Firefox Slides, IE Gains?

limber writes "InformationWeek is reporting that a Dutch Web metrics company is stating that Microsoft's Internet Explorer has gained market share, contrary to other recent studies, while Firefox has lost market share, during the last two months. 'People are not switching so often to Firefox as before,' said Niels Brinkman, co-founder of OneStat."

Comments

In Other News

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot viewers are slipping against other sites, prompting the editors to post more articles about Firefox vs. IE in a hope to gain eyeballs.

Statistics....

[garrett714]

I'm so sick of statistics. Who really cares whether IE or Firefox has more market share? Even if Firefox has .005% market share, and IE has 99.999% market share, I will continue to use Firefox. If 99.999% of the world jumped off a bridge, would you do the same thing?

Re:Statistics....

[hoborocks]

I'd be sick of statistics too, if all of mine ended up adding to 100.04%... =P

But seriously, yeah, statistics don't mean much.

Re:Statistics....

[HolyCrapSCOsux]

If 99.999% of the people jumped off a bridge, I wouldn't need to.
Now the ecological ramifications of all that biomass decaying at the same time.... I wonder if any enviroterrorists have calculated that one yet....

Re:Statistics....

[Firehed]

I've only had it happen once in the last six months or so, and that was on a definaly *ahem* questionable site (and no, not pr0n), and certainly not one that would be condoned by the mozilla team. The point certainly remains that the higher the market share, the more targeted it becomes (unless it's just hackers trying to prove a point, and trying to get everyone to switch, which I highly doubt).

Of course, my solution is that if sites are spewing popups, they're not worth my time. If they won't work properly (or at least well enough) in FF, screw it. If they make their popup code so intrusive that it can get around Adblock, I'm certainly not only not coming back but giving them a +1 on the shitlist. Any sites with those intro ad pages are a no-no. Streaming video where I have to watch commercials first? Why the hell do you think I stopped watching TV? We all know damn well that the only reason popups are still around are because you get that .1% of dickheads that still click on them. I think it's safe to assume that the population of firefox users who intentionally click on popup ads is zero (it's entirely why I switched, though certainly not entirely why I stayed). While advertisers know that the only people they need to code for are IE users, it makes my web browsing experience better.

The wording seemed a bit questionable too. Slower growth != decline. The article mentions both, but considering I'd really think that browswer penetration can't be accurately measured, I'd take changes of a couple tenths of a percent of change with a grain of salt.

And of course, it was the same when FF first came out. Huge boom of everyone wanting to try it out. Some loved it and stayed. Some (somehow, imo) didn't, and went back. Huge increase at first, slower increase later as people told their friends or whatever. I'd imagine it's exactly the same with the IE7 stuffs as of recent. Come back in a month and see how the numbers look. Better yet, come back when people realize that sites that can't be bothered code in a way that accounts for a good percentage of their userbase aren't worth going to. Perhaps with Internet2 or IPv6 or something, there'll be something where "if isfuckedup($site.code) { hide($site); }" in the new protocols or whatever. I honestly don't even check my sites for IE compatibility - I code to standards, and if the most dominant browswer won't adhere to them, then it certainly shouldn't be the most dominant browser.

Just ponder what the percentages would look like if IE wasn't preinstalled, let alone integrated into the damned shell of the operating system. If it wasn't "well, it's already here, I'll use this one," I'd honestly expect IE to only have 30% market share at max, most of which is from "it's by the same people that made windows, it has to be good!"

Re:Statistics....

[misleb]

But seriously, yeah, statistics don't mean much.

That is only true %66.7 of the time.

-matthew

Re:Statistics....

[menacing_cheese]

60% of the time, statistics works every time.

Re:Statistics....

[diegocgteleline.es]

are you serious?

Firefox is _the_ reason why many pages work today with other browser others than iE. Plus, if microsoft controls the browser market, it controls a big part of the internet. RSS? standars? CSS? We need firefox to keep microsoft away from controlling people like they've done in the desktop market....

Re:Statistics....

[malraid]

you forgot to take into account that Opera has a negative market share.

Re:Statistics....

[mcrbids]

Who really cares whether IE or Firefox has more market share?

