Slashdot Mirror


Is IE Usage Share Collapsing?

je ne sais quoi writes "Net Applications normally releases its statistics for browser and operating system usage share on the first of every month. This month, however, the data has not shown up — only a cryptic message stating they are reviewing the data for inexplicable statistical variations and that it will be available soon. Larry Dignan at ZDNet has a blog post that might explain what is happening: Statcounter has released some data that shows a precipitous drop in IE browser use in North America, to the benefit of Firefox, Safari, and Chrome. At the end of May, StatCounter shows IE usage share (for versions 6, 7, and 8 combined) at around 64%; at the beginning of June it is now about 56% — an astounding 8% drop in one month. We should keep in mind the difficulties in estimating browser usage share: this could very well be a change in how browsers report themselves, or some other statistical anomaly. So it will probably be healthy to remain skeptical until trend this is confirmed by other organizations. Have any of you seen drops in IE usage share for Web-sites you administer?"

575 comments

  1. typo in summary by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hi there, submitter here. I left a typographical error in the summary. "in the beginning of June" should read "in the beginning of July". Oops, sorry about that.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    1. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No problem, Noone reads the summary.

    2. Re:typo in summary by snl2587 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who is this Noone fellow?

    3. Re:typo in summary by alexborges · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Who?

      --
      NO SIG
    4. Re:typo in summary by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Funny
      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    5. Re:typo in summary by gparent · · Score: 1

      What summary? Is there anything past the headline? Must be those new Javascript changes...

    6. Re:typo in summary by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's a summary now?

      I was making do with the first eight characters of the headlines.

      So, in response to "Is IE Us", I'll have to say no. No it isn't.

      --
      Blearf. Blearf, I say.
    7. Re:typo in summary by WebManWalking · · Score: 5, Funny

      You must mean Peter Noone of Herman's Hermits. "I'm MSIE the 8th I am. MSIE the 8th I am, I am. I got bested by the browser next door. We've been tryin' 7 times before. And everyone was an MSIE. We wouldn't pass an AcidTest, no ma'am. I'm the User Agent MSIE, MSIE the 8th I am, I am. MSIE the 8th I am."

    8. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of his cow-orkers.

    9. Re:typo in summary by philbert2.71828 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Who is this Noone fellow?

      I wish I had mod points. The parent's post is pretty well on topic. My first reaction to the grandparent's post was that "Noone" was an intentional typo, since it was replying to a post about a typo. Now I'm not so sure.

      OK, now I'm replying to a post about a typo that was in another post about a typo. I hope my post doesn't have any typos...

    10. Re:typo in summary by ocularDeathRay · · Score: 5, Funny

      you read the headlines? I just read the tags and try to guess what headline would have caused them.

      --
      Obama is a twitter sock puppet
    11. Re:typo in summary by terraformer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Linux PC: $400 Monthly Internet fee: $50 You finally get a lead story published on /. and it has a typo: Priceless

      --
      Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
    12. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I wish I had mod points. The parent's post is pretty well on topic. My first reaction to the grandparent's post was that "Noone" was an intentional typo, since it was replying to a post about a typo. Now I'm not so sure.

      OK, now I'm replying to a post about a typo that was in another post about a typo. I hope my post doesn't have any typos...

      I counted 6 including the subject.

    13. Re:typo in summary by iluvcapra · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Noone is a she, and she married anyone in a pretty how town (with up so floating may bells down)

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    14. Re:typo in summary by nine-times · · Score: 5, Funny

      You read the tags? I just blindly comment without even reading the post I'm replying to.

    15. Re:typo in summary by ocularDeathRay · · Score: 5, Funny

      then how the hell did you know I read the tags? you must be a good guesser

      --
      Obama is a twitter sock puppet
    16. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure if this is relevant, because I don't actually read the post that I reply to. But, yes, in fact, I am feeling fine today.

    17. Re:typo in summary by benjymouse · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Who is this Noone fellow?

      Apparently, he is some moron who actually reads the summaries. Go figure.

      --
      Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    18. Re:typo in summary by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cousin of Anonymous Cowardon.

    19. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      I don't know. THIRD BASE!!!

    20. Re:typo in summary by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Funny

      Something tells me you're into something good.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    21. Re:typo in summary by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      I always thought that was the name of the guy who built Data. Wasn't it? Dr. Noone Young Sung?

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    22. Re:typo in summary by nine-times · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, ocularDeathRay, not exactly. I'm not a good guesser at all.

      Though it may at times seem like I'm responding to other people's posts-- like where you mention that I knew he read the tags-- I assure you that all of my posts are just random rants without any attention paid to the posts I'm responding to. If the response seems appropriate, it's just a wild coincidence. And yes, Linux is awesome.

      See! I just said "Linux is awesome" even though that's completely irrelevant to what we're talking about. Why would I even say that until I had no idea what we were talking about? I bet you feel silly now.

    23. Re:typo in summary by should_be_linear · · Score: 1

      I read only md5 hash of Slashdot rss feed.

      --
      839*929
    24. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    25. Re:typo in summary by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 5, Funny

      You read the web page? I just drink a fifth of Jack, bang on the keyboard, and let the moderators sort it out.

    26. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod up, this is fun!!!!

      tags=mozilla,msie,typo,firefox,operaunite,tech,msie,story

      it's like a word puzzle

      a techy wants mozilla and opera users to unite and read his story with numerous typos that spreads stretches of the truth about msie. as a side note, completely irrelevant to the story, msie is still #1 in browser usage

    27. Re:typo in summary by nsayer · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      And you try and tell that to the young people of today, and they won't believe you!

    28. Re:typo in summary by w0mprat · · Score: 5, Funny

      You comment? I use a slashdot posting form.

      Slashdot Posting Form v0.1
      Please select all that apply:
      ....
      [ ] IANAL but ____
      [ ] XKCD link : ___
      [ ] Bash quote: ____
      [ ] There, fixed that for you
      [ ] In soviet russia the _____'s YOU
      [ ] sudo _____ > /dev/null
      [ ] Get off my lawn
      ....
      [ ] Cory Doctrow
      [ ] Al gore
      [ ] Natalie Portman
      ....

      a.k.a. checkbox humour

      --
      After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    29. Re:typo in summary by boaworm · · Score: 2, Informative

      I always thought that was the name of the guy who built Data. Wasn't it? Dr. Noone Young Sung?

      Doctor Noonien Soong

      --
      Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
      Aristotele
    30. Re:typo in summary by ozbird · · Score: 1

      And "Firerox" - or is that Debian's latest branding for Firefox?

    31. Re:typo in summary by ais523 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Actually, there's a complex algorithm which looks at people's random comments, and then attaches them to posts where they apparently make sense. It's amazing what modern AI can do to construct what looks like a coherent discussion out of ramblings made at 4am. (It's also responsible for appending [NO CARRIER] and submitting when the connection inexplicably breaks down in the middle of a post.)

      --
      (1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
    32. Re:typo in summary by miknix · · Score: 1

      I read summaries and I can tell that this particular one is FUD.

      I use IE8 regularly and it works just fine it doesn't cra½@£r!# [no carrier]

    33. Re:typo in summary by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I always thought that was the name of the guy who built Data. Wasn't it? Dr. Noone Young Sung?

