Slashdot Mirror
Browser Wars 2: Electric Boogaloo
Tomas wrote to mention an article up on XYZ Computing discussing what is shaping up to be another round of the Browser Wars. From the article: "To anyone that has been following the Window's browser news lately, it is apparent that the stage is set for another browser war. Last experienced during the nineties, companies are fighting over which program consumers use to view the internet. For the average computer user this is a very good thing as it should drastically improve browser performance in a short period of time."
From the fine article:
First, Windows products do seem to use TABS.... Right-click on "My Computer" (if you've actually left it named that!), select PROPERTIES. Not only does Microsoft use TABS to manage some of the most important aspects of computers, they've done it poorly! What the....???? When you click on an upper row tab, the upper row of TABS becomes the bottom row?!? Wow! Yes, Microsoft products not only support and/or use TABS, they were the first to make me hate tabbed interfaces.
Fortunately Mozilla and Firefox came along and convinced me tabbed interfaces could be done nicely and ergonomicly. I'm back in the tabbed fold... sigh.
Second, the claim that adding tabbed browsing to IE is less important because the Taskbar can group similar activities, therefor it already is like tabbed browsing may illustrate more than I'm able how Microsoft doesn't get it. The "like apps" Taskbar browsing has been the source of more headaches for me... I've tried using it, found it obtuse and annoying -- that's okay, just my preference and opinion. But, once again, it's been frustrating in a support role because you (rhetorically) end up trouble-shooting for users an interface poorly thought out and confusing to users. I find Microsoft's "easy to use" ideas sometimes baffling.... (how many times have you over the phone tried to walk someone through a WORD problem only to stumble when they can't find the menu option, and it's because Microsoft has unilaterally decided "hiding" little-used features under menu chevrons).
Other than that, back to the main topic, hopefully more energetic competition in the browser world will mean better and higher quality browsers, but if history serves, it will be a minor spurt in advancement until Microsoft has re-landed their stranglehold on that segment of the market.... and I'm guessing that won't take very long.
I don't care if browsers compete with performance. I don't even much care if they compete with functionality.
I just want security.
Well, OK, I also want standards compliance which maybe counts as functionality. But no crazy "innovative" feature that they believe will woo the public.
The Internet is full. Go Away!!!
...can't we all just get along together?
The battle is Firefox vs IE. The danger is of Microsoft winning again, but not because they have a better product.
At best, IE 7 will work only on certain versions of Windows.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
it looks like all browsers will have to implement each other's functionalities. For example I wouldn't think for a second going to MSIE unless it was CSS2 compatible and it fully supported XPI extensions. I am biased of-course, since I am working on my own extensions (russkey, leetkey) so why would I want to use a browser that does not provide the same functionality? The only way to force someone like me to use IE is to make sure that the places I work at are only IE compliant and do not work in other browsers, because voluntarely, I would not use websites that are locked into IE only.
You can't handle the truth.
"browser wars 2: the legend of curly's gold" is more acceptable.
It is a period of civil war.
Mozilla spaceships, striking
from a hidden base, have won
their first victory against
the evil Microsoft Empire.
During the battle, Mozilla
spies managed to steal secret
plans to the Empire's
ultimate weapon, INTERNET
EXPLORER 7, an armored web
browser with enough power to
destroy an entire website.
Pursued by the Empire's
sinister agents, Firefox users
race home aboard their
browser, custodian of the
web standards that can save
their people and restore
freedom to the web....
Maybe it's just me, but I think browser performance isn't much of a problem any more these days. Standards compliance, on the other hand, is, and I hope that this is the area where a new browser "war" might actually help out.
We all know that IE's standards compliance leaves a lot to be desired, but the Mozilla crew's product leaves a number of things to be desired, too. The Acid2 test may be one example, but there's also other things like MNG support and CSS-generated content where Gecko is still lacking, so hopefully, the people in charge will realize that if they want to replace IE as the standard browser, they shouldn't repeat the same mistakes of not caring about the finer details of the standards.
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
I don't even like Opera but I'm very surprised Opera 8 never got mentioned in the article. NS8 over Opera?! Sub-par... sub-par...