Web developers. Like anybody else, they don't want to have to work any harder than they have to. When IE has > 95% marketshare, you end up with stupid things like checks for browser ID string, and then displaying a "You must upgrade [sic] to IE X.0 or better to use this site". They would have every motivation to use Microsoft specific HTML extensions, and your lovely Firefox browser slips into irrelevance and uselessness as a result.

By having an alternative browser commanding a significant percentage (Say, 10% or more) of the user marketplace, there's enough incentive to lay off the MS-specific stuff, and write stuff intended to work with documented standards - so your [Firefox, Mozilla, Konqueror, Spyglass, Opera] browser has a decent chance to remain relevant and useful.

So, in short, you should care.

Re:Statistics....

[smokestacklightning]

The only stats impacting my life are the % of CPU and Physical Memory the latest FireFox release is hogging/whoring on my system ...

FP

[42Penguins]

Do we really need an update every 2 weeks of the status of FF vs. IE?
I love my phoe-firebird/fox/something, but that's my choice.

Alternatively, could slash include a ticker on the frontpage?

What's the cause?

[omeg]

What I'm interested in is the CAUSE of such numbers. Why do people switch to Firefox or, like in this case, favor Internet Explorer? Is it the new Internet Explorer 7.0 beta? Maybe it's just that important governmental issues are coming up which allow people to check out sites about them that only work with Internet Explorer. Are there any known reasons out there?

Re:What's the cause?

[Anonymous Coward]

I work at CompUSA in the tech department, and having dealt with numerous customers, I'd say one major reason many users (who don't specifically need IE for web based "apps") don't switch to Firefox/Mozilla/etc is because of a combination of two factors (1) they haven't even heard of it (much less the security concerns IE brings about that exist minimally in Firefox), and (2) many people equate the "e" icon on their desktop AS the Internet as opposed to a browser. Yeah, it may seem funny to us /.ers, but it is true more often than not for the average computer user. MS has made that little "e" icon synonomous with the Internet in their minds. I can't begin to list the number of times a customer has said "When I click on the Internet..." referring to IE's little "e" icon.

- RobM
Tech Lead
CompUSA #531

Re:What's the cause?

[okmnji]

You want to know the cause of the numbers?

Ok, how about this; every day, there are a lot of computers sold. A large percentage of these computers have Windows XP pre-installed. All the computers with Windows XP installed have IE. I have not yet seen any computer that had XP pre-installed that also had Firefox pre-installed. I know it pains you, but computers sold with desktop Linux just aren't that popular among the general population; they want their Play-skool Windows, with the nice big 'e' that says 'Internet'. There are also a lot of corporate/education products that require ActiveX controls, and thus IE. For those two reasons alone, I doubt Firefox will ever break 20% share of the "browser market" among the general population.

Speaking of which, why does everyone talk about it as "market share"? Last I checked, it's been a decade since any major browser other than Opera was not free (as in beer). The only real advantage to "market share" that I see is, the browser maker gets to set the initial default homepage...

And thus shall it always be

[TFGeditor]

I suspect Firefox et al will always ride a +/- 2 percent sinewave with IE displaying a similar leading edge ripple. Rolls Royce and Ferrari do not think or speak in terms of "market share." They have a core following that will always remain, and will always be small. The masses will always drive Chevys, Toyotas, or whatever.

Re:And thus shall it always be

[superyanthrax]

However, the problem with that is that Rolls Royces are made and designed for a small group of people (the very rich) but Firefox is supposed to be for mass consumption. One of the main purposes of FF is to make the internet a better place, b/c so many unscrupulous vendors are using adware/spyware/worms/viruses to take advantage of the security holes present in IE, and converting to FF will eliminate many of those holes. If the vast majority don't use IE then FF has failed in this very important purpose.

Re:And thus shall it always be

[ClosedSource]

Well, I think the point is to be careful about one's analogies. If the analogy writer gets to narrowly interpret the analogy to support his point, it's not very illuminating.

The fact is that some people really like FF much better than IE, but comparing FF to a fine car and IE to a crappy one is just another way of saying you really like FF better. No additional information has been added via the analogy.

Seamonkey

[strcmp]

Could it be that everyone using Firefox switched to Seamonkey?

Re:Seamonkey

[The-Bus]

It is possible that some Firefox users, like me, have stopped using the internet altogether.

School's in, SUCKA

[Brunellus]

...which means that all those new computer sold to students are using IE. Not all those students are migrating to FF.