      Doctor Noonien Soong

      Doctor who?

    34. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Something tells me you're into something good.

      You're revealing both your age and your bad taste in music in one sentence.

      I, on the other hand, post anonymously to avoid the same fate...

    35. Re:typo in summary by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      Oh, I thought you were going to say "vor versions 6, 7..." is the typo. Well, I guess that is an attempt at some fake-Dutch-speak humor then... sorry for missing that! ;)

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    36. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe we both like starbucks and money. We should hang out more often.

    37. Re:typo in summary by Decameron81 · · Score: 1

      You read the parent? I have no clue if you did since I didn't even read your post...

      --
      diegoT
    38. Re:typo in summary by geekboy642 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      And it's good for +5 insightful at LEAST once a day!

      --
      Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
    39. Re:typo in summary by imhennessy · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're putting monkeys out of work!

      ivan

      --
      Like to brew? Want to talk about it? Brattlebrew: groups.yahoo.com/group/brattlebrew
    40. Re:typo in summary by Pandare · · Score: 3, Funny
      Second post, same as the first

      I'm MSIE the 8th I am. MSIE the 8th I am, I am. I got bested by the browser next door. We've been tryin' 7 times before. And everyone was an MSIE. We wouldn't pass an AcidTest, no ma'am. I'm the User Agent MSIE, MSIE the 8th I am, I am. MSIE the 8th I am.

    41. Re:typo in summary by PPH · · Score: 2, Informative

      Listen, sonny. In my day we didn't have tags. We had to stand on street corners, ranting about any topic that came to mind.

      And stay the hell off my lawn!

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    42. Re:typo in summary by jejones · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Come on... didn't you watch Blood Work?

    43. Re:typo in summary by capnkr · · Score: 4, Informative

      As a "moron" who reads summaries *and* even TFA's, and who even looks further into some things (gasp), I noticed that NetApp's Market Share page for Operating Systems has the same lack of data so far for this month as does the browser page.

      Maybe this is just a case of "Nothing to see here, move along..." until we find out they had some mundane reason they were tardy this month.

      --
      "...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
    44. Re:typo in summary by capnkr · · Score: 1

      Screen cap here, in case the data appears soon...

      --
      "...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
    45. Re:typo in summary by peragrin · · Score: 2, Funny

      No Doctor Who accidently left the positronic plans behind for Sung to steal.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    46. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot Posting Form v0.1
      Please select all that apply: ....
      [ ] IANAL but ____
      [ ] XKCD link : ___
      [ ] Bash quote: ____
      [X] There, fixed that for you
      [ ] In soviet russia the _____'s YOU
      [ ] sudo _____ > /dev/null
      [ ] Get off my lawn ....
      [ ] Cory Doctrow
      [ ] Al gore
      [X] Natalie Portman

    47. Re:typo in summary by OlRickDawson · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow. I don't want memorabilia THAT badly.

      --
      Ol' Rick Dawson had a farm EIEIO
    48. Re:typo in summary by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      You forgot Cowboy Neal.

    49. Re:typo in summary by porl · · Score: 1

      the cowboy neal checkbox is currently in beta. for some reason there is still a bug that posts that option randomly even when it isn't wanted..

    50. Re:typo in summary by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Touché. But seriously, not quite old enough to have this knowledge first hand, but having parents that were into crap music certainly helps.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    51. Re:typo in summary by Al+Al+Cool+J · · Score: 1

      5ytrutrfxjtrhszgsfh xf dz gfjfhdz 5yer45yez yerxn yrhd fhd45ye7 tfxh gfc v vfh rxdfxhd rhdb

    52. Re:typo in summary by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      He's the guy that reads the summary.

      I've heard he reads the articles too.

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    53. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you post the entire checklist? I'm working on a screenplay incorporating all of them.

    54. Re:typo in summary by eelke_klein · · Score: 1

      It's a woman Nicole Noone.

    55. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dr. Noone Young Sung?

      Doctor Noonien Soong

      Doctor who?

      no, he's on first.

    56. Re:typo in summary by zobier · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --
      Me lost me cookie at the disco.
    57. Re:typo in summary by Hal_Porter · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Only if you're the first person to post that particularly cliche. If you're the second it's -1 redundant. Cliche posters need to have hair trigger reflexes to survive.

      It's a bit like "Bark for a dollar!" except the second barker pays the first.

      Taco is an evil, evil man.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    58. Re:typo in summary by Svartormr · · Score: 1

      Well, as long as the Doctor didn't (although he can be absent minded, especially with what's in his pockets). BTW, who is this "Doctor Who"?

    59. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy who created data

    60. Re:typo in summary by silanea · · Score: 1

      You are not, perchance, the code monkey from third floor, second office to the right? I think I debugged some code yesterday that followed the same principle.

      --
      Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
    61. Re:typo in summary by Anarchduke · · Score: 1

      Wait, uh, we weren't talking about linux?

      --
      who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    62. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you forgot

      [ ] whoosh

    63. Re:typo in summary by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 1

      Thank you. You have just made my day. Unfortunately I have no mod points to bestow upon you.

    64. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      You forgot my favourite you insensitive clod!

    65. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that was a type of dinosaur...

    66. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't bring me into this!!!

      I'm a Monkey with a laser on my head you insensitive clod!

    67. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he was from Gallifrey

    68. Re:typo in summary by zmollusc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      WTF? How do poets afford to eat?

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    69. Re:typo in summary by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You read the web page? I just drink a fifth of Jack, bang on the keyboard, and let the moderators sort it out.

      Be careful... talk like that, and next thing you know, they'll make you an editor.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    70. Re:typo in summary by Jimmy_Slimmy · · Score: 0

      Speaking of typos, there is that "Anonymous Cowardon" again.  She seems to be everywhere! How does she find the time?

    71. Re:typo in summary by a_klavan · · Score: 1

      I have NO idea. What a waste of a life. Mod up !

    72. Re:typo in summary by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Informative

      <pedantry>
      It's not "noone" or "no-one", it's "no one". Two words. Got it?
      </pedantry>

      Now get off my lawn, you dumb kids. And no, you can't have your balls back.

    73. Re:typo in summary by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 1

      Maybe the proeminent add for chrome on gmail pages stating that you could browse faster using chrome is finally working (It appear randomly when you're using IE on Windows)

      To me, it doesn't seem very ethical for google to leverage a strong position on email to promote their browser, but it looks like I am the only one who feels this way, after all nobody from Microsoft, Mozilla, Opera or Apple has complained yet.

      Now, imagine the outrage if everytime someone opened their hotmail account using a browser other than IE, they received a message stating something like:
      "You could browse hotmail faster using Internet Explorer, GET IT HERE"

      Hell would break loose for sure.

      --
      Your ad could be here!
    74. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5ytrutrfxjtrhszgsfh xf dz gfjfhdz 5yer45yez yerxn yrhd fhd45ye7 tfxh gfc v vfh rxdfxhd rhdb

      And you try to tell that to young people today, and they won't believe you!

    75. Re:typo in summary by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      That sounds like SO much work. I just let my bot write comments and journals and submit stories.

