On 5/22/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
If they're a non-profit, this could be a good thing. Additional revenue
for
free for WP, and additional traffic (substantial) for Firefox.
Why would that be a good thing? I see no reason why we would to direct our readers to an inferior browser.
Inferior to what? ;) I'm not interested in a "this browser is better than..." argument. Firefox is the major "free" browser on the market, for the widest array of operating systems (Windows, Apple, *nixes). My suggestion is based on that. If another non-commercial project had theoretical cash to burn, and their goals weren't incompatible with Wikipedia's, I'd make the same basic suggestion.
Regards, Joe http://www.joeszilagyi.com