Every new computer that runs Windows is a new IE user. Not so for Firefox or any other browser. Nothing to see here. Move on.

Re:School's in, SUCKA

[evil agent]

My university has instructed all students to switch to firefox.

Re:School's in, SUCKA

[RalphSleigh]

Except the Dells in the UK that come with firefox preinstalled...

Maybe, maybe not.

[gasmonso]

Many regular users of Firefox like myself are forced to use IE for some things like Launchcast and many other nonFF friendly sites. Also, many people employ FF extensions like IE Tab to use IE within FF. Of course, this may also have something to do with the IE 7.0 beta usage.

http://religiousfreaks.com/

I love Firefox...

[JMZero]

But I'll admit I've slowed down on my evangelism.. Honestly, Firefox seems to perform worse now for me than it did at .9 (or so). It's getting to be fairly regular that I see the "Firefox is already running - go kill the process" dialog. It's getting to be fairly regular that I see All-In-One Gestures in wacky mode where it's building a huge string while I don't have the button down (and then usually crashing). It's a little annoying, too, that the association with QuickTime (for playing .WAVs or .MP3s) doesn't ever "just work". I was thinking about writing a little game based on the Canvas object - but when it came to adding sound in a manner that was going to work for people I just gave up.

Maybe I've just had bad luck, but Firefox seems bigger, slower and less stable than it did a year ago - and I can't think of any added feature that I've cared about during that same period.

Re:I love Firefox...

[larry bagina]

I agree. firefox is my primary browser, but I've started using Opera a lot more. Since 1.5, FF crashes 4-5 times a day, not counting how many times I need to kill the process manually.

Last time I dared mention that, I was told that FF is perfect, it's probably just a buggy extension, which may be true, but if the extensions I like (adblock plus, html tidy, and web developer) don't work, I might as well use Opera or IE.

Re:I love Firefox...

[rjstanford]

I had this experience on Windows. Ya know what? I'm using IE for most of my regular browsing. I'm even using it right now. It doesn't crash, it supports all of my plugins, and I've never really been a huge fan of tabs (at times, yes, but mostly I ignore them). I don't click on random executables, I don't install arbitrary ActiveX controls, and I've never been infected... IE, like XP, is pretty much "good enough," for a whole slew of people who just want to render them some HTML.

Who f*cking cares?

[undeadly]

It's a nice browser, so why don't you just use without beeing "concerned" that your neighbour and the cat uses it as well.

Not real gain

[imoou]

I think it's more a case of more new PC purchases during the Christmas/New Year periods, that's why IE (preinstalled with most new PCs) "gained" some market share.

I can't imagine anyone would actively download and install IE, so unlike Firefox, IE's gain is not a real gain, but a side effect of its parent -- Windows.

Look at the story icons

[tomhudson]

One for firefox, one for IE, and a red stapler - the editors' way of saying that they're doing a Troll Tuesday article on the readers.

Its a bit more subtle than posting "this story from the YHB[TT] YFI HAND department"

Hey, be kind!

[jd]

I think it very important if 99% of the world's population jumped off a bridge. For a start, the tsunami might damage my Internet connection.

Now, if you were to talk about 99% of Internet Explorer die-hards jumping off a bridge, that would be another matter. I'd even be willing to help them look for a suitable bridge.

The browser distribution does matter, however. At the present time, many sites are IE-specific and will not function under Firefox, SeaMonkey or Konqueror. I do not accept the argument that to be good, browser-specific code must be used. Nor do I accept the argument that nobody can test on all the browsers in use - that is why we have standards. And I definitely don't accept the argument that you'd design for the browser most in use, because a good design will work just as well on IE as a specific design, it'll just work everywhere else too.

Think global and long-term, not just next-cube-down and next-week.

Very normal with such high novice user rate

[stikves]

It's sad, but it's expected.

Firefox, Opera, etc (and even avantbrowser) for advanced users only. Nowadays it's considered "difficult" to install software by clicking "next, next, next".

Do not get me wrong. It's not that Firefox is not user friendly or easier to use, however there are so many "PC users" below "novice" level which will disable an antivirus if they're unable to open an infected file. And there are many "system admins", (which are in charge of internet cafes or school labs) who only knows how to install Windows and Office (and probably from "recovery CDs"). Times are different now.