To win the browser war, budding browser development teams should implement my new idea for tabbed browsing.
The browser should let you access all the paid sites you want, and put all the charges on a tab. This can then be paid off at the end of the month. I'd switch to running IE under Wine (is that even possible?) if M$ brought this feature out.
SUPPORT TABBED BROWSING!!
I saw a big E (IE logo) in the middle of the article and didn't see the Firefox logo, so I'm not gonna read the rest of the article, because I think this is subliminal propaganda.
Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
I never heard of this "firefox" thing before now. I had had no idea what tabs were before now. Its interesting to learn that this "Internet Explorer" isn't the only internet out there. I'm glad there's a website like this "Slashdot" to tell us these things - thank you Slashdot!
Of course IE has had 90%+ market share.
You really expect people who don't even know how computers work to go out of their way to get a new browser when they have no clue why they would need it? Not only did IE come standard on all the Windows OSes, it also came on OS 9. If Firefox or some other alternative browser can standard, and people had to download IE in order to use it, that browser would have 90%+ market share.
Until Firefox starts coming on computers instead of/in addition to IE, there's no way it's going to have 90%+ market share.
I gotta agree. Enough already.
The joke is supposed to be making fun of Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo but it stopped being funny sometime around 2002.
First of all, it really was only all that funny the first time it was done, when the creators of Mystery Science Theater used it as part of the name for their second (and last, as it turned out) annual fan convention.
Secondly, pretty much nobody actually remembers the movie Breakin' anyway, let alone the sequel which pretty much nobody went to. Adding "2: Electric Boogaloo" to anything the second time around is really just sponging off the laughs the MST3K guys got from it the first time. It shows about as much wit and inventiveness as repeating a Monty Python joke around a bunch of other nerds. You might get a laugh, but you really should feel like a complete tool afterwards.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Are we still talking about this? Seriously? Is there any new information here that hasn't been presented, seen, dissected and analysed yesterday, and the day before, and the one before that?
This reads like we are beating the same old dead horse over and over again.
- sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
Last experienced during the nineties, companies are fighting over which program consumers use to view the internet. (Emphasis added)
I "view the internet" using ssh. Sometimes FTP. Maybe SCP. I do like to view the internet using POP3, too.
The more WE, as people in-the-know, screw up the terminology, the more the sheeple will too. How about we give them the impression that the "interweb" has more than just "that dot com thing"? Maybe, just maaaaaaaybe, if they understand that the INTERNET is a bunch of computers connected together that can talk to each other (and say MANY different things) then they'll also better understand security concerns, patching, etc. Isn't security one of the big factors of the "browser war"?
That's great for you, but you're not in the majority. The browser wars will ocne again be determined by populartiy, which is determined by prettiness, features, etc. Most people don't really care about security, and only developers (and other related uber-geeks) care about standards compliance.
I don't respond to AC's.
I commonly use both PCs and Macs and I want a broswer that I can use on both. As other operating systems gain users this will become more of an issue.
If Firefox can hold on for a while longer I believe that more web pages will start to comply to the actual standards and IE will take a hit due to that.
You seem to be overlooking one small point, IE actually deserved to win the last browser war because guess what, it was a better browser than Netscape. So with previous experience at seeing off a competitor and still having by far the lions share of the market what makes you so sure they will loose this time?
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
How any time you actually have an honest choice of software in the consumer software world, it's such a strange and upsetting event we have to describe it by the word "wars".
Wouldn't it be nice if competition between multiple partners were the rule, rather than an exception so bizarre that when it occurs we widely describe it by a word normally associated with mass death and destruction?
Kind of a small thing, but y'know, just a thought...
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
for those that don't know the whole "random title " 2 - Electric Boogaloo comes from the movie Breakin' 2 - Electric Boogaloo and has been used by anyone desperate for a laugh.
it should drastically improve browser performance in a short period of time
Bah. It's been how long since the first browser war? And IE is still a heaping pile of crap. And, what's worse, M$ doesn't seem to want to fix what they already have on the market. "Oh, we'll fix it with Longhorn." Yeah, so you'll have to spend more money on a whole new OS, just to fix these bugs that have been arond since at least version 5.
