Slashdot Mirror
Firefox Gains on IE Again in June
kurtz_tan writes "Infoworld reported that Firefox increased its market share to 8.71 percent, up from 8 percent in May, while IE's share shrank to 86.56 percent from 87.23 percent. This is according to NetApplications.com. Since the beginning of the year, Firefox has increased its market share every month between 0.5 percent and 1 percent, mostly at the expense of IE. This means Firefox would cross the 10% market share by October."
We're number three! :-)
firefox/firefly I'm getting really confused...
Is it really news though? I like to see these stats as much as the next guy, but i mean, give me a shout when it hits 25%.
Does this combine Mozilla Suite(Seamonkey) & Firefox data, or is it being separated?
What prevents OEMS from installing Firefox much like Sony and others did with NS? Granted MS would love to charge those companies more, but wouldn't those companies save in support costs?
Well, as we can see, this starts with the most tech savvy users switching and continues to less tech savvy users, but by the 10% barrier, will enough people be even tech savvy enough to understand that the Big e isn't the internet? That's my major concern right there. People like that are the ones that keep me up at night, fearing for the future of our society that continues to depend more on technology but has less and less understanding of it.
When you in single percents it's easy to gain a couple more.
:-)
Linux is gaining on Windows for 14 years now and still is in single digits
Three cheers for the superior browser!
Sure, hitting a 10% milestone is great, but is there something inherently special about it? The article claims that it will indicate greater traction with corporations, but I suspect 10% has more to do with the number of fingers on most people's hands than any real economic theory of adoption.
Because I rebrand and reskin Firefox then install it on my clients' computers as "Internet Extreme". My saavier clients like how IEx prevents popups and spyware, and also like that it is from Microsoft so they know they can trust it.
Ahhh saavy clients...
You get only 8% market share and your main competitors haven't even tried in how many years?
As soon as MS decides to show up to this party, Firefox will follow the likes of Mosaic. It just isn't profitable for MS to play yet -- they are waiting to be "fashionably late."
As a MSFT shareholder I am pleased.
The real test will be when the new IE 7 comes out... I predict (and hope) that FireFox will continue to gain even when the "new and improved" IE get's here. http://www.getfirefox.com/
I can imagine that some heads are rolling in Redmond. They esentially put IE in maintenance mode and now it is gettting its clock cleaned. MS Management is most likely trying to do something to reverse this trend. Losing IE would be a major chink in their armor. Next would be Office (Word and Excel) -- can you say OpenOffice?
www.w3schools.com changed the way it shows browser statistics?
a sp
They are saying that FF use is decreasing.
Maybe because Bill is worried about this and...
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.
I am glad to see that Firefox is increasing in the browser market. I am sure we will also see a bigger increase in Firefox exploits. Maybe the rate of exploits is the true measure of market share.
"Anything tastes good if you deep fry it."
The Army reading list
As everyday mom and pop users depend on Firefox instead of IE for browsing and more companies support Firefox, more exploits and holes will start to show up. I'm just glad that they update it frequently. Theres nothing like safe and secure browsing. It also means that more people will look to FOSS solutions. I have to admit, Firefox got me started.
I am pretty sure that the current browser war will evolve, in a decade or less, in a war of Web application development with the browsers' supported proprietary extensions. Web developers will harness the power of XUL in combination with Javascript, and Microsoft will either push ActiveX or rather than promote a framework seen as inherently insecure, design a new Web application development framework, perhaps based on .NET and Longhorn technologies.
Competition is good, as long as the customer doesn't lose out. My bet is that XUL will prevail due to its ease of reach ...
So if Firefox gets 50% market share, but still adheres to standards... they can start charging money... or make everyone go to freshmeat as the default home page... or
But still, word.
Don't you mean "But still, OO.o writer"?
You forgot "Excellent..."
A recent study confirms 86.56 percent of computer users have massive amounts of malware on their computer.
Please remember that this 8.71 percent comes from a study of mostly north-american websites (NetApplication clients).
A similar study is done each month in Europe and the figures are quite different:
src: XiTi
There ya go.
I have to LOL when an anti-microsoft thread is advertising microsoft products. Life is funnier than anything hollywood can come up with !!
I read in an article the other day that FireFox was so successful because it automatically imported all the user info, settings, etc. from IE. It also speculated that Linux would have to be able to import all of one's Microsoft settings, info, etc. to become successful.