    76. Re:typo in summary by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      No, Uncyclopedia needs all the monkeys it can get.

    77. Re:typo in summary by james.m.henderson · · Score: 1

      [ ] In Soviet Russia, _____ _____s YOU

      There, fixed that for you

    78. Re:typo in summary by OS2toMAC · · Score: 1

      You had street corners! Lucky guy. I had to sit in the muddy tracks left by passing horses and rant about topics that came to other peoples minds! And oh, if only I had a lawn.

    79. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's related to Mr. Cowardon.

    80. Re:typo in summary by nsayer · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on, mods! How is completing the 4 Yorkshiremen gag of Monty Python fame off topic?!

    81. Re:typo in summary by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Why do you want to construct what looks like a coherent discussion out of ramblings made at 4am ? Suppose I did looks at people's random comments you -- what would that mean ? But you are not sure you breaks down in the middle of a post. What answer would please you most ?

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    82. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the stats are correct, then certainly there's a kind of rush all over the world.

    83. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And no, you can't have your balls back.

      Meh, I'm used to it, the missus has had them locked away for years

    84. Re:typo in summary by Mozk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For a while, I thought that that was because of my custom stylesheet, but then I disabled it and found out that it was just another addition to the list of things wrong with Slashdot's layout.

      --
      No existe.
    85. Re:typo in summary by multisync · · Score: 1

      Who is this Noone fellow?

      The lead singer from Herman's Hermits.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
    86. Re:typo in summary by drodal · · Score: 1

      He's on first base.....

    87. Re:typo in summary by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Well, Hotmail does work better with Internet Explorer, as do the Exchange web interface. Hell stil didn't break loose, as far as I know.

    88. Re:typo in summary by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 1

      Hell would break lose if Microsoft put a highly visible warning sugesting that you could "Browse Hotmail Faster Using Internet Explorer". And that is exactly what google does with Gmail when the user is not using chrome on Windows.
      As almost none of us ever use IE on windows, it's not surprisingly that nobody at /. is aware that google is using gmail to promote chrome to IE users on Windows.(Said warning does not appear on Firefox running on Linux)

      --
      Your ad could be here!
    89. Re:typo in summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ook! Ook ook Ook! OOK! OOK!

  2. It was to be expected by ls671 · · Score: 1

    It always takes a while to educate the whole population with regards to technical stuff, after a while, it becomes public knowledge although ;-)))

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And some people will never be educated. They have to actually die to rid the world of their ignorance.

    2. Re:It was to be expected by Swizec · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It always takes a while to educate the whole population with regards to technical stuff, after a while, it becomes public knowledge although ;-)))

      The tough part isn't making it public knowledge, the difficulty is in making it common knowledge.

      To compare this to more sinister things: Notice of your house being demolished on Tuesday can be put up in a dark cellar with no stairs at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory of the planning office guarded by a Leopard. This is public knowledge.

      Making a news cast on the fact a new road is being run through your neighbourhood and personally notifying everyone whose house will be demolished is much more difficult. This is common knowlege.

    3. Re:It was to be expected by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What I noticed is a dramatic shift in the listening to your IT guy lately.

      People actually listen now instead of blowing me off and going right back to their porn surfing with IE.

      The bad economy makes people actually listen when the IT guy says "I'll be back in 30 days to collect another $250.00 if you dont change your internet habits."

      I love a bad economy, it forces people to be less stupid.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:It was to be expected by Swizec · · Score: 3, Informative

      I love a bad economy, it forces people to be less stupid.

      But apparently a large portion of your business was relying on the fact people are stupid. Now what?

    5. Re:It was to be expected by stevied · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At the risk of being slightly controversial .. how much of the difference between commercial and OSS really is technical?

      Don't get me wrong, I'm rabidly pro-F/L/OSS, and nudge "ordinary" people towards it wherever I can, but I think it's a bit of a simplification to describe it as purely technically superior. When it does push the envelope, it normally drives the commercial world to react and improve, so they're usually roughly level-pegging at the feature level.

      Where it really shines, I think, is in harder-to-define areas. Ethics, for one. Architectural taste, for another (debian got package management right 10 - 15 years ago - has windows caught up yet?) Social/organizational factors - the maintenance and repository models used by open OS distributions works so well that the commercial world is mimicking it with "app stores." Lastly, of course, there's motivation - I trust Ubuntu and Mozilla to fix security holes because it's the Right Thing and because they want to do a good job, and not just because they're scared of getting caught out, which I always feel is the mindset in the commercial world.

      I understand these things are probably harder to explain to the general public, but can we at least be a bit more honest / precise amongst ourselves?

    6. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think he'll be OK. There are a lot of stupid people out there...

    7. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You think it's EASY to get into a dark cellar with no stairs, and then leave a leopard behind to guard it??

    8. Re:It was to be expected by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      > I love a bad economy, it forces people to be less stupid.

      But apparently a large portion of your business was relying on the fact people are stupid. Now what?

      Ignorance can fluctuate, but stupidity seems to be a constant. No worries for him, I bet.

      The ideal customer is one who is rich, trusting, and ignorant. The first of those three rarely goes along with the other two, unfortunately.

    9. Re:It was to be expected by ocularDeathRay · · Score: 1

      yeah now people are more educated and lynx is really taking market share.

      --
      Obama is a twitter sock puppet
    10. Re:It was to be expected by TheoCryst · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Ah, no mod points today. +1 Hitchhiker's Guide Reference

      --
      Warning: Contents May Be Flammable. Keep Out Of Reach Of Children.
    11. Re:It was to be expected by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's an inexhaustible supply of work thinking for people who can't or won't. (Sort of like there will always be work for sysadmins, because even here in the future nothing works.) The problem is that the work itself resembles being paid lots of money to dredge through sewage by hand.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    12. Re:It was to be expected by Curate · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't you rather come back in 30 days to collect another $250.00?

    13. Re:It was to be expected by ls671 · · Score: 1

      You bet it is !!! ;-))) Comment
      #http://slashdot.org/

            Subject
            Re:It was to be expected__________________________
      Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!
            Customize Posting Preferences
        [ ] No Karma Bonus [ ] No Subscriber Bonus [ ] Post Anonymously

            [Plain Old Text_____________] Preview Submit
            Allowed HTML
           


         

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    14. Re:It was to be expected by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      What I noticed is a dramatic shift in the listening to your IT guy lately.

      In other news, we're firing our IT guy for letting you hack our webcams.

    15. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "To compare this to more sinister things: Notice of your house being demolished on Tuesday can be put up in a dark cellar with no stairs at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory of the planning office guarded by a Leopard."

      What I got out of this was:

      The planning office has a leopard?!

      Sorry, that's just too cool. I just hope you mean the large cat, not the overly large woman who daily wears leopard printed shirts and pants who happens to be the secretary at the planning office. That would be uncool.

    16. Re:It was to be expected by dbcad7 · · Score: 1

      Some of it is technical.. Browser speed, Active X, implementation of Java and other things like flash, and rendering web pages to standards.. these things do offer different experiences depending on the browser you use.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    17. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the time it's the fault of the moron manager that HAS TO view the cameras from home.

