Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Usage Doubles in 9 Months
TheBadger writes "Thanks to the success of Firefox, Mozilla now appears to have 14.9% of the browser share, double that of 9 months ago. Let this be a lesson in complacency."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Just one thing, w3schools.com is a site for people who write websites, so they'd naturally have a much higher percentage of non-IE browsers than the more general browsing population.
Personally, I keep an eye on thecounter.com to see how Mozilla's market share is doing. It's certainly more realistic than the linked article statistics page. Pity Google removed browser stats from the zeitgeist page.
--- There isn't any problem that can't be solved by a small, low yield nuclear device, is there??
Um, your own chart shows that IE6 usage has barely budged in the past year and holds firm around 70%, near its high. Yes, Mozilla's increased, but at the expense of old IE5 installations only.
So, in this case, complacency is working fine.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
You can force compliance to standards. The FCC does it all the time.
Here's some statistics from a different source (which actually presents stats from 5 sources), where Gecko (mozilla) ranges from 4% to 27% - it's clear that the stats greatly vary from site to site:
http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm
"but we are also monitoring other sources around the Internet to assure the quality of these figures)"
is the rest of the parent's quote.
I run two web sites, one of which gets 3 million hits per day, neither of which are tech-oriented, and have seen very similar results to W3schools. In January, 7% Firefox/Mozilla and 85% IE. In August, 15% Firefox/Mozilla and 74% IE.
I should buy some cement.
Given that Konq's default browser id is:
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3.3; Linux) (KHTML, like Gecko)
it's probably just being included in the Mozilla stats.
I wish the browser id tag had never been put in. Devs would have no choice but to write to the standard.
I'm looking at btowser stats for seifried.org, averaging 70,000 visits a month in the security area and I'm not seeing even a hint of firefox in the top 15 browsers for any month, "MSIE 6.0; Windows X" and googlebot are the clear winners. You think people interested in computer security and UNIX would have a tendancy to use FireFox or Mozilla but IE is still kicking their butts.
Why do you think IE's user string starts with Mozilla? It was Microsoft spoofing Netscape to get their browser access to places designed for it.
Here are some real stats from a large entertainment company website for the month of August.
No. 1 includes all Microsoft Browsers. IE4 - 6 The AOL users are also using microsoft browsers so that 94.5% of users using IE.
Now I wish this wasn't the case but it's true.
Certainly in Europe :) :
:)
Here are the stats from Poland
first all the guests stats
http://www.ranking.pl/rank.php?stat=browAL
then Polish users stats
http://www.ranking.pl/rank.php?stat=browPL
and outsiders stats
http://www.ranking.pl/rank.php?stat=browFG
as you can see Opera RULES in Poland (second after IE) with >4% steady rising userbase
Go grab those torrents.
http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2004/July/browser. php
mozilla at 2%.
nuff said.
This is hardly an unknown bug. It's been plaguing Firefox releases for various people for as long as I can remember, and it even has an entry on Bugzilla (#217527). It is, however, a little unpredictable. I ran into the problem very rarely until upgrading to 0.9, when it started popping up every time. Other people have said 0.9 has improved things, though.
I eventually had to switch to the trunk build, which has incorporated a fix for it (although is more of a work-in-progress than the branch build, in general). For those who only encounter it rarely, or aren't willing to bother with the trunk builds, the most reliable way I've found of "fixing" the page is to quickly increase or decrease text size (CTRL++/-). Reloading doesn't always work.
Sean Daugherty "I have walked in Eternity -- and Eternity weeps."
No, since Internet Explorers id is
:-)
"Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)"
that's probably not how it works at all.
Or are you saying that IE is inlcuded in the Mozilla stats too?
IE 5 has decreased every month in their survey, from January 2002 through now. For example, it's down from 12.8% in January 2004, to 9.2% in May 2004, to 7.0% in August 2004.
Here's the stats for a financial services website, which while doesn't attract traffic such as the likes of Schwab, is visited enough to be a good sampling:
Anomolies are present due to better browser detection implemented mid 2004. This particular site put out a couple of articles (out of many hundreds of other articles on its core topic, financial services) which suggested a browser switch to clients.
Apparently several paragraphs of advocacy make a difference.
We know that U.S Patent Office is notorious of issuing patents (particularly software patents) that are clearly unpatentable. But very few are aware that U.S. Patent Office is violating our constitutional right by promulgating and enforcing a Microsoft-IE-only policy.
This little-noticed law really makes me mad and feel like crying--why a government agency can be so stupid.
Basically, when you file a patent application, if the Patent Office thinks that your invention is not patentable because it is not novel or nonobvious, it will send you copies of prior art patents so you can rebut their rejection.
Now the Patent Office has changed its policy and will not send you those hard copies. Instead, it requires you to download those prior art reference on-line.