I wonder how important someone's browser settings are to them. Am I wrong in thinking that FireFox is gaining market share just because it is easy to download and install and it has a reputation for not getting viruses?
Anyway, 10% is not exactly a dominant market share. Why are we getting excited?
This means Firefox would cross the 10% market share by October.
What effect do you think the release of IE7 (maybe before October) will have on Firefox market share?
I know the IE haters won't switch. But what about the Firefox users who are using it because it's the latest thing and because of features IE6 doesn't have but IE7 will(tabbed browsing, RSS reader, etc.)?
Firefox has 8% and you call that a clock cleaning?
I don't know how Microsoft can stay in business with Firefox and Apple cleaning their clocks.
there's more than one way to do me.
nt
Or even Windows Media Player? They don't make any money off of them. I suppose IE has the ActiveX lock-in factor (Fedex.com anyone?).
Since the beginning of the year, Firefox has increased its market share every month between 0.5 percent and 1 percent, mostly at the expense of IE. This means Firefox would cross the 10% market share by October.
No, that doesn't mean anything. If the trend continues then Firefox will cross the 10% threshold, but in order to determine whether that will realistically happen, one has to examine the underlying reasons for the current trend.
What are those factors? My guess would be that home users are continuing to adopt Firefox in favor of IE, and so I think it would be fair to say that it is likely that Firefox's growth will continue.
However, I think Firefox will hit a stumbling block when it comes to the edge of "business workstation" browser territory. Unlike the article predicts, I don't think Firefox will begin to take over, and at that point one could expect the growth trend to slow as the home user region alone becomes saturated (whether that will happen before or after 10%--probably after--is uncertain).
IE is too well integrated into the operating system and works too well within the Windows environment for it to be displaced. When a company admin wants to lock down users to limited access so that they spend their time working and not surfing the Internet, why install Firefox?
At my office the Internet access is controlled by Websense. I use a limited number of applications (Outlook and proprietary software) in order to do my job. There is no need to upgrade/replace IE with Firefox because I don't visit unsafe sites, I don't need a lower impact browser, and I don't need Firefox's features. To install another browser (trust me, I would love to get Opera on there myself) would, in all aspects, unneeded.
It's going to take a lot more than the current advantages of Firefox for the browser to supplant IE in the workplace, and there's no telling where IE7 will move the standards (hah!) bar. In a business environment, there's a huge advantage given to that whole integrated-browser-into-the-OS thing.
Don't such small percentages usually represent different polls, logs etc.?
Much as I want FF to do so, so well, I don't actually see it ever becoming a dominant force.
Aiming at 10 pc is great but imagine one in ten people using FF. Doesn't sound much, eh?
Before we know it we'll have IE7 and people will be even less inclined to switch. We may even see the some going back to a pop-up blocking, ActiveX disabled, tab-enabled IE.
I think FF's place in history will be remembered as the OS browser that bought the change. Nothing more - and I say that with sadness
"The browser statistics below were adjusted in July 2005 to reflect page views instead of visits." Might that have to do with it, basically FF users staying a shorter while there. (I for one normally just check and enjoy the statistics...)
I have a really elegant proof for Fermat's last theorem. If this sig was only a bit longer...
How many friggin times do we have to hear about this? It's not that exciting anymore.
Of course, this means that (assuming 1% growth per month for easy math):
14% by Jan 2006
26% by Jan 2007
38% by Jan 2008
50% by Jan 2009
62% by Jan 2010
74% by Jan 2011
86% by Jan 2012
98% by Jan 2013
100% by Mar 2013
Sounds about right: no more IE in only 8 short years. The math couldn't possibly be wrong...
The only issue here is if the momentum will keep going strong, or will they lose focus or face obstacles? One of their main advantages is security, but with popularity comes more people trying to penetrate security.
Voice your opinion!
"This cleanup is free. The next one, if the need for it is caused by bad practice, won't be"
- follow this up with standard teach-in about browser security, risks posed by using the mainstream browser that is widely targeted, introduction of a different browser that doesn't have these particular problems
- provide printed sheet about system security for them to read if the teach-in wasn't clear enough
- install Firefox and AdBlock with a default set of REGEX filters to kill the worst excesses, and suggest they play with NoScript for ultimate safety, now that the browser-crashing bug that it sometimes triggers has been fixed.
