Firefox Usage Climbing

Firefox is yet another OSS victory! by hackstraw · 2006-07-12 01:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

Netscape was good, or at lest the best of the day. It ran on every obscure platform under the sun. It was like java before even java. Runs and is able to be debugged and crashed everywhere.

I've heard from Netscape developers that the highlight was when they realized they were _the_ browser for the web, and they were seeing web addresses (complete with the http:/// part on them) on the side of trucks and all that. I also heard that the secretary is quite wealthy now due to stock options, the whole nine yards.

Well, they stagnated. And IE came and IMNSHO, ruined the web experience in the late 90s to early 00s. And during that time Netscape released their code into the Mozilla project. It then got worse. AOL bought Netscape, and Netscape is just a memory.

But then, guess what happened?

Because of the open code and open standards, we got the web back! My browser of choice is Safari. I really like it. It does almost 100% of what I think a browser should do. And it too is based on open standards and OSS (KHTML), and Apple has given patches back to the KHTML people.

And then Mozilla grew into Firefox, and things are getting better on the web again. I recently ran into two websites that required IE. One was for my taxes, and I told them that sure this time I can use IE on the Mac, but IE on the Mac is dead and if they want my business, they need to support standards. At work, there is one system that requires IE _on windows_, and we had to get a new computer, with windows just to view one website, and I had a word or two with them. And guess what? They told me that they are now targeting Firefox as the target browser, and for that to be cross platform.

Hey, as sucky as IE was, it did help the scene a little bit. It focused the other guys to care about security and for standards compliance, and today I have a number of good choices for browsing the web on a number of platforms, and its getting better every day.

Thank you Mozilla team, and thank you Microsoft.

Re:Firefox is yet another OSS victory! by MtViewGuy · 2006-07-12 02:29 · Score: 3, Insightful

Actually, what make Firefox pretty good is that the vast majority of web sites render correctly under this browser, which was not true of many previous non-IE web browsers. That plus the fact the basic download is only around 4.5 MB helps, too.
Re:Firefox is yet another OSS victory! by Just+Some+Guy · 2006-07-12 07:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

Actually, what make Firefox pretty good is that the vast majority of web sites render correctly under this browser

Correction: all of them render correctly, and if they don't, it deserves a bug report.
However, "correctly" may not be the same as "what the designer thought they were making" due to a seemingly infinite number of bugs and incompatibilities in IE's render engine. If a designer used a hypothetical "<splitscreenthreeways>" tag, IE splits the screen four ways, but Firefox only splits it the correct three ways, then the bug is in IE for rendering it wrong in the first place even if the designer liked the end result. It's not Firefox's fault if it does The Right Thing but generates ugly output.
Fortunately, the upswing in non-IE browsers means that designers pretty much have to write good code now, which is especially nice for those of us using relatively rare browsers like Konqueror and Opera. Thanks, Firefox, for creating the tide that's also lifting our little ships!

--
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?

Work by bilbravo · 2006-07-12 01:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

That number might be higher (for /. users), but some may do a bit of viewing while at work. Some employers do not allow Firefox for some reason.

--
Starmen.net

slashdot vs digg by Anonymous Coward · 2006-07-12 01:27 · Score: 0, Insightful

mod me as a troll if you'd like, but slashdot readers have been asking for slashdot stats for years, now because slashdot's traffic has decreased (due to digg) they're giving out some webstats?
Comon slashdot, give us a full URL to webalizer!

Re:slashdot vs digg by mikeisme77 · 2006-07-12 01:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

I wasn't aware Slashdot's traffic was decreasing, just that Digg's was increasing. Personally, I look at them both. Digg I look at for more recent stories--the conversations tend to be at a very low intellectual level (high school or lower). Slashdot, while there are quite a few really dumb comments, still has quite a few "field experts" browsing and commenting on stories, which is why I read Slashdot. I spend maybe 2 min. on Digg with each visit (glance at the stories--open the ones I'm interested in and then close the Digg tab); while I spend at least 10-15 min. each time I go to Slashdot glancing through the conversations (from stories that interested me) for intelligent/interesting comments. I will say that I like the fact that I can post a blog entry to Digg and only get 10 diggs, but get 60+ readers for a blog entry that would have only gotten maybe 3 reads (MacBook and OS X Review...
As for the web statistics, these were only posted because they're relevant to the story about increased Firefox usage. I want to try the 2.0 Beta, but last time I tried a Firefox beta I couldn't use any of my extensions and I therefore wasn't able to use Firefox in the way I like using Firefox (since without the extensions its only an okay browser). I don't know if I'll switch to Firefox 2.0 when it comes out though, as currently I'm really fond of Opera 9.