Under ordinary circumstances, this would not pose any problem, except that we are dealing with one of the most stupid government agencies in the history of mankind. The United States Patent Office, without much notice, now requires that, in order to download those references, you must register with the Patent Office, then the Patent Office will install a program ON YOUR MACHINE WHICH MUST BE RUNNING MICROSOFT INTERNET EXPLORER UNDER MICROSOFT WINDOWS to allow you to communicate with the Patent Office before you can download those prior art patents that our government must furnish you as a matter of our constitution right and as part of the filing fees paid to the Patent Office.
Thus, basically it has boiled down to this stupid law: if you want to receive a patent, you are now REQUIRED BY LAW to have a machine with Microsoft Windows running Internet Explorer in your office.
In other words, in order to exercise your constitutional rights, you must have a machine that runs Microsoft Windows and you must set Microsoft Internet Explorer as your default browser.
What kind of stupid government agency is this? I know many banks used to have the same requirement (i.e., using Microsoft IE running in Microsoft Windows), but they have got rid of this stupid policy because they have to compete in order to survive.
The United States Patent and Trademark can implement and insist such a stupid policy because it doesn't have to compete. But what about those 4000+ patent attorneys? How come all of them are so quiet? Are all of them idiots?
Even our HomeLand Security Department has changed its Microsoft-only policy. It appears that our Patent and Trademark Office is the only government agency in the whole world that requires its users to use Microsoft Windows. Unlike Homeland Security Department, the U.S. Patent Office has to account to no one!
Microsoft survives and propers exactly because our government agencies are unafraid to abuse their power and unashamed of being idiots.
I'd be that's a bug in slashcode.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
Heh, no, not "adult".
www.nationstates.net
I should buy some cement.
It's been fixed in the trunk builds, so by 1.0 or whatever they are calling it (in the about section it says 0.10), it should be correct.
The Web Developer extension for Firefox has a Zoom feature (under Miscellanous, Zoom) that works just like the one you describe, scaling images and all.
DJ kRYPT's Free MP3s!
Although I think this is great, the statistics from some servers that I manage and run show different and it depends greatly on the type of site. For example this link to a stats report for a site that was Slashdotted shows Firefox users as 26.8% of visitors and Mozilla 16.7%, a grand total of 43.5% against IE, which got 40.7%. All I can say here is well done Slashdotters for using a decent, and probably the best browser - it's excellent.
Looking at another site, not slashdotted, of general interest for all sorts of users, the stats reveal 9.1% Firefox and 5.4% Mozilla, which comes to 14.5% - a figure very close to that posted in the article. Good.
However, it's very different when moving to a commercial site selling a commerical product. For example, on site reveals just 1.6% Mozilla & Firefox users against 96.6% IE users and another, selling Jazz and Latino records, has 4% Mozilla against 87.9% IE.
I reckon that it depends greatly upon who your audience is as to what statistics you extrapolate.
It is not a bug in Slashcode. It is a bug in the Gecko (the rendering portion of Mozilla) code related to incremental reflow. It has been fixed in Gecko, but the latest version of Gecko has not been rolled into Firefox.
(Courtesy of another Slashdotter in the know.)
I'm not sure what the schedule is on rolling in the fix.
May we never see th
> check the html source to see if the problem is on the slashdot.org end. I suspect it is
Slashdot is garbage HTML. But in this case it's garbage HTML that Mozilla has been designed to render. So it is a real bug.
Its http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=slashd ot (yes, id=slashdot actually works) I didn't make it clickable because it won't load a with Slashdot referer anyway.
My workplace uses a heavily customized version of PeopleSoft that I'm relatively sure would tear a small rift into the space-time continuum if someone tried to access it with something other than IE.
*sigh*...
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
The point is that the default search engine for IE is MSN, whereas Firefox has a default search engine of Google. Google would, therefore, naturally have a greater percentage of Mozilla users than the web as a whole. Ebay, on the other hand, is visited by a wide range of browsers and would be more representative of the true statistics.
"it's not about aptitude, it's the way you're viewed" - Galinda
That's the point, "most geeks" aren't representative of the overall population.
If you look at the other 9 sites on NedStat's top 10, there is only one site with Mozilla at 13%. The rest show IE in the mid ninties.
It's unfortunate there is no overall source as to what browser is most popular. However, overall it seems that most sites show IE as in the mid 90s as far as percentages are concerned.
Don't get me wrong, I WANT Firefox to gain ground, and I use Firefox myself, both on Linux and Windows. However the claims that it's captured nearly 15% of the market are silly.
OK, I'll prove you wrong. I never use windows update. Neither does my mother, after converting to Mac. Neither does my GF after converting to Mac. My father is moving abroad, he'll never have to use windows update since a moving gift is a iMac. I spent the weekend in a summer house of a friend, now there are two possible Mac converts in the loop.
>Or Internet Banking (which 9 times out of 10 requires IE, often "for security reasons" [sic])?
US Bank and Citibank's online banking have recently been redesigned for full usage under Mozilla based browsers.
They *used* to give warnings similar to what you say but that has changed in the past six months.
I anticipate more changes will follow.
My reality check bounced.