(Previously everybody not only knew what every file in their C:\DOS and C:\WINDOWS were for, they could also program in at least in one language).

We cannot expect any more growth until PC users are more educated.

Re:Very normal with such high novice user rate

[wwahammy]

I'm not sure why tech-savvy people expect all others to know their computer inside and out. PC users will not become significantly more educated because in all honesty why should they need to? Computers are just a tool, a complex tool but still a tool.

People dont' get a computer cuz they want to run Firefox or Office (at least most don't); they do it because they want to check stocks, read the news, talk to family members world wide, share photos and videos, type letters, etc. A lot people on here give Microsoft a ton of crap for lots of good reasons ( and lots of bad ones) but Microsoft seems to have gotten something that seemingly not a lot of people in the tech world haven't. People have computers to complete tasks and to make those tasks easier; anything that makes those tasks harder is useless for a huge portion of the population.

While we all here want people to be safer and we can make some progress on that front, in some sense its not going to happen until computer become much more fool proof. Blame Microsoft for not getting that accomplished if anything.

Re:Very normal with such high novice user rate

[el_womble]

Because computes are a tool and ALL tools require a certain amount of training.

Now do they need to know when and how to implement a radix sort? No. In the same way as I don't need to know how to do and oil change, or tune the engine in my car. But I am expected to fill it up myself and check the tyre pressure, maybe even fill the screen wash. I'm also obligated to drive safely, and act with courtesy towards other road users and pedestrians.

It doesn't even need to be as complicated as a car for this analogy to work.

Take a sledgehammer. You don't need any formal training, or a license to operate it. You do have to be strong enough to lift it, and look halfway responsible when you buy it (more than a computer). In the right hands a sledgehammer is a wonderful tool that can be used in a variety of different ways. In the wrong hands it can be used to destroy your house and kill people. The difference between a computer and a sledgehammer is that when a sledgehammer is used by a moron, its the moron that gets blamed.

Its not even like there arn't equivalents to viruses and malware. Sledghammers are suseptable to variety of attacks: fungal wood rot, rust, termites. Still, if a moron gets hurt, or does damage with a damaged sledgehammer its the morons fault.

This is why nerds think that people who use computers should have at least a basic understand of how they work, before they use them. Computers are tools, and tools need training and care if they are to be used without damaging the operator and those around them.

Well, of course!

[Hikaru79]

Haven't you guys heard? The new IE7 beta has such revolutionary features as Popup Blockers, and even Tabbed Browsing! Of course Firefox can't compete. They'll have to come to their senses if they want to lead the pack.

They're right

[Feanturi]

People are not switching so often to Firefox

Yeah I never switch to Firefox anymore, once was enough. The same is true for most of the people I know using it. Something about switching to it that first time, they never switch to it again, I wonder what causes that. For awhile I tried downloading it from mozilla.org every time I wanted to surf, but that got tedious rapidly. I'm sorry I guess I'm just not doing my part. Hey I know, I could load up IE then close it, then load Firefox again, would that count as another switch? I promise to do it more often if it will help.

Skewed data?

[lostboy2]

Hmmm... OneStat is a company that provides website analysis for a fee. According to the blurb about their enterprise service,

To track visitors you have to implement a small piece of javascript in your HTML pages. This browser-based tagging method is proven to be the most reliable and effective way of tracking your visitors. Measurements are based on IP number, cookie and browser string.

Each day thousands of new IP addresses are added to OneStat's growing database which is based on 2,3 million IP ranges. Nowhere else you can achieve such an accurate picture of where your business visitors are coming from.

So that would suggest that their statistics only count people who visit their customers' websites. I don't think I'd count that as a complete, objective picture of the Internet as a whole. Plus, whether or not you accept cookies from a site might skew their data further. [For the record, I use Firefox and only accept cookies when I have to].

Every time you buy a Wintel box

[WillAffleckUW]

you get counted as buying IE.

Every time you download Firefox, you get counted as "buying" Firefox.

Of course:

1. if you have twenty boxen like we do, you only download Firefox once and then roll it onto each boxen internally - 20 copies, one download.

2. if you stop using IE on your laptop and use Firefox, noone REDUCES the count of IE users by one, they only INCREASE the count of Firefox users. Thus, IE will always have more users, since they never LOSE them when you switch to Firefox or Opera.