--
Read my blog posts on usability.

One problem... by Mr.+Underbridge · 2006-07-12 01:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

...One could also say that MS has gone *six years* without updating their browser, and Firefox is only at 16%. I mean, I'm as happy as anyone. I'm using it now. But I really see that market share getting cut in half within 2 years of IE7 coming out. MS just won't put up with this, and when you can put your product on every PC that's sold, and the competition can't, you don't have to be great to win.

Re:One problem... by Anonymous Coward · 2006-07-12 02:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

True, 6 years of MS stagnation and only 16% doesn't sound too impressive on paper, but you have to remember how thoroughly entrenched IE has been (and still is to some extent). Look at how many people there are now on the web compared to even just 6 years ago - it's grown massively and as new users come online with their MS configured OS with bundled IE, that's bound to skew the figures slightly more in IE's favour. The fact that FF growth has not only held its own but has increased during that time is pretty impressive in light of this.

Also realise that small incremental gains now can become huge gains later. Remember, most of that initial 5-10% would have been made up of the typical /. crowd who know enough about security and standards to appreciate FF and to ignore the fact that, in the past, many websites were configured to work properly only in IE.

Now FF is up to 16%, this shows it's getting through to a growing chunk of not-so-tech-savvy users. This will have a big knock-on effect as they tell their friends and family about FF and word spreads.

Couple this with an increased awareness of the need for cross-browser compatible, standards-based websites meaning fewer and fewer site owners refuse to support anything but IE. Now there is not so much incentive to use IE over FF as your main browser of choice, this will add to the spread stil further (the number of times I heard people complain about FF in the past due to poorly implemented IE-only websites - a fault of the sites themselves not the browser - used to be huge, now it's negligible).

Another factor is that companies can no longer say FF users are too small a minority to properly support - at 5-8% maybe they could afford to turn away those visitors. It's unlikely they're going to do so for 16% of all their visitors (and if they do, they're fools). This will mean more of the big sites supporting FF and, again, fewer disappointed people blaming the browser for the deficiencies of the website.

These are exciting times for this little OSS browser, and it can't be a coincidence that IE have chosen now to go back to IE and have a major revision (and, yeah, maybe poach all the best bits from FF while they're at it). It seems someone is finally getting worried in Gatesville.
Re:One problem... by Nadsat · 2006-07-12 02:43 · Score: 3, Insightful

I don't think it will drop in half. People are burnt out on the company, as it has lost its reputation and the trust of its users.

Aside from that, Microsoft isn't particuraly innovative anymore, and I doubt that their latest browser will shock and awe net users.

--

The Custom Mary
Re:One problem... by tobiasly · 2006-07-12 02:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

A local entrepeneur... was distributing for free a CD with FireFox, Open Office, SpyBot, Gimp and Trillian.... he said he passes out about 200 CD's a day on Saturday and Sunday.... seems like a good way to make a bit of $$$ for a kid, and at the same time help spread the love

Not to rain on your rose-colored parade, but I bet 180 of those 200 CDs go straight to the trash or sit on a shelf and never get looked at again. Of the remaining 20, maybe half of those result in any one of those apps being actually being installed and maybe half of that end up being used on a regular basis. Maybe one of them actually sends the kid some money, but I think I'm being a bit generous with my numbers here.

Passing out CDs, Spread Firefox campaigns, NYT ads etc. are all great, but they can't compete with pre-installed, default software. People just don't have the inclination to try this stuff out and are too scared to fundamentally change the way their computer works. They don't connect the fact that their computer runs 10x worse than when they got it to the fact that they're using a horribly flawed web browser. Malware is something that "just happens" when you use the Internets.