Bingo
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
I'm still waiting for the day when Opera releases a version of their browser that identifies by default as Opera instead of IE. It will be really interesting to see how much this impacts both IE's and Opera's market stats.
I reported that Firefox increased its market share to 8.715 percent, up from 8.71 percent in July 14th, while IE's share shrank to 86.555 percent from 86.56 percent. Do we really need to report every month, if we know that it's going up every month?
For a lot of people thier bookmarks represent a lot of work - work they do not want to go through again.
I think they were spot-on in saying that's exactly why so many people have been able to adopt Firefox. That's the key term, "able" - it's not a feature that brings them over (you mentioned those), but it's an enabing feature that does not STOP them from switching.
Similarily I agree that a Linux distro that would copy Windows app settings and emulate, as closely as possible, the users Windows desktop, would lead to a lot of switchers. Especially from people who could breathe new life into an old and probably spyware-ridden computer through a lighter Linux install.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Two years from now people will be buying computers with the "Firefox operating system" cause its cheaper than the "other one" and its a known name. Geeks will insist it's a Firefox browser on a Linux system. Ubergeeks will say its a GNU system with a Linus kernal and a firefox browser (unless they want to get laid).
firefox/firefly I'm getting really confused...
:)
Hey, it's not like a CIA Agent is googling for your records, hacking your website or sending cylons after you . So please take it with at least some serenity , will ya?
Do the statistics allow for overlap; i.e.people who use multiple browsers? I realize that may be a small percentage, but if the published numbers are going to be to the second decimal point, it's got to weigh in there somewhere.
Those of us who use three (or more), either in regular use or for the purposes of testing - and just get accustomed to using multiples - should factor somewhere.
We'll be the first to break the 100% barrier.
Fellow geeks -- it doesn't get any better than this. When we cross the 100% barrier, the sky is the limit, I tell ya!
In addition to ff, the moz suite, epiphany, galeon, kmelon. Probably wouldn't add that much to the total as a couple of those are X only but still, would be interesting.
And I think that's the point of what firefox brings to the table. Some people like to say IE sucks FF rulez!!!
But the great thing about ff is that as it gains marketshare, since it adheres to standards, in the end it won't matter what browser you use as long as it conforms to the standard.
So in the end it won't matter if you use, konqueror, safari, opera, ff, etc. You know, kind of how it was meant to be.
IE is there to ensure the OS isn't made irrelevant.
When the internet burst onto the scene, the sound of platform dependence was in the air, so MS made the best damn browser out there and installed a whole bunch of "extras" - like activex - that would ensure people would still need to use windows (or the browser that only runs on windows).
Now that they have market share (esp in business) all they have to do is ensure they have enough "platform dependence" going forward to keep browsers like firefox, and companies like google on the outside...
It's getting harder and harder to do, but only time will tell if they continue to be successful.
One thing to note - in the end it says this:
Attention, il est important de noter que cette étude a été effectuée sur un week-end, où l'utilisation de Firefox est toujours plus importante qu'en semaine. La différence demeure importante entre les usages domicile et les usages au bureau (2 à 3 points en moyenne).
Which roughly means, if my french skills haven't yet totally dissapeared, that the study was made in the weekened, which slighly slants the study because Firefox is more used at people's homes than at work. But the last sentence says the difference between Firefox @ home and @ work is only of 2 or 3%, on average.
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
Yay, and 110% by Jan 2014! That's some serious market share. :)
has supportive gov'ts, and a smaller "aol crowd".
The US is another story altogether.
It will take six months for firefox to make the changes needed to work with Longhorn. In that time every Longhorn user will go back to IE, because there is no way to use longhorn without IE, the usage of Firefox will drop from 40% to 20%. And even though security will be terrible, because the user will not know if they are in a secure zone. Computer techs are free to install other browsers, but that will not help as the user will actually have to start the browser, rather than just using what is already on the desktop.
By the time MS is once again convicted to anti trust behavior in 2013, Firefox will be down to 5%, and MS will have had most Firefox developers sent to jail for treason against the holy capitalist deity. MS will have to donate Longhorn to every school in the country, which will hammer the final nail into the coffin of the non-MS rebellion.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
A few years ago I wrote the Doctor Snuggles website. Interestingly in stats taken over the last month Microsoft only have 62.8%.