Granted, all browsers have their flaws. But at least most of these browsers have people working to patch whatever holes are found. M$ has been nothing more than lackluster with regards to their patch attempts, rarely releasing any fixes. And when they do release a fix, it sometimes breaks other stuff (a'la SP2).
Until M$ gets its head out of its ass, makes IE stand-alone (as in not intergrated into Windows), and gets with the program with regards to patching security risks in a timely manner, I'll stick with the competition. Firefox and Konqueror work just fine for me...
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
Asa and Ben: Good morning. In less than an hour, Firefox and Mozilla will join others from around the world. And you will be launching the largest browser war in this history of mankind.
Mankind -- that word should have new meaning for all of us today.
We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore.
We will be united in our common interests.
Perhaps its fate that today is the 4th of July; and you will once again be fighting for our freedom, not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution -- but from Microsoft.
We're fighting for our right to browse, to surf free.
And should we win the day, the open source community will no longer be known as an niche group, but as the day when the world declared in one voice:
"We will not go quietly into the night.
We will not vanish without a fight.
We're going to live on.
We're going to survive."
Today, we celebrate our Independence Day!
"For the average computer user this is a very good thing as it should drastically improve browser performance in a short period of time."
This will also create many average users that hate the other side for no good reason. The browser wars were rife with ignorant zealots on both sides. I hope the browser war makes it to a more high-brow level of technically meritorious discussions.
The Crimson Dragon
"browser wars 2"??? Please, spare me I could hardly stomach the "first" one...
In the end, does it really matter so much what browser you choose to use? If the obviously superior features of FF are not enough to convince to try/use it over IE, then by all means use IE.
Why does everything in our society seem to have to break down to a coke v. pepsi scenario?
Dumb article, too.
The next big play in the "browser wars" should be more aggressive ad blocking.
Anyone else think this was Anti firefox? They say "IE has some security holes" then go on and list 5-6 "problems" (Which I've never exprienced) with Firefox... WTF comes to mind..
If you're going to write a pro-IE article don't show it off like it's a "browser war" article.
I like muppets.
leetkey - whaat is going on with the links here?
this is a test.
You can't handle the truth.
And you're going to get modded down, since no one cares any more except you and me.
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
Page 3 states:
No, no, I think it was doing pretty good in the mid-90's. By the late 90's, however...
R.Mo
Call up your broker, buy 1,000 shares FFOX!!
Boy, that was the Slashdot post from hell. Reading that made me madder than a yak in heat.
crawls... The newest version of FireFox on a Mac crashes for me using 10.4 Is Camino stable on 10.4 yet? Both Camino and FireFox are noticeably faster than Safari. Now if only Camino would allow me to block images from source.
This guy is way out there
This is what caused the almost immediate switch from Netscape to Internet Explorer. It had nothing to do with the features of either browser. As long as these three things are true, IE will NEVER go below 80% of the web browser market.
I "view the internet" using ssh. Sometimes FTP. Maybe SCP. I do like to view the internet using POP3, too.
People who use Firefox for HTTP are more likely to use T-bird for POP3. And once more FTP related RFEs are implemented in Firefox and/or Seamonkey, users of Firefox will be more likely to use Firefox than IE when connecting to FTP sites.
For the average computer user this is a very good thing as it should drastically improve browser performance in a short period of time.
More like drastically increase Microsoft's unfair market practices... They'll just find more ways to integrate IE with Longhorn so that you literally can't do anything in the OS without it... I can also see them adding more online interaction with the OS and Windows Update or whatever on microsoft.com that can only be done through IE's ActiveX Controls.
Sometimes you've gotta roll the hard six.
Why should either side care about winning Browser Wars II?
In Browser Wars I, Netscape leveraged its popular browser to gain members for its portal service, which was supposed to be the profit center. It also sold an enhanced version of the browser (or was it actually enhanced, or just licensed for corporate use? I can't remember. I never paid for it.)
Microsoft, similarly, leveraged the popularity of its browser to gain subscribers for MSN portal / ISP.
This doesn't seem to be such an important goal anymore. (Portals are *so* 1995.) So they'd be going to "war" to provide a product that hasn't proved to be particularly profitable. What's the point?