      Tell the Manager or owner that he is stupid, use a VPN, and dont let the idiot manager demand you put the IP cameras on the internet directly.

      There is a reason why most shops that have retarded PHB's never have competent IT.

    18. Re:It was to be expected by bakes · · Score: 1

      There is also an inexhaustible supply of stupidity.

      --
      Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
    19. Re:It was to be expected by Landshark17 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "I love a bad economy, it forces people to be less stupid."

      Oh, I don't know. I think it just forces them to be stupid in new and different ways.

      --
      This sig is false.
    20. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IT support and evil virus development etc are two sides of the same coin.

      The populations that handle each group self-balance. Lost all your IT support business? Put those skills to work stealing credit card details! Suddenly, more attempts to hax0r yuor teh PC = more demand for IT support, and a few trickle back onto the white side of the hat.

      It's a truly beautiful cycle.

    21. Re:It was to be expected by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      Good point, I wonder if there is a link between browser usage and the state of the economy. With all the people being fired from work in the last 6-12 months, there's less people being forced to browse the net with IE from their work desktop and the remaining staff may be too busy and / or scared of being fired to browse too much...

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    22. Re:It was to be expected by number11 · · Score: 1

      You think it's EASY to get into a dark cellar with no stairs, and then leave a leopard behind to guard it??

      Leave? The leopard is bored, pissed off, and hungry. Who said anything about leaving?

    23. Re:It was to be expected by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      It doesn't need to be Lynx. Slashdot looks like that in Chrome even right now.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    24. Re:It was to be expected by abhi_beckert · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In the case of browsers, it has become a technical issue. Microsoft has a monopoly marketshare, and also has several commercial products which are threatened by the new generation of online platform-independent software. This has lead to microsoft freezing their previously rapid development of IE to a snails pace, and open source web browsers (which could not keep up with IE's old development speed) have overtaken it and become much more technically advanced.

      Personally, I love open source (and am involved in several projects of various sizes, some of which I created myself). But I will use commercial software over open source if it is better and reasonably priced. For example, a few years ago I purchased the OmniWeb browser, but no-longer use it because most of the open source browsers available today are better.

    25. Re:It was to be expected by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      not the overly large woman who daily wears leopard printed shirts and pants

      She's a cougar, not a leopard.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    26. Re:It was to be expected by DECS · · Score: 1
    27. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has Debian got package management right? Can you build a single package and install it on all major releases of the OS (on the same architecture) from the last 8 years, without having to recompile anything?

      Debian has managed to deal with a very different problem; they're awesome for it, but it's still an apples-to-oranges comparison.

    28. Re:It was to be expected by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      Making a news cast on the fact a new road is being run through your neighbourhood and personally notifying everyone whose house will be demolished is much more difficult. This is common knowlege.

      Well, yes. So why are you telling us, again?

    29. Re:It was to be expected by daemonburrito · · Score: 1

      You may already know this, but I think it should be noted that OmniWeb is a WebKit-based browser.

    30. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It always takes a while to educate the whole population with regards to technical stuff, after a while, it becomes public knowledge although ;-)))

      The tough part isn't making it public knowledge, the difficulty is in making it common knowledge.

      To compare this to more sinister things: Notice of your house being demolished on Tuesday can be put up in a dark cellar with no stairs at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory of the planning office guarded by a Leopard. This is public knowledge.

      Making a news cast on the fact a new road is being run through your neighbourhood and personally notifying everyone whose house will be demolished is much more difficult. This is common knowlege.

      Are you, sir, by any chance, a Vogon?

    31. Re:It was to be expected by abhi_beckert · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it wasn't using WebKit when I bought OmniWeb, it was using it's own custom built rendering engine which is (believe it or not...) older than any of the current rendering engines (older than netscape or internet explorer even!)

      Even now that it's using WebKit, it's not a very recent version.

    32. Re:It was to be expected by daemonburrito · · Score: 1

      Indeed. The wikipedia article talks about its NeXT roots.

      The article suggests, though, that the move to WebCore in 2003 (and then to a custom WebKit version) was due to its inability to do things like CSS.

      I didn't know about OmniWeb previously, but I have a thing for NeXT/Open/GNU step. I bet it was pretty nice.

      But the original point stands, I think. The point at which the Omniweb Group decided that the open source solution (LGPL-licensed KHTML + Apple sauce) was superior to the closed one was mid or late 2002. The contemporary IE version was 6, and KHTML had already implemented the W3C DOM in early 2000.

      At the time that Microsoft was spending the most on Explorer (ver 5), 1999, KHTML was just getting rolling. By the time of the 1.0 release, in October 2000, it was already superior.

      Yes, Microsoft rested between 2001 and 2006, but only after spending hundreds of millions of dollars. It's a bit unfair to the KHTML and Gecko folks to say that their success was due to Microsoft's inaction.

      Microsoft is (and has been for a couple of years) trying very hard to make IE better, and they have failed. They're not losing because of lack of trying, they're burning mountains of money on it and it's still inferior. Open source development has in fact far outpaced Microsoft's best effort (and they are still totally paranoid about platform independence, now expressed as webapps).

    33. Re:It was to be expected by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 1

      "(Sort of like there will always be work for sysadmins, because even here in the future nothing works.)"

      Where did you say you were posting from? I mean when?

      --

      ---
      "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    34. Re:It was to be expected by Erikderzweite · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not him, but I'd rather have the customer telling all his relatives and friends about how good and reliable my services were. Less short-time profit, more long-time profit.
      And a reputation is something you can't buy with money, on the other hand good reputation might get you some.

    35. Re:It was to be expected by gig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > how much of the difference between commercial and OSS really is technical

      If regular people are leaving IE for Safari or Chrome or Firefox in large numbers it is for technical reasons not political because even I don't understand WTF you are talking about. A recent poll showed only 8% of the public know what a "Web Browser" is. The fact that WebKit is BSD licensed and Firefox GPL probably has no meaningful impact on IE market share.

      Safari, Chrome, and Firefox are all 2x-8x faster than the latest IE, and you can run the latest Safari and Chrome on mobiles also. You can run Firefox completely for free on almost any PC hardware because you just have to install Ubuntu and there you go. At the same time, IE is a disaster. An epic technical failure. The current mobile version is based on the 1998 PC version.

      You don't need to look any further than technical as the IE users peel off. The contrast is extremely stark.

      I'm consulting in an all-Microsoft shop right now and they have all 2003 stuff and what they want is to move to Web apps, so they are thinking of standardizing company-wide on Chrome, at first on Windows and then later on Linux or a Google client OS. Nobody talks about moving to whatever is coming out of Microsoft tomorrow or ever. Their conversation around Microsoft for years has been how to keep it all running without upgrading it any further, basically an I-T freeze. Now they can see Web apps and cheap PC clients and of course smart phones for all as the next steps, and Microsoft is 0/3 in those categories. Also, they are moving away from paper faster than ever and Word does not have a "Publish to Web" command, there is no enthusiasm for a new version of Office, which is why they're still using 2003.