MSIE 6.x - 10774 sessions - (60.2% of all sessions)
Netscape Gecko - 4029 sessions - (22.5% of all sessions)
Robot - 918 sessions - (5.1% of all sessions)
Unknown - 552 sessions - (3.1% of all sessions)
MSIE 5.x - 459 sessions - (2.6% of all sessions)
Opera 7.x - 406 sessions - (2.3% of all sessions)
Mozilla Compatible 4.x - 228 sessions - (1.3% of all sessions)
Opera 8.x - 207 sessions - (1.2% of all sessions)
Netscape 7.x - 136 sessions - (0.8% of all sessions)
Mozilla Compatible 3.x - 56 sessions - (0.3% of all sessions)
Pardon my ignorance, but are these statistics significant enough to warrant attention? What is the margin of error?
Although its always nice to see that our favorite browser is gaining market share, these trends may very well be temporary. We should be careful not to get overconfident, nor should we underestimate Microsoft's ability to squash competition (not always through innovation). They managed to exterminate Netscape, they could be able to kill off Firefox too. I seriously doubt that firefox will ever hold the majority of the market, as Microsoft insists on bundling IE and making it "a neccessary component of the operating system"
Nice to see that a group of enthusiasts is having success, isn't it? After all this is how it all started.
That would only happen if IE7 never comes out.
Specifically, it means that the BoingBoing audience is not representative of the total web-browsing population, and that BoingBoing statistics therefore cannot be used to demonstrate broad conclusions about browser market share.
They "bother" with it because the reason that Windows is so popular is that a developer can, incredibly easily, use any of the functionality in IE, Media Player, etc. I know that when I write an app that needs web access, I use IE COM objects.... I don't know if Firefox even has any exposed COM objects.
Is it really fair to call it market share, when firefox isn't something that's on the market, but rather free... and you can't go by shares of the Mozilla Organization. There's no market or shares.
http://illhostit.com/ - Webhosting
"Shrank" by less than 1%
I use only firefox, but its cunts like the submitter that would drive me back to IE in a heartbeat.
Go on, tell me, how much did Windows "shrink" this week?
Mwahahahahah - if this is the best you can do on a weekend night I suggest you go and have a feel of your mom while shes passed out......
i.e. people use just IE.
Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
Well, so when will it get to 200%? That would be a real achievement.
Oh well, what the hell...
You should make your script print out more than just a line or two. more like an entire crapflood.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Has anyone else noticed that more and more sites are cropping up that "penalize" users that use IE? Note that I'm not talking about a site that refuses to support css hacks or throws up a "please upgrade" javascript window -- I'm talking about deliberately serving out degraded pages when it detects you are using IE (or refusing to show anything at all). Here are two examples
Stuff and Nonsense, A an otherwise good design/usability blog, Uses javascript to swap turn all images black and white, displays graphic that reads "Internet Explorer 2 old, Stomp to a Betta Browser" (God I hate bloggers sometimes)
Played to death, pretentious online video game zine, uses javascript to redirect users to a "Sorry IE User" page.
What kills me is that when you turn off javascript, the pages display & behave either identically or pretty damn close to Firefox. So it's not IE completely borks the rendering, or cant handle fancy DOM/Javascript tricks... they just dont want you to look to look at degraded content because they dont like IE.
Obviously these are niche sites, but I've seen this cropping up more and more. I hate IE about as much as any other web developer (though thankfully I stay mostly on the server side), but isn't this the same exact crap that sites did back in the day with the custom Netscape 2 tags, and the crap Microsoft pulled (and occasionally still pulls) circa IE4?
A lot of people, especially business users, don't have much choice other than IE. For me, I use IE for printing because Firefox ends up cropping stuff out half the time regardless of how much I futz with the page setup options.
I've heard the argument that such tactics are necessary to force users (and Microsoft) to take web standards seriously. I find this not only condescending and heavy-handed, but also counter-productive: Isn't the whole idea with web standards is that you want to make the web as inclusive as possible? Sometimes people's ideology gets in the way of their ideology.
...but in mine the whole company has come to find tabbed browsing a absolutely necessary productivity boost and replacement for having 12 windows of Internet Explorer wasting space on the task bar.
The fact that it is able to block ads and flash popups via the AdBlock and FlashGot extensions is icing on the cake.
Anyone have a form e-mail for companies that choose to make IE only web sites? I've replied to a couple of these companies without a whole lot of success. Not thinking that one e-mail will make much of a difference, but thinking that maybe someone has written one more persuasively than I did...