You seem to be overlooking one small point, IE actually deserved to win the last browser war because guess what, it was a better browser than Netscape.
That may be true, but you're overlooking another small point. The reason IE won had nothing to do with it being better. Simply putting it on the desktop of every windows computer, and therefore every computer you buy from any major manufacturer, is what made it win. As long as this is true, there will never be another war. Even if IE had a timer to crash every 30 minutes, it would still have 80% market share.
What about all those people buying macs? I've bought my last three computers with Linux preinstalled. They sell them at Fry's and they're prominently advertised in the ads Fry's runs in the local newspaper.
I think a more accurate statement would be that for people who don't care enough to look at the other options, Windows is the default choice.
As long as these three things are true, IE will NEVER go below 80% of the web browser market.
If IE went below 80%, that would be utterly wonderful. The reason we should care about the browser wars is not because we want the IE monopoly to be replaced with a FF monopoly. The reason we should care is because we don't want anybody to have a monopoly.
If IE was down to 80%, a lot of great things would happen. For instance, banks would have to give up on making their web sites only work with IE. Also, it would become virtually impossible for MS to hijack various web standards. Web designers aren't going to go with an MS-only design in a world where that means cutting out 20% of their customers' audience.
Find free books.
"I hope the browser war makes it to a more high-brow level of technically meritorious discussions."
You mean kind of like the technical arguments experienced Unix bods have?
e.g.
"Emacs for example is the Unix equivalent of MS Office, a bloated slow dificult to use puddle of drool (what else do you expect with lisp). VI on the other hand is a svelte powerful elegant and universal text editor."
Deleted
The last major browser war led to divergent implementations of HTML & JS which drove web developers crazy. The rush to more features led to frequent but poorly tested releases that were (a) unstable; (b) not secure. It is true, however, that it eventually led to a new generation of browsers and much benefit to the end users. One way to avoid the instability may be to somehow enforce and demand adherence to standards, but this is easier said than done.
There's a typo but I'll fix it:
During the battle, Mozilla
spies managed to steal secret
plans to the Empire's
ultimate weapon, INTERNET
EXPLORER 7, an armored web
browser with enough power to
destroy an entire Windows Operating
System.
yggdrasil:/var/log/apache# cat a*g a*g*1 | grep IE | wc -l
644
yggdrasil:/var/log/apache# cat a*g a*g*1 | grep [Ff]ire | wc -l
374
Of course this is totally unscientific. Most of the people that come to my simple little webpage, as oppossed to people going to walmart.com or whatever, are a bit geekier than usual. But I think that your third point shouldn't neccesarily be "idiots use computers" as much as "people who don't understand computers use computers". I think there are a lot of people in there 40s who are intelligent professionals, and just can't naturally parse out the difference between "the operating system", "a program used to access (part of) the internet" and "the internet". I think for high school students and college students, it might not be so confusing. I think that this will be the age group in which computing patterns are made.
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
While one might say that IE 'deserved' to win, that really takes a larger perspective on things. Now, whether it should have one, then yes, it should have, because it was omnipresent on the majority of machines and Netscape's strategy was a failure. Now, however, with the simplicity of Firefox, not to mention that it is also free, it plays on a much closer to level playing ground than Netscape did. Firefox is a superior product now, and with few roadblocks to hold it back, I believe that Firefox will overtake IE in a final, decisive battle. Firefox's rate of expansion and its vast grass-roots marketing are sure to leave a dent, if not win. That is how I believe that Microsoft will lose this time, in a final, decisive battle.
Actually, your post made me wonder.
A few weeks ago a neighbor of mine called me up saying she was having all sorts of trouble whenever she accessed the Internet. I went over there, saying I could give her a few minutes. Her computer was riddled with spyware. IE had four different spyware related "search bars" running at the top (which is a record in my experience).
Rather then spend hours cleaning things up, I just downloaded firefox and installed some of the more popular plugins (flash etc.) and deleted the big blue E from the desktop and the start menu. I talked to her the other day and she told me "wow, my computer is still running great".
It makes me wonder now if IE might be losing ground not because firefox is better, but because there seems to be less junk out there that messes with firefox? (don't get me wrong, I still think Firefox is better).