      Microsoft's technical problems surely come at least in part from their inability to accept that some software projects, like browser engines and operating system cores, are better done in a community way through open source and standardization. But at the end of the day if your stuff works, nobody cares how you made the sausage. IE is falling under its own weight right now, and just when Safari, Chrome, and Firefox are really shining. The new typography in Firefox 3.5 really impressed me, and I was happy to see good typography from someone other than Apple and Adobe. Safari is so easy to use and so fast, what a joy. Chrome is a great business browser that will replace IE in a lot of corporate environments over the next few years and everyone will be better for it.

    36. Re:It was to be expected by dbIII · · Score: 1

      But apparently a large portion of your business was relying on the fact people are stupid. Now what?

      Sleep more often. Perhaps even eat breakfast.

    37. Re:It was to be expected by trickyD1ck · · Score: 0

      For the more general public to understand what you have to say you need to stop being rabid and infesting the interwebs with your propaganda and "nudging".

    38. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you used to get blown but now they only want to be friends? sorry to hear that.

    39. Re:It was to be expected by stevied · · Score: 1

      From an amateur sysadmin's PoV, I'd have to say "yes, looks like it." I trust dpkg. I know when I install something that dpkg WILL NOT proceed if that package overwrites files in another package. Years of experience of (admittedly earlier versions of) Windows have made me really appreciate that. Plus all the little elaborations like dpkg-divert, and the alternatives system, that allow people who understand their system to tweak things without tripping up the package manager later.

      Having a user-friendly installer that runs everywhere is superficially nice, but I like the trust that comes from understanding the underlying architecture. And anyway, you could implement something like that on-top of dpkg/apt if necessary - simply detecting the distro version and adding an appropriate line to /etc/apt/sources.lists would have the same effect as far as user was concerned.

      Actually being able to install the same .exe on multiple OS versions is a double-edged sword. You either have to statically link things like the C run-time library, upgrade the system-wide version (historically dangerous and avoided on Windows), or supply the app with a local copy - which means it won't get updated by security fixes released by the OS vendor.

      Superficially easily installation is trumped in my book my a system which does the Right Thing and which has earned the trust I place in it ..

    40. Re:It was to be expected by taucross · · Score: 1

      Wish I had mod points. +5 Punny

      --
      "In the absence of the ability to establish the attribute of truth they tried to establish the noble attributes."
    41. Re:It was to be expected by swilver · · Score: 1

      Well, for me the difference will always be that Commercial software usually has investors interest at heart (which is not quite the same as having the consumer's interest at heart, although close, otherwise consumers wouldn't buy it at all), while OSS software has the user's interest at heart (which is often the author of the software, which is again not quite the same as your common user).

      The difference is subtle, but commercial software often is more annoying: more questions being asked of the user, more annoying splash screens, pop-ups, flashy stupid defaults nobody would use but looks nice for marketing, that kind of stuff. You're also unlikely to see features like ad-skipping in Media Center or ad-block in IE, or an easy way to rip CD's directly with Windows. There's lots of features frowned upon by investors that consumers would probably love.

      That's why I personally like OSS software more. It tends to limit me less, and it adds features that at least please a small selection of users (the author(s)). It does mean it is often less polished, but I can live with that. It's not too big of a problem if the software just keeps running without a glitch once properly configured.

    42. Re:It was to be expected by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      It's after 2000! This is the future!

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    43. Re:It was to be expected by pbhj · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's an inexhaustible supply of work thinking for people who can't or won't. (Sort of like there will always be work for sysadmins, because even here in the future nothing works.) The problem is that the work itself resembles being paid lots of money to dredge through sewage by hand.

      Better to be paid lots for metaphorically dredging sewage with your hands, rather than next to nothing for actually doing it ... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/howaboutthat/5077475/Is-this-the-worst-job-in-the-world.html?image=1 (image shows a dude cleaning an Indian sewer in his underpants - they have safety equipment but it's too cumbersome and hot to use).

    44. Re:It was to be expected by MrMr · · Score: 1

      You mean we were at peak-stupidity?
      I'd gladly settle for less.

    45. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's double funny since it's modded Insightful.

    46. Re:It was to be expected by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      The ideal customer is one who is rich, trusting, and ignorant. The first of those three rarely goes along with the other two, unfortunately.

      That's just because you get to them too late as the two latter elements tends to remove the first element.

    47. Re:It was to be expected by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      because even here in the future nothing works.

      Indeed. This will always be the case. This is why I don't put much stock in teleporters. When the photocopier jams everyone tends to just walk away like nothing ever happened. Makes you wonder how they'll act when your liver ends up in Brazil, you right arm in Paris, and your left lung on the surface of Mars.

    48. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "People actually listen now instead of blowing me off..."

      Jeez! I think I'd rather be blown off than listened to. Especially in the secretary pool.

    49. Re:It was to be expected by castironpigeon · · Score: 1

      IE 6 does not properly interpret standard HTML/CSS. I don't know how other web developers feel about this, but I refuse to add IE hacks to my code to make it work in IE 6. IE 7 is bug-laden garbage that most people regret installing. If somebody swallows all that and installs IE 8 it's probably because a friend or relative set their computer to automatically download and install all MS updates and IE is part of that package. Firefox, Opera and Chrome seem to work just fine and interpret standard HTML/CSS.

      --
      mmmm...forbidden donut
    50. Re:It was to be expected by fl!ptop · · Score: 1

      But apparently a large portion of your business was relying on the fact people are stupid. Now what?

      i've also seen a large increase in customers wanting their computers fixed lately. i think the bad economy has a positive effect on businesses that fix stuff. people are more willing to spend less and get it fixed than spend more buying something new. we're doing well for the same reason the auto mechanics are.

      --
      When you recognize love in another and realize how precious it is, everything else seems so insignificant.
    51. Re:It was to be expected by LoyalOpposition · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's why I never leave a leopard. I just post a sign stating "Beware of Leopard."

      -Loyal

      --
      I aim to misbehave.
    52. Re:It was to be expected by Creepy · · Score: 1

      IMO, IE's main problem is entirely caused by the lack of :before and :after elements for curvy corners, making sites like slashdot dangerous to read because you can easily poke an eye out on the sharp corners if you aren't careful. Curvy corners can also be also done using browser specific CSS -moz-border-radius or -webkit-border-radius tags, but even IE8 lacks this.

    53. Re:It was to be expected by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      You would be surprised how many rich people are downright ignorant when it comes to Computers.

      I would consider it an oddity when I find a rich client that knows something about the correct use of a PC.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    54. Re:It was to be expected by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      Notice of your house being demolished on Tuesday can be put up in a dark cellar with no stairs at the bottom of a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory of the planning office guarded by a Leopard.

      Except that there is no leopard there, only a sign reading "Beware of Leopard".

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    55. Re:It was to be expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a Thursday!

    56. Re:It was to be expected by stevied · · Score: 1

      (The word "consumer" has always squicked me, I have to say .. what was wrong with "customer"? "Consumer" conjures up visions of something hippo-like lying on a sofa, watching daytime TV and ingesting liquidized burgers through a tube .. whereas a customer is somebody who exercises their own judgement and returns to vendors whom they have previous good experiences with.)