Skewed data? Adblocked users not counted

[WillAffleckUW]

To track visitors you have to implement a small piece of javascript in your HTML pages.

So, if I use Adblocker to block the javascript - which I do for most ad sites unless it's a poll or something I need - then they aren't counting you AT ALL when you use Firefox, since you blocked their ads and their popups.

Bundle Extensions with Firefox

[Omega1045]

There are four reasons I like Firefox better than IE:

1) Its faster,
2) Tabbed browsing,
3) Adblock,
4) More secure.

Items 1 & 4 are difficult to present to new users. Item 2 is also in IE7. Item 3 does not come standard with Firefox.

In addition to Adblock, there are several other really great extensions that make Firefox the browser for me. I use other extensions to sync my bookmarks between computers, provide thumbnails of all open tabs (available in IE7), and to more tightly lock-down pop-ups and javascript.

What Firefox needs is a bundle that includes several "essential" extensions pre-installed. As MS plays catch-up with where Firefox was a year ago, the Mozilla Foundation could stay way ahead bundling these great tools. The average user is not going to go out and find these free additions on their own. By adding only a couple of MBs for the initial download, I bet you could bundle several great extensions and market the additional functionality.

Re:Bundle Extensions with Firefox

[Yahweh Doesn't Exist]

my reason for using firefox was adblock, but now I have safariblock so use safari.

the thing that made me delete firefox was realising how it managed passwords. as far as I can tell you have 2 options:
1. you passwords are free for everyone to see by looking in the preferences (secured only by a "are you sure?" box), or
2. you must enter a master password every time you start a new session.

this is absolutely insane. I guess it's because firefox isn't OS-integrated so can't use OS-protection such as Keychain to keep passwords safe.

1.5 wasn't so good.

[Eric Coleman]

if anything, I'm an old school netscape fanboy. My first browser was Lynx, then I eventually jumped on the bandwagon and got netscape 3, then eventually moved on to long lasting netscape 4.x series. Netscape 6 sucked so I stayed with netscape 4.x during that time. I eventually starting using the Mozilla suite pre 1.0 after stumbling upon it. The lack of AOL branding at the time was a major reason for my jump from Netscape proper. Since then I've been using Mozilla, then Phoneix, then Firebird, then eventually Firefox. When 1.5 came out, it really sucked major ass for me. FF1.5 would crash at least 7 to 10 times per day. I'm fairly computer savy and I followed explicit instructions on making sure it was a clean install. I was browsing with hardly any extensions at all, which sucked.

There have been other major changes behind the scenes that might not be so apparent to the average user. In my attempts to create an extension for FF1.5 extension contest I came accross a shitload of bugs. Very simple XUL markup could make the browser disappear by simply clicking on a hyperlink. And by disappear I mean as in invisibile, except for plain text. And there are others, but my attempts at using Bugzilla have sucked. I've reported bugs in the past only to have them recently deleted because no one want's to fix them.

OSS is fine, but it seems to foster a mentality that if a developer can't reproduce a bug then the end user must be stupid. That's annoying, especially for a company that's marketing its browser to everyone, including urging people that don't know what a browser even is to upgrade.

The feeling I've gotten from this open source netscape project is that I'm using a product, such that if it ever gives me serious problems, I'm left with no recourse since there is no focused method for attaining a definitive solution or fix for something. It's like the bystander effect when it comes to fixing or even acknowleding problems.

Re:1.5 wasn't so good.

[dtfinch]

You can try the 1.5.0.1 nightlies, which are supposed to contain a lot of crash fixes and other major bugfixes. http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nig htly/latest-mozilla1.8.0/

I used to get occasional crashes starting with the Deer Park builds before it was called 1.5, but they seemed to go away completely after I installed the flashblock extension and disabled java. Lots of flash ads across several tabs is a recipe for disaster. There's still a Linux-only tab dragging bug (drag doesn't end when button is released) that annoys me in 1.5, but I feel it beats the a Linux-only performance bug that annoyed me in 1.0.

Yes

[cowboy76Spain]

I mean, if 99.999% of the world jumps off a bridge, the corpses should be at least at the height of the bridge, so it should not be a hard fall. And then you can examine the bodies of those who jumped before searching for money, jewels and i-pods.

Maybe a little off-topic, but so I am too.