The Internet is generally stupid
What about all those people buying macs? I've bought my last three computers with Linux preinstalled. They sell them at Fry's and they're prominently advertised in the ads Fry's runs in the local newspaper.
Yeah, they arent impossible to find if you go looking for them. However, recently I looked around for a laptop online. I went to several large sites and manufacturer's websites. Dell, HP, IBM. I keep hearing about these people selling Linux computers, but they're very hard to find, especially laptops. If I do find a linux computer, they're often for expensive server hardware only. I dont even care if it comes with Linux, I just dont want to be forced to buy Windows. But your OS choice is always seemingly "Windows XP Home Edition" or "Windows XP Professional Edition" or "Windows XP Media Edition". What the hell. All versions that come with a big blue e icon on the desktop, and usually no other browser. How will IE ever slip below 80%?
Also, you're right about it being great if IE goes below 80% market share. But the whole point of my comment is that its NOT going to happen. Unless something major changes. All of this hype about browser wars is overdone. Nothing is going to change.
Way to many sites ( note spelling , not "sights") seem to design for IE or screw up , never could tell which.
Mainly because you can't remove it from Windows and even if the computer is not connected to the Iternet, it still runs IE. Hell, I run IE because that's what runs Windows Explorer. I use Firefox for all but the few sites that require IE. The feature I love the most is limiting what javescript can do(ie turning out the status bar mouseovers)
The reason IE won had nothing to do with it being better. Simply putting it on the desktop of every windows computer, and therefore every computer you buy from any major manufacturer, is what made it win. As long as this is true, there will never be another war. Even if IE had a timer to crash every 30 minutes, it would still have 80% market share.
Which misses one key point: I used Netscape up until version 4.2 or so - at which point, IE made leaps and bounds ahead of Netscape, was better, so I used that instead.
Explain that one.
Coming soon - pyrogyra
It makes me wonder now if IE might be losing ground not because firefox is better, but because there seems to be less junk out there that messes with firefox?
That is seemingly the direct reaction of a single program being used by the masses. In this sense, I think everyone could benefit from more variety. But it probably wont happen with a program as complex as today's browsers.
Maybe its required that we use something different from the masses of people in order to have a pleasant browsing experience?
The whole 'tabbed browsing' thing is just a poor attempt to copy Operas MDI interface anyway.
And yes, I use Firefox as my primary browser now - not Opera - but for other reasons than this. No other browser yet has gotten that part of the interface as usable as Opera had several years ago. And I really think conceiving of it as 'tabs' has something to do with it.
I don't want tabs, I want a decent MDI interface for my browser.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Well I meant deserved in that it was a better product. The fact it was ubiquitous is as others and yourself have noted was the major factor.
Regarding Netscapes strategy I think Mozilla have been down a very similar road (going to rule the world etc) Firefox is simpler but from painful experience rather than design.
Free ?? If you meant as in beer so was netscape and so is just about every other browser these days. If you meant speech, heres a newsflash Joe Sixpack doesnt give a rats ass.
Rapid rate of expansion?? You do know its slowing and is still at under 10%?
Firefox is undoubtly a better browser than IE at the moment but I expect that will change in the near future. The fact that Firefox is now as you put it simpler puts it squarely in the commodity market. What will its differentiator be when IE has a comparable feature list and comes preinstalled and is what people are familiar with? So I cant really see where your 'final decisive battle' is coming from other than the emotive cliche book. If there had been a quality OS browser back when Netscape and IE were duking it out then I think a lot more people would be using it if only because of market entrenchment, but the simple fact is that OS had nothing back then of sufficient quality to begin to even compete. Now 5 years after the fact they have a very good browser but personally I think its too late to achieve the sort of domination MS did (frankly I dont want anyone dominating I want 3 or 4 browsers sharing the market).
Fortunately though competition does improve the standard of browsers all round so I can switch between Firefox and Opera without much difference as the mood takes me.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
This needs to be stressed. The biggest threat to computer security is not insecurity in the underlying operating system. It's users not knowing what they're doing.
In this sense, having operating systems hide operation details from you is a Very Bad Thing.