The only way Firefox can continue to grow its market share is by OEMs installing it and setting it as the default. Maybe Google can help some in this arena to spend some cash to get OEMs to install Firefox (with Google homepage of course). Of course I'm not saying anything that Mitchel Baker et. al. don't already know, and my fingers are crossed that we'll continue to see such wins for Firefox in the future.
Re:One problem... by misleb · 2006-07-12 02:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

In 2 years XP will still be the the majority of Windows installations. You'd have to wait longer than that for Vista and IE7 to have a real impact on Firefox. And we don't really know how the security of Vista + IE7 will pan out. I'd say it is too early to tell when IE7 will do to Firefox.

-matthew

--
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
Re:One problem... by ejp1082 · 2006-07-12 05:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Plus, there's Google to consider, which is pushing Firefox hard, and will presumably continue to push it hard. I don't think that IE7 will be the default on every Vista computer, thanks to whatever deals they cut with Dell and other manufacturers. Considering that Firefox doesn't come by default anywhere now - I can only see it's share going up once it is the default on a fraction of new computers.

Thank you ... Microsoft? by QuaintRealist · 2006-07-12 01:45 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's easy to forget that not too long ago I was waiting for the latest upgrade to IE, downloading and installing it manually, because it was the best browser out there. I appreciate the efforts of the developers, too.

But I can't thank Microsoft. Because they quit trying to be the best and tried instead to lock out and eliminate competition, through means familiar enough to everybody here that I'm not going to repeat them.

And I don't think I'm just saying "what have they done for me lately" - Microsoft's war on the competition went some way towards undoing the good things that came from their competition with Netscape.

I agree with you, otherwise (for whatever that's worth). Just a thought

--
Using plain ol' text since 1968

Re:Upgrade? by lspd · 2006-07-12 01:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

I think they're referring to people like me who still run 1.0.7 and need to upgrade to 1.5.0.4.

The results are probably skewed by people like me who use the version of Firefox that came with their distro. I'm using Debian Stable with Firefox 1.0.4

Re:More Data by xtracto · 2006-07-12 01:46 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yes and no.

I agree with that but in the other had, the 85% of the population that doesnt use firefox already have a computer and are using another browser. The aim would be to get marketshare from IE who is the one that has an uneven marketshare.

How to do that? well, you have to convince the people that is using them to migrate to firefox. As another person wrote one of the ways to convince them is showing the advantages Fx has compared to IE6. On that note, you should show the people what Fx can do right now, for example the ad blocking, tabbed browsing, the live bookmarks, spell checking etc. Some of these properties are achieved using extensions, but please dont just say "firefox has extensions that allow you to make things you can not do with other browsers". Just tell the people what firefox can do (including extensions).

And then, the chance for this mass migration posibility is almost gone, because when Microsoft releases IE7, people will see it as an update. They will update their current program and they may not buy into all the bells and whistles that firefox provides

--
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'

Re:I wonder... by Jane_Dozey · 2006-07-12 01:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yes we will, and I hope that it does. The more people finding holes the more the devs can fix. I'm thinking though, that the sheer volume of problems won't be as bad as IE as it's not stupidly tied into the OS.

I could be wrong mind you :)

--
Silly rabbit

Re:Fire who? by dhasenan · 2006-07-12 02:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

Nah, they'll just get annoyed that their computer is slow. They don't link their behavior with the computer's state unless the relationship is clear and immediate. Programmers and techies are used to that sort of thinking, but then, they already use Firefox for the most part.

Re:I prefer Mozilla, not Firefox by FreeBSDbigot · 2006-07-12 02:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

I don't find Ctrl+ or Ctrl- a couple of times to be all that awkward.

--
Orange whip? Orange whip? Three orange whips.

Extensions by ZachPruckowski · 2006-07-12 02:19 · Score: 4, Insightful

We need a Windows version with some of the extensions pre-bundled. Set up the AdBlock and Spell Checking, and dispatch that version. That way it consists of Download -> Install -> Doubleclick -> Browsing!!

