the community. But Larry worked a deal so that the Linux developers could have a limited license through the use of gateway technologies.
  • Tridge decided to start a pet project to reverse-engineer the Bitmover / BitKeeper “on the wire” protocols. BTW, this is exactly how Samba started – and exactly what Samba accomplished regarding Microsoft’s SMB implementation.
  • Larry took offense at the reverse engineering and decide to pull the license under which kernel development was proceeding.
  • Linus began to raise the issue of how best to conduct kernel development given the BitKeeper license changes prompted by these problems. That question is not yet resolved. But in the meantime, Linus has made some highly inappropriate comments concerning Tridge and his character.

Once Linus began his very public commentary, things got quite heated. Tridge is being conspicuously quiet (probably because of legal concerns over Bitmover). Since Tridge won’t speak, others are stepping up to his defense. As noted earlier, luminaries like Bruce Perens are even starting to speak up.

I will not comment upon the people (or their conduct and comments) in this unfortunate mess. But I will note that this proves that all people can make mistakes – regardless of how luminary these people are.

All of this reminds me of a few scenes from Star Trek: First Contact. In that movie, the Enterprise is thrown back in time. While in the past, they meet the “inventor” of the warp engine. As the crew from Enterprise are working to prepare the very first human warp craft (that will be flown by Zefram Cochrane), many crewmembers start to talk about Cochrane and his accomplishments. There is even the off-hand discussion about “first-year Academny” warp mechanics classes that were inspired by the events that were about to occur. During all of this reminiscence (and downright idol worship), we hear Cochrane utter the following: “You think I want to go to the stars? I don’t even like to fly–I take trains.” And at one point, Cochrane is trying to hide from all the intense adulation. But he is found by Geordi while he is taking a “leak.”

Sometimes, I think we treat the open source leadership like the Enterprise crew treated Zefram Cochrane. We forget that these folks are normal people who sometimes do human things (like take a “leak”). Hopefully, this will all turn out well. But I have always found that the best way to overcome such human frailties is to offer something extraordianry and altogether super-human: forgiveness. A number of community leaders probably need to step back and humbly ask for (as well as offer) forgiveness. Not to the community, but to each other. Too bad that the open source community does everything in public view. This “openness” may make such displays of contition quite difficult. So let’s give these men the time and ability to be real leaders.

-CyclingRoo-

FF 1.0.3 – Where the Hits Just Keep On Coming

As reported yesterday afternoon:

The Mozilla Foundation today released updates to two of its main products, the Mozilla Suite and Firefox. This marks the third round of security fixes for Firefox, along with the seventh minor update to the 1.7 version of the Mozilla Suite. Security issues fixed in these new versions are listed on the Known Vulnerabilities page with detailed descriptions of each issue.

So I’ve updated – and added another few downloads to the counters. Man, I wonder what the real stats are for unique downloads. Oh well. We’ll see more details as web sites report unique visits by Firefox users. In the meantime, you can get you copy here.
The security fixes are as follows:
MFSA 2005-33 Javascript “lambda” replace exposes memory contents
MFSA 2005-34 javascript: PLUGINSPAGE code execution
MFSA 2005-35 Showing blocked javascript: popup uses wrong privilege context
MFSA 2005-36 Cross-site scripting through global scope pollution
MFSA 2005-37 Code execution through javascript: favicons
MFSA 2005-38 Search plugin cross-site scripting
MFSA 2005-39 Arbitrary code execution from Firefox sidebar panel II
MFSA 2005-40 Missing Install object instance checks
MFSA 2005-41 Privilege escalation via DOM property overrides
I don’t yet have the scoop on whether these bits include Asa’s “Popups Must Die” ad block improvements. I’ll double check and report later.
-CyclingRoo-
===Update===
The relevant string did not exist in about:config after install. So I added the following: privacy.popups.disable_from_plugins with a string value of 2 (it accepts 0,1,2, or 3). Things are blocked quite nicely now.