Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Dutch Survey Shows IE Web Share Below 90%

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the women-and-children-first-mind-your-step dept.

happycorp writes "We've seen a few too many Firefox articles by now, but it is gaining a real presence in the market: Onestat reports that IE's share is down to 88.9% marketshare, with the combined Mozilla browsers above 7%. While we saw this trend much earlier in particular communities such as w3schools this is the first time IE has dropped below 90% in a general survey. Also interesting, the w3schools page shows a steady parallel increase in both Linux and Mac OS global marketshare over the last 18 months."

23 of 428 comments (clear)

  1. 0% IE, 100% Firefox by danormsby · · Score: 4, Funny
    0% IE, 100% Firefox on my desktop.

    58% of statistics are made up.

    --
    Omnis amans amens
  2. Fads. by damu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real numbers and the true impact of Firefox will only mean something after 6-12 months after all the press dies down. Another thing is that MS is really has not doing anything yet, anything publicly, so assuming there will be a responce from MS then we will see how FF withstands on MS's direct line of sight.

    --


    Useless sig.
    1. Re:Fads. by mordors9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since these statistical studies are only good at showing trends and not absolute numbers, it may be further out than that. I would note that MSIE is just under 90% and the other set of numbers show that windows usage is almost the same figure. This would seem to indicate that Windows people are still all using IE with very few exceptions (I know and those few are all on /.). That the growth in the alternate browsers is just due to the growth in Linux and MacOS.

    2. Re:Fads. by DenDave · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well actually I think that since a large portion of PC's are in Offices, you will see a change when employers start getting rid of their 800-pund-microsoft-certified-gorilla IT services... in my experience they don't want to hear of anything but IE because "our dotnet infrastructure requires it" or "our vendor contract doesn't allow it" or "quit wasting my time you drone".....

      Otherwise this would be one more statistic right ehre and now...

      --
      -if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
    3. Re:Fads. by rpjs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Doubt it. On the site I work on (major UK telco) most Mac users are using IE or Safari. Only 3.5% of all users are on non-Windows platforms, the vast majority being on MacOS, with Un*ces not even making 0.2%.

      We get our figures monthly so our most recent numbers are for October when we had 3.05% for all Gecko browsers, of whicb 3.5% were on Un*ces, 5% Macs, the rest 'doze. IE still scored at just over 95% of all users.

      I am looking forward to seeing November's figures to see if the Firefox 1.0 release has had an impact.

    4. Re:Fads. by rseuhs · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Microsoft's problem is that the better they make IE, the more developers will leave the Windows-platform and move to the web.

      A web development means for MS:

      • Less customer lock-in (even when you code for IE only, Mozilla is likely going to work. And even if you use some IE-only hacks, it's a lot easier to replace those hacks than to completely rewrite a Win32-application)
      • Less revenue by forced upgrades. Even Windows 95 can run a webbrowser. So why buy a newer version of Windows? (That's the reason why MS is making IE7 Longhorn-only. However I think they are shooting themselves in the foot because most WinXP users will rather download Mozilla for free than upgrade to Longhorn.)
      • Less revenue by client operating systems. Not only Windows 95, but almost any OS can run a browser. Therefore web development is a big problem for MS.
      • Less revenue from development tools. If Microsoft loses a developer to the web, will he still need that MSDN-subscription?

      So Microsoft faces a dilemma. And they are losing no matter what they do.

  3. What's the critical marketshare threshold... by yahyamf · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...required for /. to work properly in firefox?

    1. Re:What's the critical marketshare threshold... by shufler · · Score: 5, Informative

      SlashFix Firefox Extension.

    2. Re:What's the critical marketshare threshold... by Vegard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The reason so many pages works so well in IE and not in others, is *not* that IE works better. It's just that people design and test against IE. And not against the other browsers. The reason for this? IEs market share.