First of all, stop saying "boxen", its really...

[voxel]

annoying.

Secondly, they count browser usage based on network traffic, not based on number of downloads/PC's sold.

RTFA.

Re:Blame where it belongs.

[Anonymous Coward]

Windoze

It's "Windows" but you called it "Windoze", how cute.

Microsoft sabotages the better programs on it's platform

Please go ahead and provide some proof that Microsoft is sabotaging Firefox. Please, I'm sure every single Slashdot reader would like to get their hands on that kind of evidence. Really, you need to provide some proof of what you just said. Thanks.

you need to change your evangelism to platform migration

"Evangelism" - is that your term for making insane, ridiculous claims about "Windoze" and "M$"?

There's enough to take Microsoft to task without people like you "helping" those of us who are working for broader acceptance of free software. Thanks, but no thanks.

Firefox is the most unstable program in common use

[Futurepower(R)]

It's an ugly fact, but Firefox is the most unstable program in common use. For me, that's ugly because it is my favorite browser. Perhaps people get tired of the crashing and CPU hogging, and have moved to Opera, which has no stability problems that I'm able to detect.

The CPU and memory hogging bug in Firefox 1.5 is well known. In two extensive articles, Information Week reports that opening and closing many Firefox windows and tabs causes crashes and CPU and memory hogging. That kind of heavy user often sees Firefox consuming 99% CPU while idle and/or more than 400 Megabytes. See Firefox 1.5: Not Ready For Prime Time? and Firefox 1.5 Stability Problems? Readers And Mozilla Respond.

The bug seems to be due to insufficient allocation of resources inside Firefox, such as inadequate stack space. Those who use a browser to do extensive research, for example, are likely to have more windows and tabs open than the average user. Apparently Firefox developers did not plan for that.

The bug has been reported to Bugzilla, and is very easy to reproduce (see below), but Firefox developers have marked it invalid because there is not enough specific information! The bug has existed in Firefox for more than 2 years, and several people report that it is worse in Firefox 1.5. Firefox's Bugzilla does not allow direct links from Slashdot, so copy and paste Bugzilla URLs into a new tab. Remove the space:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=131 456
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=222 660

See comments #48 and #49 of bug 222660 for an example of the symptoms under Windows XP. A typical Windows Task Manager screen shot attached to comment #49 shows the "I/O Other Bytes" increasing by 20K/second with no program activity. At that point, the bug was not yet showing the worst symptoms.

The huge memory use, and 94% CPU use or more with no activity, normally occur after opening and closing many Firefox windows and tabs, as happens when researching something on the internet over a period of hours or days. The bug symptoms are worse after putting the computer on standby or after hibernating. My experience has been that the memory and CPU hogging always occur together, so they appear to be the same bug. However, the CPU hogging symptom takes longer to appear. If the computer has perhaps 256 Megabytes of memory, the most obvious symptom at the beginning is hard disk thrashing.

You can demonstrate the memory use problem quickly by loading and closing the following large web page into multiple Firefox tabs a few times:
http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_mono/ libc.html. To see the memory and CPU percentage used in Windows, right-click on the Taskbar and choose Task Manager. Choose the Processes tab.This demonstrates one aspect of the bug, but is not representative of big occuring in normal use, since that web page is huge.

Maybe the only solution is for a developer who knows the code to reproduce the problem and see what causes it. It is not clear to me why they are unwilling to do so. This bug seems especially interesting to me. It is likely that fixing this bug will fix other issues. It is likely that fixing this bug will make it easier to work on the Firefox code.

The bug has often been reported on Slashdot. Here are a few examples:
" >http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=169676&cid=14 143632
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=168683&cid=140 62501
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=168683&cid=140 62671

Obligatory Sony Rootkit Joke

[tclark]

Maybe we could get Sony to include it on some new CD's...

Gatta love those double standards

[Spiffness]

Nothing quite like a 'Firefox Gains!' story. 100's of replies about how awesome firefox is.

A 'Firefox slips this month' story and what do you get? 'GOD STOP TELLING ME WHATS UP WITH FIREFOX ALL THE TIME I DONT CARE'

Hmmmm...

Re:Firefox is the most unstable program in common

[sootman]

"Those who use a browser to do extensive research, for example, are likely to have more windows and tabs open than the average user."

