---
title: "Jukefox"
date: 2004-09-13 16:43
status: published
description: >
  Why does no-one listen to you when you're right?

tags: Mozilla, Firefox, web browsers, software, being right

links:
  - url: http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
    title: "Firefox"
    rel: related
    type: text/html
  - url: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/extensions/update.html
    title: "Extension Versioning"
    description: "Read before writing a Firefox or Thunderbird extension"
    rel: related
    type: text/html
  - url: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/extensions/
    title: "Extension documentation"
    description: "The FM for extension authors to R"
    rel: related
    type: text/html
  - url: http://www.foxytunes.org/
    title: "FoxyTunes"
    description: "Should've been called Jukefox"
    rel: related
    type: text/html

---

<p>
It'd be nice if more extension authors read the <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/extensions/update.html" title="Extension Versioning for Firefox and Thunderbird">documentation all extension authors must read</a> and learned about the Firefox Version Format. A lot of extension authors seem to think 1.5 &gt; 1.45. This would be true if Firefox version numbers were decimal numbers... but they're not - they're a string of integers, each separated by “.”. So 1.5 is indeed “one point five”, but 1.45 is “one point forty-five”, forty-five is greater than five (no, really), so 1.45 &gt; 1.5. Of course, 1.5 &gt; 1.4.5...
</p>
<p>
I suppose it was smart to market <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/" title="Firefox">Firefox 0.10</a> (whose release is imminent) as “Firefox 1.0 Preview Release”, even though some folk seem to think it's not a milestone... which it is.
</p>
<p>
Meanwhile, with crazy autohiding controls and drag-'n'-drop placement - <a href="http://www.foxytunes.org/">FoxyTunes</a> 0.61 turns out to be a highly polished extension.
</p>
<p>
Still, they should've called it “Jukefox”.
</p>