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Microsoft has fairly recently released a toolbar for IE that includes tabbed browsing and Desktop search. I've been a dedicated Firefox user for the last few years, but I can tell that the stats are going to shift back towards IE really fast when IE 7 is released with many commonly-used Firefox/Opera/etc features integrated, especially if MS releases it for XP too.
Firefox has increased its market share every month between 0.5 percent and 1 percent, mostly at the expense of IE. This means Firefox would cross the 10% market share by October."
And by this logic, it will have 105% market share by 2021 at the latest.
That will rock!
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
In like 10 years Firefox should have 130% market share!
I wonder when Slashdot incorported the "change penis to MARKETSHARE" filter....
The only way to get Firefox to 25% is to keep broastcasting about it as often and as loudly as possible. The more often it's written about, the more people will hear about it, look it up, download and install it, and eventually get us to 25%+.
Either you aren't in the United States or they have changed the way they teach history. The Americans think they won the war. They are (the last time I checked) blissfully unaware of the number of casualties suffered by the Soviets. Could the war have been won without the USSR? Probably but it would have taken a lot longer.
Actually, the Americans, Brits and Canadians had quite good equipment although the German high command didn't seem to think so (they were wrong). Technology in the form of radar may have prevented the Germans from invading England. The western allies sure didn't have enough men to sacrifice any.
I have played a wargame involving the major tank battle between the Soviets and Germans. I always took the German side and I have never found a way to win it. The technology just didn't seem to provide that much advantage. I must say that my opponents (in the case of this particular battle) didn't have to sacrifice many tanks to win.
On the other hand, a friend's father was in the German army on the eastern front. He said that they would aim their machine guns level in the morning and by evening they would have to elevate them on account of the pile of bodies in front of them.
Its a pity firefox is such an usuable POS on a slower computer. Its very much IO bound, even to memory: try running on an "old" pentium 2 with 66 mhz ram. It doesnt scale well at all; start adding tabs and it goes slower and slower, converging very rapidly on unsuable.
On the other hand, both IE and opera remain respectably speedy.
Firefox was supposed to be a cut down slimmed up version of mozilla. Instead I've found ti to have little configurability (wihtou a horde of plugins), to be inconsiderately slow, and worst off to have hideous scalability problems. I'm one of those jerks web developers hate: I install netscape 4.7 on new computers. Why? Because in my experience it works better. Firefox is bloat.
I seriously hope open source has something better up their sleeves for those of us who dont feel web browsing requires 1 Ghz+ and 512 MB ram.
Myren
As if anyone care, the Internet bandwidth utilization will be lower by more than the same percentage that Firefox captured in marketshare.
On the client side, Firefox, as a default, utilizes gzip/deflate over HTTP. Internet Explodrer cannot.
On the server side; IIS, as a default (never mind their latest server technology), does not promote easy to use compression of their web content and is usually not utilized fully, or at all. Apache provides for easy to use compression and in some distros, is offered as a default. Savvy webmasters do and should take full advantage to speed their end-users' surfing experience.
If you do the probability matrix math, the bandwidth saving gain is rather significant.
Firefox is getting to the point that even though it is still first generation browser, administrators of large networks like those at universities are taking note of it's speed, sturdiness, and ability to resist malware.
People are sick of malware, and their authors are increasingly using search engines to cast a wide net. It is not hard to get snagged while searching for popular subjects like mp3s or porn - many of the sites that manage to get their rankings up on these topics use activex installers for malware, or even worse, IE exploits, on their pages. These exploits sometimes install apps without any explicit user notification, though sometimes excess hard drive activity can be noticed while these things are sneaking in.
Even users with machines that are patched against exploits often let activex installers for malware in. This is because IE requests permission to run privileged code through a popup dialogue that demands a response. The problem is that sites often present pop up dialogues for more mundane things, like disclaimers and verification of site-specific information. Clicking no or cancel usually results in something not working, and users have become habituated to clicking yes. So why ask an unfamiliar security question using the same mechanism? The answer is poor identification with users, and an inconsiderate eagerness to "innovate". Both must go hand in hand though.