Not to mention people who look at pron. Note to Mozilla: must fix!!!!!11one :-)

Easy solution

[thepotoo]

Phase 1: Install Firefox
Phase 2: Right click FF icon --> properties --> change icon --> select IE icon
Phase 3: Delete old IE Icon from desktop
Phase 4: Rename Mozilla Firefox icon to Internet Explorer

Before you mod this funny, I have done this to at least half a dozen people's computers. They arn't smart enough to realize the difference (all they need is an address bar and bookmarks), so FF stays. Their computers get less spyware, they see less popups, I get less "OMG HELP ME" calls. Which brings me to Phase 5, which is profit.

AOL

[uptoeleven]

The girlfriend was concerned when I used "Internet Explorer" to do windows update. "That's not the internet, I'm with AOL"
Patiently explained that the browser wasn't the internet, just used to view it and browse it. Hence being called a browser.

Haven't tried explaining why Firefox should be used instead. Something along the lines of "well, whenever you use IE, likely as not a load of hackers can look at what you're doing"

"So why do you use IE for windowsupdate"

erm...

Re:Firefox is the most unstable program in common

[slavemowgli]

You raise a good point. I hate to say it (no, really, I do), but Firefox - and Mozilla in general - is a piece of crap. I'm using the monolithic Mozilla suite (tried Firefox, but didn't like it), and it crashes or locks up on my pretty much daily; and when it doesn't, it typically eats about 200 to 300 MB of RAM, unless I close it every day (which is possible, of course, but inconvenient).

I have filed bugs in the past for crashes, too - those few cases where I could actually work out a consistent trigger condition. Nothing ever happened, though; the bugs were auto-closed in the end since no developer had ever done even so much as acknowledge them. I do understand that the developers are swamped, of course, but don't CRASHES deserve a bit more attention?

I'm seriously considering switching to Opera. About the only things that still holds me back are AdBlock, and the fact that I'm used to Mozilla and generally find Opera a bit unwieldy.

Maybe I should give Sleipnir a try...

Actually

[halcyon1234]

Actually, this is just a dupe of an article posted five months ago.

Edit: Upon further inspection, that article seems to refer to a completely different market slide by Firefox.

Edit to the edit: Upon even further inspection, it seems that there were about six articles between that one and this one saying that Firefox has gained marketshare. Now I'm confused.

Edit to the edit of the edit: Yet another further inspection reveals that there is no consistant definition of "gain", "loss", "market" or "marketshare" amongst all the articles, making them appear to be completely unrelated, unreliable, and possible questionable, if not outright self serving. But this is Slashdot, so that can't be.

Final edit: Upon yet another even further again inspection, I've come to a conclusion. Fuck it.

PS To The Final Edit: I just reread my own posting, and realized that I did explicitly point out that this is Slashdot. I had almost forgot that! So, I'm editing the post to that fact.

All Your Base Are Belong To Firefox! After all, oonly old people use IE! In soviet russia, my new beowolf cluster of Web Browser overlords welcome me.

Re:Firefox is the most unstable program in common

[Jeff DeMaagd]

It's an ugly fact, but Firefox is the most unstable program in common use.

Ever heard of Windows?

The old Windows versions were bad, but when using WHQL drivers, the only time I had stability problems with Windows NT, 2000 or XP was with failing or faulty hardware. I suppose in all fairness, there are probably more copies of 98 or ME in use than there are of the entire Firefox installed base.

Yeah, Well I Got Another Client Interested

[Master of Transhuman]

after going through yet another marathon spyware cleaning yesterday and today.

Goddam Spystrike and a dozen or two other trojans...

The Spystrike bitch is just that - people everywhere, according to various spyware Web sites, are having one hell of a time getting rid of that one. New variants every other day and almost no antispyware or antivirus vendor is up to speed on it yet; estimates are it's infecting 2,500 PCs an hour. Rides in on various conventional trojans, then is extremely hard to get rid of without specific knowledge of how - and even then.

I had to use a special removal tool, plus a-squared, Ewido, SpybotS&D, spywareblaster, Windows antispyware, a repair install, SFC, and one hell of a lot of reboots to get rid of this fucker.

Somebody find the fuckwads who put this one out - I got something for their asses - and Bill's.

OTOH, I made some money out of it, so maybe I love those guys...