Also, it's naïve to think that the pure virtue of Linux and Mac OS X running everything as an unpriviledged user as standard is going to stop virus writers. You don't need to take over a computer completely to screw with it. You can install nice little keyloggers or remove user data just fine without having to become root.
Wait- yours is the second post about the meaning of the title. So you should have called it "title post 2: Electric Boogaloo".
LOL!!!!!!!!!!1
My genetic programming website: http://www.helpmefigurethisout.com/
Which misses one key point: I used Netscape up until version 4.2 or so - at which point, IE made leaps and bounds ahead of Netscape, was better, so I used that instead.
Explain that one.
You're probably part of the other 20% that would actually change browsers if you liked one better.
But also I'd like to make this point. When was the first time you heard of, saw, or used IE? The first time I ever used it was when I got a new computer with Windows 95 and I used it to download Netscape. How else was I going to get Netscape? I was forced to use it.
You have to admit having it on the desktop of every computer is a HUGE advantage. At that point it doesnt matter what anyone else does, its going to take over the masses.
Good, let them fight. When all of their energy is exhausted, we will show them the true follow of their "browser war"!
click
[o]_O
IE for the Mac is pretty awful too. It won't even render MSN correctly.
Yes, that is the latest version from Microsoft. Which is pretty old, since Microsoft doesn't support IE on Mac any more due to all the competition.
Whaaaa ?! The first IE was better than Netscape? You weren't around back in the days when Al Gore invented the internet, were ya?
Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
Rather than increasing "performance" (probably by precaching), what we would actually see from a new round of browser wars is tons of features nobody really needs - features that integrate the browser with various non-sandboxed activities that are potentially exploitable, features that are enabled by default and that have cryptic (to the neophyte) names so the average user won't know what to disable in order to browse the web safely.
You know, just like IE is now, except more.
Let's have a really mature and highly technical discussion here on Firefox and IE: shoulda, woulda, coulda, who cares? Happy with IExploits? Think Microsoft will build secure software, even though it's been promising that for 10 years? Good for you!
Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
The real problem with other browsers is that it's extremely difficult to emulate IE's behavior, and not w3c conformance.
The Raven
I like the Mozilla/Firefox tabs, and so far I prefer them over anything else I've seen lately. If Microsoft actually does have a genuine problem, though, I think it's likely to be that the tabs Firefox uses work inconsistently with most similar-looking tabs in nearly any other application.
In Windows, tabs are nearly always static. The user can always see what tabs are visible, new tabs never appear and old tabs don't disappear. This is a factor in usability because it means the user can expect that they're aware of all available configuration options.
In Windows, the concept of creating a tab or destroying a tab don't exist. If Microsoft could argue something rationally about this, it would be that the concept of creating and destroying tabs might confuse a user, if not in IE than in nearly every other Windows application they use after it. It puts the user into a frame of mind where they're being asked to do something that's normally done by a developer.
I still think it's a silly argument, though, if only because static tabs need have nothing to do with it. The fact is that Microsoft does provide dynamic tabs in their applications -- they simply look slightly different. Specifically, take a look at how MS Excel manages multiple worksheets (within a spreadsheet), and you'll notice that it uses differents types of tabs, where they're spaced along the bottom of the window instead of the top. This type of tab mimics exactly the type of dynamic behaviour that Internet Explorer would be using.
If Microsoft wants to be consistent with their other applications, they need only utilise the same system that Excel uses, and they might even find that people more quickly understand Excel as a result.
That is seemingly the direct reaction of a single program being used by the masses. In this sense, I think everyone could benefit from more variety. But it probably wont happen with a program as complex as today's browsers.
All too true. Just look at operating systems. Part of the reason so much junk like spy ware and viruses is written for Windows is because so many people use it.
Maybe its required that we use something different from the masses of people in order to have a pleasant browsing experience?
I can't help to think that the sudden rise in popularity of Linux didn't have something to do with Microsoft focusing on reliability when they developed XP. In 98, and even more so in ME, stability was a joke, and the real big benefit to migrating to Linux for many people was that your computer didn't freeze up at least once every day.