Firefox doesn't support ActiveX out of the box, but even once it is added, privileged code requests are handled differently. A simple notification that a control on the page doesn't have security permission to execute is overlayed at the top of the web site, and can be safely ignored. The simple message and consistency of purpose in the format lets users easily infer that when they are granting serious privileges. Popups for less privileged contexts, ignorable notifications that default to saftey for critical ones - how clever and innovative! Even better, it is rare that the advertised purpose of a site spreading malware is hindered by ignoring Firefox's notification message, though that may change as it picks up steam. Still though, users will be more aware of when they are granting wider authority.
The tough part with increasing adoption though, is that most users today don't make the browser-malware inference; identifying that the malware that keeps slowing and crashing their machines often stems from a simple page visit and/or dialogue box response. They look towards more overtly dangerous things, like explicit downloads via email attachment or website.
Firefox's notification model and its pending adoption by numerous sysadmins will change that. A critical mass of users will be forced to acknowledge the changes, and so should be more inclined to adopt them at home - through increased familiarity, and by authoritative association of that other browser with the familiar and frustrating ailment of malware.
IE 7.5 will then be forced to acknowledge the state of user experience before offering its own XPerience. Either that or MS will just mimick what it can of the Firefox recipe and rely on it's monopoly to propogate. I wonder which.
At my day job, I'm trying out the AWStats log file analyzer. Its a fairly large e commerce site, so that's about 3 gigs of access logs per day.
IE usage is about 10%
Firefox is about 4.8%
Other Mozilla/Netscape/Camino family browsers are about 2 %
Safari is about 1%
Opera is less common than WebTV! [on par with phone browsers]
Caution: Do not stare into laser with remaining eye.
You really think that 20% of the web-browsing population is going to upgrade to Longhorn within six months? Based on the minimum specs I've seen bandied about for Longhorn, my guess is that most people will only "upgrade" as part of buying a new computer... which means that it will be at least several years before a significant number of people are running Longhorn. After all, the PC market is fairly saturated, and I think most people will just "stick with what works" until their current system dies.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Don't kill me, but I am using AOL Explorer (http://beta.aol.com/aolbrowser) and it is the best tabbed browser out there.
Firefox is nice, but I do not trust sites really support them.
AOL Explorer uses IE, which I know will work.
I am sold.
...for the eight people that actually buy Longhorn on release.
Seriosuly though, how much market share is Longhorn going to have even a year later? It will be large, but probably 20% of the market. So Firefox has a chance to catch up even if Microsoft does what you say...
However I think your scenario rather unlikley given there will be an open Longhorn beta soon. You don't think Firefox people will be compiling against that ASAP? It would take more effort than even Microsoft would bother with to make sure just that one app does not run in a way that couldn't be worked around in a week. And on top of that if the browser is as integrated into the OS as you say - people may not be able to find it, and use Firefox just to have a browser they can launch instead of one that lives here and there in your explorer windows.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I reg'd firefox3.com a while ago, and I hope they can use the firefox name for a few more years!
/No I'm not domain name squatting. It's going to be a firefox related site!
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
Bundling Firefox mostly mean providing outdated unsecure versions of Firefox wchich would void most of saving costs on support or security issues.
As it is usualy done at ISPs (for example):
- Managment says : Ok, lets provide Firefox on our setup CD.
- Let choose current stable version
- Spend some time vaidating the product
- Eventually go into a customization process (profile presets for homepage, bookmarks, logo, (skins?).
- Package it
- Revalidate if it is still ok
- Burn prepress master CDR
- Wait till the old stock of setup CD will go down or we realy need an updated version of our own setup program.
- Sent the CDR to Pressed CD factory
Let's say 4 to 6 weeks gone on all the process.
Customers gain at leat a 6 weeks old version on CD when it's just out in stores.
Let's estimate the CD stock lifetime is 3 months and more. If we need no change in our own setup tools there is no motivation in going into the validation process for a new version of the bundled Firefox. So, until that, the same master CD may be used for new setup CD stock.
Customers tend to get very outdated versions of Firefox. (3 to 12 months old)
At the current state with Firefox there is no clean/easy way it can update automatically online while keeping customizations you made, unless you invest on enginering service and custom repository and update service.
The idea sound good at first but when you look at what's involved. It is not so.
Léa Gris
I run a website (http://www.christiannerds.com) that's supposed to teach computer basics to people who don't know much about computers at all.
Anyway, we've got IE down to like 79% now. Guess it sorta' goes to show you that if you actually WANT to learn about computers, you're alot more likely to choose Firefox (15%) or Mozilla (3%).