      By tolerating and giving in to this, using IE, you are part of the problem. *You*, and the millions others that tolerates this. Firefox works very well today. Some IE-specific pages not rendering quite as nice as in IE, is a *very* small price to pay, compared to the benefit there is in restoring the notion of designing browser-independent, STANDARD HTML.

      The reason we others like the fact that the share of people using Firefox grows, is *exactly* this. We like competition. We like standards. We like there being alternatives.

      And, some of us doesn't have the option of using IE at all, without switching operating system.

    3. Re:What's the critical marketshare threshold... by Scarblac · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The reason so many pages works so well in IE and not in others, is *not* that IE works better. It's just that people design and test against IE.

      That's only one half of the story. The other half is that IE has really error tolerant code - it can render very badly formed HTML. So people who write bad HTML and then test with IE will never know, but their sites will fail in most other browsers.

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
    4. Re:What's the critical marketshare threshold... by Karzz1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I had a similar issue about a month ago. I do most of my day to day banking online. My bank has, for over two years, never had an issue with Mozilla or FireFox. One Friday I tried to access my accounts and the normal login was redirected to a "Your browser is not secure, please use IE" page. I wrote a lengthy email to the admin in charge of the site (they did provide an email address on the page). I explained my concerns with security in IE and ended the email explaining that although I had been their customer for 7 years, I would take my business elsewhere before using IE for banking. The following Monday morning I was able to access my accounts with Mozilla and I recieved an aplogetic email from the admin to boot.

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
  4. I think I'm missing the point by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why is this significant? Because it appears to corroborate earlier reports?

    What is there here to discuss? We all know that Firefox, Mozilla, Opera etc are (currently) better bets for surfing than IE, saying it yet again won't change anything. It won't convince anyone to switch, it won't convince any company to support a wider range of browsers. It's the very definition of preaching to the choir, in fact.

    How about spending a little less time talking about how great the alternative browsers are, and how much better it would be if more sites supported them properly, and a little more time actually working towards that?

    --
    It's official. Most of you are morons.
  5. 10% still looks too small by linuxci · · Score: 5, Insightful

    10% still looks to small to some narrow minded web designers that think that people who don't use IE are idiots or a geek.

    25% market share is where everyone who counts will start taking Firefox seriously, I think a time will come in the near future when that will happen. It's having a knock on effect at work here, I installed 1.0 on all the machines here and simply said "use Firefox as your web browser as it will lower the number of virus problems that we have", most people are now using it and some people have even installed it in their homes (most people here are not technical).

    People need to spread the word, alternatives are good if Firefox gets at least 25% and the others also have sizable market shares (e.g. Opera above 5%) then this will be good for us all.

    1. Re:10% still looks too small by jeffkjo1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      As a web designer, I have to tell you that it's not easy to support all browsers equally. Granted getting the site to work in Mozilla is a given, but some of the mundane errors that crop up when trying to get them to work properly is extremely annoying, and half the time the errors make no sense at all.

      I disagree. I've been designing websites for too many years, and the only time that it was truly difficult to design a website for multiple browsers was at the tail end of the browser wars when IE 4 and Netscape 4 were simultaneously introduced. Netscapes layer tags and IE's proprietary DHTML extensions were an absolute nightmare.

      IE still has some proprietary extensions of various different things left in it, but standards, by and large, are the same. Sure, my sites looks a little bit different in each browser, but none of the advanced functions fail to work. And really, it seems like other browsers are the ones doing things correctly, and it's IE that's breaking the code.

  6. That's not all. by The-Bus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Google Zeitgeist shows Firefox the #10 search in October in Germany.

    Sadly, using that above piece of evidence, Firefox is still not as popular a web browser as (apparently) Christina Aguilera.

    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

  7. In other news.... by Viceice · · Score: 4, Funny

    Microsoft recommends Firefox

    --
    Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
  8. What we need is to remember... by RealProgrammer · · Score: 5, Funny

    IE users have no desire for tabs.

    There will be patent issues with Linux.