So even though Firefox will probably not become *the* dominate browser, it certainly is getting MS off their rears to make IE better.
The Internet is generally stupid
So even though Firefox will probably not become *the* dominate browser, it certainly is getting MS off their rears to make IE better.
What does that say for Microsoft? They only get around to actively developing features in their most commonly used programs when the people form together and make a better alternative with the features they want? Do they just not care as long as they have the market share?
Even Microsoft realizes its amazing they've managed to get the less than 10% market share on such an unlevel playing field.
Should we rejoice now that the Mozilla people made such a good product it made the IE people get off their asses?
They only get around to actively developing features in their most commonly used programs when the people form together and make a better alternative with the features they want?
Welcome to American Business History for the last 100 years. One only needs to look at the behavior of our automotive industry when the big three were in collusion absent any foreign competitors to see that generally speaking, American industry does not innovate unless a better product threatens their dominance.
The Internet is generally stupid
Will the hurt (more Firefox on older machines) or help (IE7 only available on more secure platforms)?
Out of curiosity, when did you switch back to mozilla?
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
Isn't the empire stealing the plans(ideas) from the rebels?
drastically improve browser performance
I hope so. I only get 12 FPS with my current browser and that's not good enough.
"For the average computer user this is a very good thing as it should drastically improve browser performance in a short period of time."
My memories of the browser wars are not that positive. In fact, it was an awful mess from my standpoint. I had an Amiga at the time, and the browsers we had available for it (iBrowse, Voyager, etc.) were always behind the curve, struggling to catch up with IE and Netscape.
It was *common* to be unable to render many pages, or shop online at many stores, with any kind of alternative browser. The user experience was one I suspect most people simply would not tolerate today.
If the browser wars resume, it won't be IE or Netscape that suffer. The casualties will be Safari, iCab, Opera, Konqueror, etc. And the standards, of course, will be trashed right and left.
You're both right. IE got 90% marketshare because it was (A) On your desktop already, and (B) Better than Netscape.
In addition, you have (C) Free corporate and ISP deployment costs, (D) Illegal Sherman Act activities, (E) Better low-spec machine performance, (F) Better development platform, (G) Nutscrape's inability to ship v5, (H) Nutscrape v6/Mozilla being a hunk of crap a few years ago, (I) AOL, (J) etc etc
Any one of these could be used to partially explain IE's dominance, so take your pick.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
It's a 'troll' to make the point that IE is 'pathetically bad' on non-Windows platforms?
Who gave Melinda Gates mod points??
They're over, MS cheated and won. When people talk about the "new browser war" they really mean "web standards war", meaning IE vs every other browser, but goes much farther than that. MS has singlehandedly held back widespread usage of SVG and png (among others) for years.
Fix your browser to work with bittorrent, audio formats (stream and static), text to speech, and pod loading. Plug-ins or built-in. A Scheduling utility a must.
There are what, some 20-30 million ipods in use?
Apple might want to help with a few bux.
You're both right. IE got 90% marketshare because it was (A) On your desktop already, and (B) Better than Netscape.
In addition, you have (C) Free corporate and ISP deployment costs, (D) Illegal Sherman Act activities, (E) Better low-spec machine performance, (F) Better development platform, (G) Nutscrape's inability to ship v5, (H) Nutscrape v6/Mozilla being a hunk of crap a few years ago, (I) AOL, (J) etc etc
Any one of these could be used to partially explain IE's dominance, so take your pick.
Netscape 4.07 is for sure total crap now, but at the time, I actually liked it much better than IE at that time. However, I dont want to get into an argument over which one is better.
Netscape at the time totally dominated the browser market. I genuinely believe that if Microsoft did not have the ability to bundle it with windows and sold IE or offered it equally with Netscape, adoption would have been MUCH slower. I think IE would have no more than 50%-60% market share today. There were other factors, but throwing it on the desktop of every computer you can buy is the only one that really matters. It turned IE into the default. If you want to use another browser on windows, you have to use IE to get it. And I think as long as it remains like this, there will be no 'browser war'.
Out of curiosity, when did you switch back to mozilla?