Luke
I seriously hope open source has something better up their sleeves for those of us who dont feel web browsing requires 1 Ghz+ and 512 MB ram.
I'm going to assume that that's a sarcastic exaggeration... If not, you're an idiot. Right now, I'm posting from my seven year old, 333 MHz, 256 MB RAM computer, with seven tabs open in Firefox... and everything is running smoothly. I also frequently use another old computer... 233 MHz and 128 MB RAM. Runs perfectly.
Admittedly, my computers aren't quite as old as your 66 mhz machine, but honestly, the percentage of people using 10+ year old computers (rough estimate) is tiny. The line has to be drawn somewhere... I mean, should I be upset that there's no version of Firefox that will run on my old Apple II?
Maybe he doesn't care about the politics, and he really does just want the best browser. That's what I want at least.
I don't know if it works on really ancient systems--a 486, for example--but I've used Firefox on a p2 laptop with 128MB of ram and (aside from the initial load time, which is nigh ) it still outperformed IE. It crashed less, too.
We could put it on our keyboards too, we just need to get rid of ^.
The Longhorn GUI will be based on IE, meaning that there will be zero difference between finding a directory and typing in a website.
... how, exactly? explorer.exe == iexplore.exe, and has been since Windows 98, iirc.
As opposed to the current situation with Windows
Not so encouraging though :(
1% for B2B sites and almost 4% for B2C
(Source)
Pfffft. Engage in hyperbole much?
Know of any skins to make firefox look superficially like IE?
Let me guess, you are in marketing?
Firefox will get 10% market share, and then Microsoft will release Internet Explorer 7 and promptly send it back to the single digits again. Firefox is great for Linux users, but between Safari (on Mac)s, Internet Explorer (on Windows), and Opera (everywhere else), you should forget about it ever being a player on the consumer desktop.
I have seen these numbers and predictions before about something else. Wonder what ever happened to it.
Now I remember.......
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/15/02452Fat chicks need love, too. But they gotta pay. - Quagmire
Well, thought the place I work at have blocked firefox for 2-3 months now, after a lot of pressure from the developement community of the office, they will mostly install it back - at least for the IT people.
But this has more to do with the strength of certain FF extensions like Webdeveloper Tool etc than the security provided by Firefox! Now this is something new, and if this trend continues elsewhere, FF can gain some more share - if not for its own strength, than on the strength of its extensions!!
I submitted this article from MSNBC (was rejected last week) the most interesting part is it calims that Firefox and other browsers are now at 18% of all adult US users. This was a random phone survey with a margin of error of 2%. I think it is some of the best data on the penetration of alternative browsers and something people could use to back up decisions to not just support IE. 20% if the market is not an amount that can be ignored.
/. won't take.
PS if you think you've seen this comment before, i posted it once already. It's a good article with pretty hard stats on Firefox and other's market share that
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
WHOA! Most faulty!
Since there are 60% Windows 2000 out there, and 11% Windows 98SE too!
Your Longhorn will at best put a 1% dent in the first year (or whats left of a year).
Not enough to stop the steady but absolutely sure eroding slide of Internet Explod^Hrer's market share.
The only way out the Microsoft conudrum is to FIX INTERNET EXPLORER right the first time, on all Windows platforms (oh, and Mac as well; Oh, didn't IE appear on Sun/OS?).
Any economist can tell you that when your infrastructure is eroding due to lack of maintenance, it will REACH the point of no-return due to inaction.
Larger the infrastructure or user-installed base, the larger the inertia of motion required to change the tide. Me think, this is what occurred to IE.
On my little webserver, IE has been steadily decreasing in share and for the first time it is less than 70% at 65.1%. Firefox has 18.6%.
Personally I'd love to see IE go down a lot in market share if only to stop websites that are IE only. You should be able to view any website with any browser!
RebateFX.com - Spread rebates for Forex traders
So I guess I'm responsible for converting a few non-technical users. I urge the rest of you to try to do the same for people you know with malware problems. People will switch in a second when they personally have a good reason to do it.
"But still, word."
Errr, what are you trying to say?
Ruby is a pretty much insignificant language and only popular with a certain marginal group, so I would expect these kinds of stats.
This means that only 8.71% of people that use computers are intelligent.
the adblock feature alone is worth the switch!