But look at the big picture

[mattbrundage]

More or less comprehensive Firefox marketshare metadata

Software is winner-take-all

[JBMesserly]

Software tends to be winner-take-all: whoever has the most market share ultimately wins. That's why people care so much about these statistics.

For proprietary software, this tends to be because whoever has the most users has the most profit, since development costs are fixed (economists call this "sunk costs"). Therefore, the market share leader can invest in more marketing and product development, getting more users (virtuous circle) and eventually edge out the competition, winning the market.

Sometimes network effects play a role, too: it makes sense to use what everyone else is using, because then your software will be compatible with theirs. The more people that use it, the more value it has to you--which, incidently, is why people often advocate the software that they use. Advocating your favorite piece of software may be a completely rational thing to do!

I'm not entirely sure how this works for Free software that is distributed gratis, like Firefox. But I can guess. Assume some percentage of the total number of users will be contributers to the project: bug writers, documentation contributers, software developers, artists, philanthropists, corportate sponsors, etc. Then, it follows that having more users will lead to more contributors, and ultimately a higher quality product. Thus, Free software is also winner-take-all.

Posting statistics

[Ximok]

I have decided to become a reliable source of statistical information and post the results from the webserver logs on my internal webserver. I have decided that this audience is an appropriate representation of the world's population and will thus announce that 50% of the world uses IE 5.0 Mac on OS 9, 30% uses Firefox (PC or Mac) and 10% uses Safari for Mac, and 10% use IE for PC.

There, you have it. The world predominantly uses IE. From the results of my INTRANET server, I have decided that Africa holds 12% of the users on the world, China a good 132.452324%, Canada is at -.4123%, and the USA takes the head with 4005.2342% of the users. You do the math.

Now that I have trolled, I'm going to get to my point. Who cares what X company says the current statistic is. If I cared enough, I'd ask for the results from Slashdot, Digg, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, and a few other companies and throw it together. Otherwise, I'd assume that the stat is BOGUS!

In other news...

[Yuioup]

... Internet Explorer BETA 2 is released to the public.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/IE/ie7/ie7betared irect.mspx

Y

Another study, saying otherwise.

[boule75]

For those interrested in these over-debated subject, may I point out to another study, that has been conducted for months with the same methodology? It says the contrary: Firefox still gaining market share, more than 20% market share indeed in Europe.

By Xiti

Regards.

Re:Uninstall Adblock and try again.

[jschrod]

But Firefox without extensions, in its basic version, is useless for any but the most casual usage. Since Firefox gives so much problems, I stopped recommending it to others.

Oh yes, and on Linux you need a GNOME environment or must turn over backwards just to change fonts, C-q doesn't work, Shift-Button1 doesn't work, too many preferences are hidden, etc.pp.

The firefox developers think they know better than their users what a good program is. Well, I had to discover that this means I'm not among their target audience. I check it out again from time to time to see if something has changed; but no. I suppose I'll try SeaMonkey and see what they are up to.

Firefox needs approved extensions.

[Futurepower(R)]

Firefox needs approved extensions.

The fact is, Mozilla.org heavily advertises the existence of extensions. Then, when you have problems with them, blames the problems on the user or the extensions author. Not even the author thinks that recent versions of Adblock Plus actually have worked well. Here are the recent bugs:

Detailed changelog for Adblock Plus 0.6.0.4, released on January 21, 2006:

• Fixed: "Not loaded" in the status bar on startup and context menu resetting to default (dropping compatibily with Mozilla Suite before 1.7 and Firefox before 0.9 for that reason)
• Added an icon to the toolbar (Firefox only, can be moved/removed via standard "Customize" dialog)
• Added an option to hide "Adblock" in the status bar
• Added an option to block ads in local pages (for compatibility with Sage)
• Made whitelist filters apply to both whole pages and individual items
• Made "Disable on site" add more specific filters
• Preferences dialog: Parts of the "Options" menu moved into the new "Filters" menu and the context menu
• Preferences dialog: Made "Options" menu apply changes immediately and not when "OK" was pressed
• Preferences dialog: Made menu items to disable whenever necessary
• Added "Adblock Link" to the context menu (if "Check banner links" is enabled)
• Many minor changes

It's the old Mozilla baloney: "Oh yes, it didn't work before, but NOW it works."