      Commercial software always seems to pander to user's short-term needs .. "You want to do XYZ? Here, we'll automate it for you, make it happen at the click of a button." Whereas OSS is aware of future consequences, security, the risks to architectural integrity posed by feature creep, and that one size doesn't fit all. Stuff that used to be known under that now sadly under-used word "craftsmanship."

    57. Re:It was to be expected by stevied · · Score: 1

      There always seems to be an arms race. I hate to say it, but for years, Windows offered a superior desktop experience for normal users, and that fact incited the OSS world to catch up, and arguably overtake. Similarly, Firefox leap-frogged IE quite drastically, causing MS to play catch-up, which they may just about have managed (not sure here, I gave up web design long ago, and don't have IE 8 anywhere to play with.)

      In this picture, OSS doesn't always have the lead on features, but what I'm trying to point out is that there are other qualities where OSS does (IMNSHO) consistently trump commercial software, but these are difficult to identify, describe, and communicate to end-users. Should we continue to over-simplify and just tell people "OSS is better", or should we have a go at explaining, in more detail, exactly why?

  3. Segment and conquer by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 5, Funny

    More interestingly, you can really see that the new key markets strategy the Spread Firefox campaign has kicked off is really paying off.

    --
    Blearf. Blearf, I say.
    1. Re:Segment and conquer by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      Was this meant to be sarcasm or stupid that it covers Antarctica, or were you just karma whoring?

    2. Re:Segment and conquer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More interestingly, you can really see that the new key markets strategy the Spread Firefox campaign has kicked off is really paying off.

      with their overwhelming majority of users, that puts them at 5 people?

    3. Re:Segment and conquer by NatasRevol · · Score: 1
      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    4. Re:Segment and conquer by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Yes, it has, indeed!
      And that with many Firefox users using AdBlock Plus, which blocks Statcounter pixels (and in fact everything from those domains) by default. I had to disable it, for the site to load any graphics, scripts, etc.
      (Oh, and "Other" must be Firefox 3.5, which just came out.)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    5. Re:Segment and conquer by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      (Oh, and "Other" must be Firefox 3.5, which just came out.)

      Or Safari 4, which similarly just came out.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    6. Re:Segment and conquer by zobier · · Score: 1

      Also see the consistent pattern of IE6 usage on weekdays (and the inverse pattern in the FF, it's about a 3% spread) - poor sods forced to use it at work (no offence intended to those in this situation).

      --
      Me lost me cookie at the disco.
    7. Re:Segment and conquer by zobier · · Score: 1

      A bit of it is Safari and Chrome if you look at the relationship between them and Other. Most of it is FF3.5 though, look at the FF2/FF3 convergence in 2008-08, then look at the similar pattern in FF3/Other happening now.

      It's pretty poor that they don't have graphs for these three new versions.

      --
      Me lost me cookie at the disco.
    8. Re:Segment and conquer by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Select a shorter time period, and you'll get a nice FF3.5 line starting to rise at the end of June.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    9. Re:Segment and conquer by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  4. Proliferation of mobile browsers... by seramar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...could explain this, at least partially. All things combined and considered I am not suprised that IE is accounting for only 56% of browsers reported. Were we limited to desktop only, that might be different.

    --
    australian project gutenberg is better than the original.
    1. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by badasscat · · Score: 4, Informative

      My stats only count desktop browsers and I am at 52.4% for all versions of IE. And I don't run a tech-heavy site or anything, I run a site selling Japanese clothes. (http://www.tokyorebel.com)

      Firefox 3.0 is at 35.6%, 3.5 is at a surprising 0.6%, but then it's new. (And thank God, because some of my CSS is totally messed up in 3.5.)

      Actually now that I'm looking, I do have a stat that says "iPhone" which is at 0.2%.

    2. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by asa · · Score: 2, Informative

      All mobile browsing combined probably doesn't break 1% of Web usage. The chances that any large-scale swing has anything to do with mobile browsing are very, very, very slim.

    3. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The perception of myself (and finally! lately!) my non-technical friends...

      is that using IE
      a) has a ton of obnoxious ads- some are loud- some take over the screen.
      b) is like walking around with a huge "kick me" sign on.
      c) is frustrating because of the lack of many useful plugins (where would I get all these glorious HD Videos-- FINALLY "Blues Travellor" without firefox).
      d) is frustrating because "they" own your browser-- not you. It's behavior serves "them", not you.

      But mainly the virus/kick me thing.

      After my bud clicked on a link (just a frikkin link!) on the yahoo message boards, he had to reinstall his entire computer!?!?!

      With Firefox, Flashblock and Noscript- you are pretty darn safe.

      Chrome got a lot of press- and to be honest, I've been looking at Safari myself. (once you break yourself of IE, you ask-- okay, but is there something else EVEN better than this?)

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    4. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by IntlHarvester · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The important number is not so much the current percentage, but what the rate of change is. I've seen sites where IE has held steady at 80% and sites where it was never over 30%.

      The story shows an 8% IE drop in a single month, which is so huge that it has to be a change in the sample size or methodology. Just as an example, at an old job we used the Omniture analytics service. They signed up Apple Computer to their service, and instantly the "internet" stats for OS X went from 3% to 12%.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    5. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Xest · · Score: 1

      More realistically it's something to do with the IE8 release as this is the period that IE8 was released to Windows System Update Services so it's the time you could expect large corporations to start having it rolled out.

      I might be wrong, but I think if anything large scale has happened to browser market share it's much more likely to be tied to that, particularly when you take into account the fact IE8 install from WSUS makes itself the default browser and many users wont really know what difference that makes other than the fact their browser suddenly looks different.

      Perhaps the confusion is also to do with IE8's compatability mode, I don't know, maybe it reports a different user agent string when it's in compatability mode or something?

      I'm just speculating, don't quote me on any of this, but it seems the most plausible cause for a massive change like that, particularly as the time frames coincide.

    6. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by PaintyThePirate · · Score: 5, Informative

      You think that's something? I host a SpongeBob fansite, and even it has 40.38% for Firefox and 47.90% for IE from June 6th to July 6th.

      Looking at the data for the same period in previous years, I'm seeing:
      2008: 63.26% IE and 31.49% Firefox
      2007: 72.85% IE and 23.22% Firefox
      2006: 77.60% IE and 17.77% Firefox

      That's with 20,000+ visits in each period, so it's more than just noise.

    7. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Old97 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We still use IE6 where I work. We have too much stuff hard wired to it. Yet we need another browser - one that is up to date and compatible - in order to use a lot of sites and to test new externally facing applications. So we have Firefox installed everywhere too. We can install and run Firefox without disturbing our corporate standard. We can't do that if we upgrade IE.

      Some are also running Safari 4 on Windows and Mac OS/X and there are a few other odds and ends around as well, but the bottom line is that if your company must continue to use IE6 for its internal apps, then they pretty much have to support a non-IE browser in order to effectively use today's internet.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    8. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I run a fairly popular Oracle-related site (psoug.org) and we've noticed a marked drop in IE along with a corresponding rise in Firefox. We get about 1.5 million page views per month, with about ~75% of them from India. Maybe Firefox is becoming more popular outside the US (although the US stats track along with this fairly closely). I think more people are indeed using browsers other than IE.