Would it be possible to set up a script that would, after a specified interval of time, change the logos and skins to something more firefoxey?
If so, add that in and ring up your client just before it goes into action. Tell them that IEx is rebranding itself - it's now called Firefox - but not to worry, the main difference is that it looks prettier. Given that they've presumably already got the hang of the workings of Firefox, this shouldn't be too much of a struggle for them to accept.
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
Not to put too fine a point on it, but I've been serving up gzipped content for a REALLY long time... let's see... I remember that the app I originally deployed it for was running under NS4/IE4, and those were the latest browsers at the time...
IIRC, NS and IE used different Content-Encoding mime types. I think one was "x-gzip" and the other was "gzip". But really, this has been supported *forever*. I don't understand why something like mod_gzip isn't built right into Apache (1.3 -- haven't changed to 2.x yet, so if it's there, I wouldn't know).
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
http://www.webhits.de/deutsch/index.shtml?webstats .html
hard to take seriously people who don't have the slightest idea of what significant digits means
Too bad I couldn't post this in time:( I've been waiting for a Firefox story so that I could ask this. I started using Firefox a few years ago - and found it to be perfect since it was better than IE and much faster than Mozilla. Recently, I upgraded to Firefox 1.0.4 on my Gentoo Linux system running kernel 2.6.12 and since then, I've found a marked degradation in performance - to the extent that it's actually quite annoying. Multi-second freezes with multiple tags have become quite common, and there's a real lag between typing a phrase and seeing it appear in the google toolbar. I tried the pre-compiled version as well as compiling it from the sources and got the same results. So my question is - are there other Firefox users who've experienced the same problem?
I hope that this is either a local problem on my system - or a temporary one that'll go away with the next version. If not, we might see those market figures rebounding a little (for one, I'll change back to Opera).
"firecow"=transformer, not battery recharger
The word for "fire" is used, but in this context it means "voltage". I have been assuming that the "cow" part refers to the fact that a transformer (which used to be much larger than they are nowadays) was a large object that made a low-pitched humming sound reminiscent of a moo. In any case "cow" is often the nickname for large implements or tools. So, a "voltage tool".
I'm sure there are non-English speakers who find it odd that the English word for mushroom is literally "mushroom".
404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
[GPG key in journal]
If MS gets its way, the browser will become merely a window that runs the thick client. http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/10/31/43NNpdc_ 1.html
...contract system administrator at a large DoD facility. Users are calling me right and left, complaining about pop-ups this and slow browser performance that (due to toolbars that use domains that don't resolve or try to phone home to places blocked by proxies).
At one point, this guy (a MSgt.) needs to download macromedia shockwave so that he can complete some required training.
I start using firefox to just keep the basket cases productive. Bamb... no more pop-ups. Boom, shockwave installed and training delivered to the end user. People start getting the picture and load Firefox on their own.
One month later, the CS (comm. sqdn.) community, issues a TCNO stating that Firefox is not autorized on their NIPRNet. Now I'm confused. Do they want a more secure network or do they just want to be microsoft whores? Mean while, a few of the users get smart and start using stelth firefox installs completely bypassing the logon script that detects Firefox... and I ask myself again, do they want a secure network or one in which the users how to work around their stupidity? I chuckle to myself, "yeah, those pre-public release patches are sure helping the situation", as I surf out to downloads.microsoft.com to download MS05-0XX because the patch issued by base comm. doesn't load on blog-standard microsoft desktops (XP or 2k).
Some times you've just got to realize that you're riding a loosing horse. As long as as it has bleeding strap marks on its hindquarters upon being last across the finish line, you'll be OK, secure in the knowledge that you have unriveled job security, but slightly unbalanced due to the fact that your workload, job and life suck directly because you are forced to use Microsoft products.
I'm eating mushrooms right now!
And in a mush room! however the cleaning lady will arrive any time now
Webhits: 11.6% Firefox (17.8% Mozilla)
Spiegel ONLINE: 30.15% Firefox
Heise Online: 40.6% Firefox (49.2% Gecko)
Stop reporting this every 0.5 increase in damn fox share.
How many times are we going to report till end of year? Not that I believe fox is going to take over world anytime soon.
Btw, by the look of usability, there are bunch of good IE wrappers works more convenient than fox, yes I know about fox extention, but even with them, I'm sure Sleipnir can't be beaten by far.