    Microsoft is about innovation.

    There will be patent issues with Mozilla.

    Microsoft is about innovation.

    There will be patent ...

    That's it, you're getting sleepy, very sleepy...

    Quick somebody at Mozilla.org patent tabbed browsing! I know tabs were in Hypercard in 1940 or so, but they didn't use it for browsing the web and USPTO doesn't look at the real world, just what's been patented.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
    1. Re:What we need is to remember... by geordie_loz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The reason it's important, is why Microsoft fought the war in the first place. Microsoft wanted the way Internet Explorer does things to be the standard. It wanted any web based systems (which is becoming increasingly larger a market - although I don't think it'll be the size that people really think) will require Internet Explorer to run.

      The upshot of this is that if Internet Explorer is required to be used, then Windows is required to be used, and therefore no matter who is providing the web-based services, at least microsoft will be getting some money, and it'll make it easier for them to "bundle" their web-services into the browser by default (aka, .net login in XP).

      If the browser becomes interchangeable, then the platform will too, and Microsoft cease to be in control, so there goes all the people who use their services because they're installed as default.

      Naturally the people who'd use Microsoft's defaults would be less likely to use Mozilla or other OS's, but there is concievably a time when these things can be pre-installed, especially to save cash from an OEM point of view.

    2. Re:What we need is to remember... by arendjr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To plumb a buzzword ("application services") I really don't think we're even going to recognize a "browser" in 10 years. We'll be too busy running our word processors, financial software and games straight over the internet. The "browser's" border will become transparent, and you won't need to know (or care) what you're using.
      Yes, we will quite likely be using word processors over the (inter|intra)net in some years. But we won't be doing so over HTML, because it's simply not up to the task. So we need a next generation markup language for that. Currently there's only one contender, and that's Mozilla's XUL. Microsoft will try to push its own format with the introduction of Longhorn, namely XAML. If Mozilla takes off and XUL becomes a real standard before XAML even sees the daylight, Microsoft has a real problem. They will either need to adapt XUL or loose the backend market as well. That's why Microsoft should be worried for Mozilla.

    3. Re:What we need is to remember... by robertjw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have you been reading the news lately? Every indication is that Microsoft is VERY concerned about losing market share. All we here are veiled threats to sue Linux (users, developers, advocates, etc...), Ballmer spouting off about increased efficiency and reports and analysis of the first dividend payout.

      I would be surprised you don't think Redmond is nervous about something.

      --
      Find coupons in Greeley
  9. Web browsers? by bcmm · · Score: 4, Funny
    I don't understand all this hype about web browsers. They take too much of my system resources away from compiling the latest kernel release (I use Gentoo). I prefere to use telnet. I can do HTML rendering in my head (it's more standards compliant that way).
    telnet www.slashdot.org 80
    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  10. redundant by corpsiclex · · Score: 5, Funny
    We've seen a few too many Firefox articles by now, but it is gaining a real presence in the market


    We know. The Other Articles told us.
    --

    eBayDig 1s a typo saerch engien
  11. Even less still by Epeeist · · Score: 4, Informative

    Plus all the people who change their UserAgent setting so that it works with the stupid browser sniffer that their bank/pr0n site uses and will only let them in if they are using Exploder.

    In this situation complain to the management, not the the techies. Point out that they are losing over 10% of their prospective customers.

    Because IE only sites tend to have lower accessiblity than properly designed sites it may also be worth mentioning that they do not comply with the Disability Discrimination Act (in the UK) or Section 508 (in the US).

    Finally, point them to the CERT and SANS Institute reports and let them know that you are following their guidance and using a more secure browser. This is of advantage to both the supplier and you as a customer.

    Don't rant on about M$ monopolies, or W3C compliance.

    I have done this with a number of sites and it does have an effect.

    Once they have a browser neutral site then you don't need your browser to advertise itself as something it isn't. As a result, alternative browser share will increase, if only by a small amount.