    9. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      After my bud clicked on a link (just a frikkin link!) on the yahoo message boards, he had to reinstall his entire computer!?!?!

      With Firefox, Flashblock and Noscript- you are pretty darn safe.

      Ah yes, comparing apples (heavily secured non-IE browsers) to oranges (unsecured IE installations) is so useful.

    10. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      > b) is like walking around with a huge "kick me" sign on.

      That goes for using most MS products

    11. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Kamokazi · · Score: 1

      I agree moblie browsers are becoming much more significant, but a 6% drop in a month is substantial.

      I am wondering if maybe it has to do with kids being out of school, and them being more likely to use other browsers. I would also like to see the specific numbers on Chrome, as Google seems to be advertising for it more lately. Another thing is maybe IE8 might be causing issues with browser detection or something goofy like that...does the new privacy mode block browser strings?

      I just have a hard time believing 6% of internet users suddenly decided to install something else. My money's on the kids out of school explanation.

      --
      As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
    12. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by joeflies · · Score: 5, Funny

      You host what??

    13. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS is pushing IE8 via a security update, it appeared on my wife's vista laptop without directly being installed. I wonder whether its useragent string is subtly different from the previous incarnations of IE.

    14. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by DMalic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How do you easily lockdown IE to a similar extent without sacrificing additional functionality?

    15. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      NoScript is just for the paranoid.

      Even a "stock" Firefox install is going to be remarkably more secure than IE.

      Granny can probably install NoScript. Can she lock down IE?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      You install IE8 which has pretty much all of the same features as Firefox.

      Of course it pretty much came way too late so the cat may be out of the bag since so many people don't want to upgrade IE6 which will cause application compatibility problems. This means that web browsing must be done with an alternative browser like firefox since running IE6 and IE8 on the same machine is problematic for the majority.

    17. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by DMalic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The conversation was about FF secured w/ flashblock/noscript. I am fairly certain that IE doesn't come with the functionality of those plugins. Does it have addons which are just as good or better?

    18. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by DigitAl56K · · Score: 1

      Another thing that potentially could explain this is IE8's "Compatibility View" feature, where in some cases the user-agent string can be modified.

      See here:
      http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/08/27/introducing-compatibility-view.aspx

      I'd be surprised if it was ever modified to read something that couldn't be identified as IE, but perhaps it's modified just enough to monkey with the analytics in this case.

    19. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      site which puts him in contact with children to molest

    20. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      It has much of this functionality built-in so yes. It also has third party plug-ins similar to Grease-monkey.

      One of the main reasons IE8 breaks so much in terms of compatibility and IE7 wasn't much different was purely for the fact that it is shipped in a much more secure state.

      IE8 is a lot safer than previous versions of IE but as I said, it may be too late for people jumping ship since even Firefox's increased share hasn't seen it crumble to security problems like IE was running into when Firefox first came on the scene. Of course there are starting to be Firefox specific exploits in the wild so that may end up slowing its progress.

    21. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I run a tiny, little site selling some obscure parts for cars, and get close to 10,000 hits/month now which probably isn't much. But even so, my current stats show Firefox/Mozilla at a whopping 45%, with all versions of IE at 49%. Opera has 1.88%, just above Netscape 4 (!) at 1.12%. Strangely, I haven't seen any hits from Safari in the past three months.

      One interesting thing I saw looking through my site's last three months of stats is that IE8 usage has risen tremendously. But Firefox usage has been holding steady at around 45% for a few months now.

      I imagine my site is mostly visited by people in the teens-20-something category, mostly males, but probably not a lot of Slashdot-type geeks, so I find it pretty interesting that so many are using Firefox.

    22. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      You're not answering the question directly. Is there something as good as AdBlock Plus available for IE8? I'm quite sure that Microsoft would not build in such functionality.

      No one's going to care much if IE8 is as secure as FF if it doesn't have the ability to block ads. There's a reason ABP is probably the most popular plug-in for FF.

    23. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by spectre_240sx · · Score: 1

      It is in a way. Is there a no-script extension for IE? If not, the argument is valid because you're looking at the full capabilities of both browsers. Just because it's third party doesn't mean it should be discounted.

    24. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Informative

      You could use IETab for the sites that still need Internet Explorer. It can be set up so that the tab automatically uses IE for certain websites. The other sites will use FireFox as normal and users won't need to worry about firing up a second web browser. Then, if you update a web application so that it doesn't require IE6, you can remove that site from IETab's list. Users won't need to change their habits at all, but will get the FireFox rendering engine.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    25. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 2, Funny

      Car parts... mac users... yeah, I can understand the lack of Safari.

    26. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I'll bite.

      I asked in another thread (no snarkiness)

      How do I duplicate noscript and flashblock in IE8?

      There was one response-- for noscript, I have to approve/disapprove every single time a javascript executes (I can't whitelist and blacklist sites).
      No response for flash.
      No response for my follow question about blocking ads (outside of doing wierd things with the host file).

      So...
      How do I whitelist and blacklist individual scripts, or by web site directory, or by web site domain, scripts, ads, and flashes while retaining the ability to execute them individually if I want to?

      I still have to use IE occasionally -- but I only do so for sites I know are safe (some at work, and a company I do business with) and only because they *ONLY* support ASP. (which may be costing them more and more business if these trends hold-- all for a flashy shimmery ASP button at one site).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    27. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am in charge of the gateway for a farely large gov gateway, we are completely technology neutral and reagrdless of what the stats of others are saying I actually saw a significant drop in non IE browsers rather than a rise :(. IE seems to have made a comeback in the last month or so to be just over 82% of all hits now, firefox is down to 13.7% for us. We do about 50 million hits a days.

    28. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by salesgeek · · Score: 1

      You are brave to admit that, but 20,000 SpongeBob fans can't be wrong.

      --
      -- $G
    29. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      You seem to be missing the fact that there is no such thing as a heavily secured IE browser, Bill.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    30. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      You install IE8 which has pretty much all of the same features as Firefox.

      They finally ported IE to a secure and stable OS ????!!!! I thought it would never happen!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    31. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Kalriath · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, actually, there is. Microsoft's BUILT IN InPrivate filtering by default manages to block every ad and tracking site (it works by auto-blocking things that are common to lots of sites) and you can set it to manual mode to block only things you don't want.

      Also, IE7Pro (third party) goes the extra mile and is pretty much AdBlock, FlashBlock, and NoScript in one.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    32. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      InPrivate filtering, or IE7Pro.

      Also, ASP/ASP.NET != IE. That's like claiming that PHP requires the user be using Firefox. It's idiotic.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    33. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by spitzak · · Score: 1

      For that to explain it then IE8 would have to look like Firefox to this statistic counter. If it was just unrecognized there would instead be an 8% rise in "unknown/other".

      However it does seem possible that this counter uses some strange method to indicate the browser so that IE8 looks like Firefox to it.

    34. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I looked this up and found this. It seems that to actually work like ABP, you have to download a file created by some guy on dslreports.com and use that to get ABP's blocklist, and then you have to go mucking around in the Registry to actually force IE8 to use it all the time, instead of having to enable it on a per-session basis. Sounds like a PITA to me, when with ABP all I have to do is install it once and I'm done, and it even tells me automatically when updates are available, so I can easily keep up with the latest blocklist without having to go manually download a new version of some XML file.