I use Firefox occasionally; for the most part I use IE. There's one specific piece of behavior in Firefox that I hate, that works great for me in IE - and that's when I create a new tab/page/whatever, I get the page that I was looking at duplicated in that window.
Until Firefox does that, I won't switch. Even then it depends. I mainly use it these days to test compatibility.
Coming soon - pyrogyra
IE only had 60% marketshare when Netscape cancelled v5.0, even with the bundling. They wouldn't have stayed there while Nutscrape went on a five year hiatus and rewrote everything from scratch.
I agree that a seeing a real browserwar is unlikely, but I think you will see enough compeition to keep the IE development team alive this time.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
I'm not kicking it. (Well I am, but not just for the sake of kicking.) I'm pointing out a factual error in the parent post.
...a Kentucky man has pioneered a bread division process he calls 'slicing'...
Invisible to moderators.
Your a sheep if you agree , your a zelout if your agree , if you disagree your a troll , if you disagree your a tool.
I advise application of electrodes to the genitals of all those who misspell "you're" four times in a row!
I agree that a seeing a real browserwar is unlikely, but I think you will see enough compeition to keep the IE development
I see Microsoft is finally putting active development back into IE. They've publicly stated that the only reason they are doing this is because of increased pressure from Firefox.
What does this say for Microsoft? They only actively develop new features in their most commonly used programs when another competitor threatens their dominance? They never cared to continue development into IE as long as they had the market share? The only way to get IE developers off their ass is for the people to come together and make a great alternative?
Its amazing that the Mozilla people were able to put out such a good product that they were able to crack into less than 10% of Microsoft's market share. Its insane that losing your 90% hold on the browser market is Microsoft's idea of a threat. I find it humorous when Microsoft refers to this as competition.
Microsoft has an unfair advantage. This is not competition.
I just want to say I think its disgusting that the browser market is arranged this way. Should I rejoice now that the Mozilla people put out such a good product that it made IE developers get up off their asses?
Filenames should not have any metadata shoehorned into them. Not "executable" flags, not MIME type, not even "unique" identifiers, and certainly not the other metadata like timestamps, owners, geo info, versions, or anything else. All that gets put into ad hoc data formats that break any meaningfully complex infosystem, are unmaintainable, and inevitably cause lots of problems. The real problem is filesystems, with inflexible metdata fields, bad tools for metadata usage, and little to no support for relations among objects. A more relational filesystem, with uniqueID, MIMEtype and other metadata would solve all kinds of problems everyone has with using data and its UI representations. Fixing mistaken expectations of GUI operations on files would be a small part of the solution, but probably one of the most popular.
--
make install -not war
While it doesn't look like Firefox has the GUI way to configure this, it looks like it's still in there. Go to the URL "about:config". The preferences you're looking for are "browser.tabs.loadOnNewTab", "browser.windows.loadOnNewWindow", and "browser.startup.page". (You can probably guess which does what ;) These are each integer values, and they are:
0 Blank page 1 Home page 2 Last page At least, that seems to be the system. I highly recommend using the "Filter" area to quickly select these configuration preferences.Hope that helps!
BTW, is there some way to disable the loadOnNewWindow = 2 functionality under IE? It always drives me up the wall whenever I'm forced to use IE.
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
The article referenced starts out "To anyone that has been following the Window's browser news lately.."
To anyone THAT? Why do people write this way these days? The proper form is, of course, "to anyone WHO..." Who. A person isn't a thing. A person is a person. When did using "who" in this context start to disappear? Does anyone know why it disappeared? Why do people use "that" instead of "who" when referring to human beings? It's weird and creepy.
Insert witty sig here.
Personally I thought it should be Electric Bugaloo
It comes from this 1984 movie and its 1984 sequel. As of a few weeks ago, all sequels now have the subtitle "Electric Boogaloo". Personally I'm waiting for "Browser Wars III: The Search For Spock".
qntm.org
In Excel, creating a new sheet in a workbook creates a new tab at the bottom of the page, which also goes away when you delete the sheet...
U.S. War Crimes blog. Email for free Mandriva support.
http://www.storewars.org/flash Store Wars. Funny!
Nutscrape/Mozilla didn't put out a good product between Navigator v3 and Firefox, so yes you should rejoice.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.