Re:Safari Adventure Club by Anonymous Coward · 2006-07-12 02:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

when we can code to one standard -- Firefox -- and have it work everywhere.
You've got that backwards that should be "when we can code to one standard -- W3C compliance -- and have it work everywhere. At the very least that should be your startingpoint. Having everyone code for firefox isn't really that much better to having everyone code to IE

Work by CMan0 · 2006-07-12 02:32 · Score: 3, Insightful

Remember that some people still use I.E. at work and have FireFox at home. So probably there are more firefox users that 65% in the /. crowd

Makes Sense by Petersko · 2006-07-12 03:04 · Score: 2, Insightful

"Thats interesting, I used IE for a long time, started using Firefox a couple years ago and found it to be a very easy transition, my wife uses Opera and I could just never get into that interface."

Guess that's why ice cream comes in flavours other than vanilla.

I respect Firefox for bringing a viable alternative to market, even if I don't use the product.

18% of our Firefox users need to upgrade by eck06 · 2006-07-12 03:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

I bet a good portion of that 18% is users using a linux distro release that has an aged version of firefox from the package manager.

Re:Safari Adventure Club by JWW · 2006-07-12 03:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

Speaking of Apple and browsers. What I find truly amazing is that on my iMac I have _five_ different browsers installed (none of which is IE). Now mind you some of them share quite a bit of code (camino, firefox) but still the amount of activity and innovation going on with browsers is amazing. Amazing everywhere that is except at Microsoft. IE exists and has always existed for the sole purpose of locking people into Microsoft products. It was Microsoft's best reaponse to regain control after the world wide web broke out.

You always have to remember that when the web became big, it wasn't where MS wanted the fuure to be. In fact the delays on the way to IE7 are all about MS not wanting the web to be the future either. Microsoft fears open standards and systems like the plague. Embrace, extend, extinguish exist soley for the purpose of trying to defeat open standards.

Its good to see MS losing ground on this battle in the browser space and hopefully ODF will help them lose it in the document space.

You always have to remember that if in the 90's Microsoft could have in any way caused the web to not exist they would have done anything to make it so. But the best they could do was try to monopolize the market with _their_ browser.

Go Firefox!

Re:Safari Adventure Club by poot_rootbeer · 2006-07-12 03:12 · Score: 4, Insightful

Safari pisses me off though because lack of design mode is a major flaw, but one that is obviously fixable.

I don't have a bathtub in my kitchen. It would be very easy to hire a plumber to have one installed, but I won't. Why not? Because a bathtub does not belong in a kitchen.

Apple doesn't seem to be of the opinion that it's appropriate for a web BROWSING application to incorporate the features of a web AUTHORING tool. I find this to be a reasonable design decision, even if I don't particularly agree with it.

Firefox is not going to replace IE by MasaMuneCyrus · 2006-07-12 03:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

Everyone seems to be hoping that Firefox will replace IE... I just don't see that happening.

I'm a happy user of Firefox. I use Firefox because it does things that IE doesn't, and I really like the ability to customize it to how I like. The thing is, though, that for most casual web users, IE does suit their needs. They want a browser that can browse the web and will keep them safe. IE6 isn't the safest browser in the world, but IE7 will definitely be safe. IE will continue to be the dominating web browser because A.) companies will use it because it's easier to use the built-in browser, and it should be just as safe as Firefox B.) Casual users don't need anything more.

I think the future will have IE and Firefox co-existing (and Opera!) because IE is what the normal people will use and Firefox/Opera will be what the expert web-users use. It's the same reason most people still use Windows Media Player. I use Winamp because of plugins/customization, but most people just want to use what works, and since they don't want any more functionality than that, they have no reason to change.

Re:Safari Adventure Club by Geoffreyerffoeg · 2006-07-12 04:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

And until recently iChat didn't support auto-replies because of some asinine theory that a messaging PRESENCE application does not need to handle the AWAY situation. Somewhere in my comment history is an Apple dev replying to me that they won't ever support it because it's not a chatting feature. Same with buddy profiles - it's chatting, not hosting profiles!

They support it now. Someone finally realized that if they're going to make an AIM client, they'd better support almost all of the AIM featureset. I suspect the same thing will happen with Safari once Writely and co. get popular. Your personal philosophy does not override a published standard.

27 of 443 comments (clear)