      So why would I want to use IE which requires a lot of work to get to work like FF + ABP, when Firefox makes it so easy?

    35. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by DJRumpy · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking this is all coming down to speed. With the prevelance of Flash, a smattering of Java, and the sheer volume of crap on most sites these days, the speed increases in Firefox, Chrome, and Safari are actually noticable on a real world basis to the average Joe/Jane.

      On top of that, the plugins on Firefox are like crack. Nuff said there.

      Even Safari has AdBlock now which was a show stopper for me. I've used it for my primary over the last month and I can't complain other than the refresh button location sucks.

    36. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Dullstar · · Score: 1

      I recall reading somewhere that IE has low default security settings.

    37. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by levicivita · · Score: 1

      After essentially threatening to quit, I was allowed to upgrade to IE8 from IE6 at work (but I still cannot use a non-IE browser). Although better than IE6, IE8 is nowhere near the alternative browsers in terms of performance of features. Not to mention that it produces all this FUD when you try to use gmail or google maps. IE8 is like the fat dumb mumbling little kid who happens to be the son of the school principal so is always sitting in the front row at all school events, next to all the cool kids who've earned their spot.

    38. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

      For ASP saying that would be idiotic.

      But how many ASP.NET developers add a BrowserCaps section to their web.config files?

      I would guess that almost no one does. After all they are developing in .NET

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
    39. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC, I used security zones with IE4 and later IE browsers. Basically, there were four zones or so. A 'trusted' site would get access to ActiveX and Java goodies. All other sites by default had those features disabled. It kept me virus free. Now, with IceWeasel and NoScript(&Adblock+), much of the manual work I did with proxies and adding sites to zones is eliminated or greatly reduced.

    40. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by ancientt · · Score: 1

      It isn't quite the same, and doesn't even do all the same things, but I've taken to recommending privoxy for IE users. It seems to take them a long way towards getting their browser to do what they want. Most of them are not terribly enthusiastic but after using it for a couple days they are thrilled. Believe it or not, people tend to view the computer as something they have to deal with, not something that will work for them. It is in that moment when I see the spark come into someone's eye when they realize that it is possible to get the computer to do what they want, that I love being in IT.

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    41. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Tom · · Score: 1

      You think that's something? :-)

      In my statistics (see footer), IE has dropped to number three - and not yesterday. Also about 20,000 visits a month:

              Firefox 1091940 57.5 %
              Safari 352113 18.5 %
              MS Internet Explorer 292886 15.4 %
              Opera 97550 5.1 %
              Unbekannt 37055 1.9 %
              Mozilla 19119 1 %
              Wget 1756 0 %
              Sony/Ericsson Browser (PDA/Phone browser) 1011 0 %
              Netscape 889 0 %
              Konqueror 632 0 %
                Others 1015 0 %

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    42. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      But did you notice any unusual shifts last couple months? Can you take a look at that statistics?

    43. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      So you're trying to tell me that emerging generation isn't completely lost?

    44. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      We still use IE6 where I work. We have too much stuff hard wired to it.

      It's fairly common and truly bizzare. We finally have a cross platform way of distributing information with easily available standards and some idiots find ways to muck it up by making it X browser only. Whoever made the design choices for your companies site and many others managed to somehow miss the entire point of the web and didn't consider that they had deliberately chosen something that would not work in a few years.

    45. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      How do you easily lockdown IE to a similar extent without sacrificing additional functionality?

      Don't run with admin privileges. The exploits (if they can run at all) can't do much but trash the settings for that account and any writable storage but not the Windows system folders.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    46. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Xest · · Score: 1

      That's an issue with bad IT management more than anything though.

      IE6 is probably the least secure browser ever released and so hanging onto it like that is bad practice in itself. At the end of the day, IE6 wont be available for ever, XP will become unsupported and you'll be stuck with an unsupported OS so something is going to have to shift else your companies IT infrastructure will have more holes in it than swiss cheese.

      There isn't even that much work involved in upgrading to a new version of IE, particularly as IE8 includes a compatability mode for exactly situations like yours.

    47. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by TheRealSync · · Score: 1

      We use IE7, and are *not* to install other browsers. For security reasons.

      Firefox is specifically mentioned as a big no-no.

      --
      -- A good compromise leaves everyone mad. --Calvin and Hobbes
    48. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      20K visits? That is a drop in the bucket

    49. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think that's something? I run a Mac oriented game site that is linked to directly from Apple's website. On average IE has about 10%, Firefox about 40% and Safari has a whopping 50%!

      It is time to fear Apple's dominant position in the browser market...

    50. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Don't run with admin privileges. The exploits (if they can run at all) can't do much but trash the settings for that account and any writable storage but not the Windows system folders.

      I like my files (what you keep on "writable storage".) They contain my data.

      Every time someone says "just don't run as admin because all you can lose is all your data", Slashdot gets a little dumber.

      (Will making me wait three more minutes to click submit make this comment better? My sources say no)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    51. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Safari is used on the iPhone and iPod touch, would that show up as a mobile browser or just "Safari"? I use mine all throughout the day for browsing and email, it's far superior to my company supplied BlackBerry.

    52. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It appeals to children of all ages.

    53. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by dna_(c)(tm)(r) · · Score: 1

      We still use IE6 where I work. We have too much stuff hard wired to it.

      That's the best argument for open standards I've seen in a while

    54. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by cenc · · Score: 1

      Whomever built whatever it is you are running that is that hardwired to IE6, should be taken out back and shot. They essentially ripped your company off. Your IT department (perhaps just the cheap manger) for not being able to replace it, should also be taken out back and shot. There is no excuse for hard wiring an application to a browser version that old (or ever), and not fixing it.

    55. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      He lives in a datacenter under the sea...
      Agile, Corporate Gray and a non-porous firewall has he...

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    56. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by lamapper · · Score: 1

      I still have to use IE occasionally -- but I only do so for sites I know are safe (some at work, and a company I do business with) and only because they *ONLY* support ASP. (which may be costing them more and more business if these trends hold-- all for a flashy shimmery ASP button at one site).

      One can only hope you are correct, but based on reading other posts to your comment, my guess is there are other issues also.

      --
      Is your Internet Throttled? Install DD-Wrt, OpenWRT or Tomato to learn the truth! Google: 1Gbps/1Gbps: 5 Communities
    57. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Because you ignored half my comment. IE7Pro, a third party addon, implements the functionality of AdBlock Plus, NoScript, Flashblock, and Greasemonkey for IE.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    58. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Uh... you do realise that the browserCaps section is completely optional, since ASP.NET has some built in anyway? At worst, it'll recognise all non-IE browsers as DownLevel (like Outlook Web Access 2003 does).

      Also, do NOT use browserCaps sections, which were deprecated about 5 years ago. You simply add .browser files to your app instead (Microsoft ships a few, but no Firefox or Safari support)

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    59. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by mcfedr · · Score: 1

      seems lazy on behalf of our techy people that they havnt updated your software for what, 4/5 years now. Maybe a bit of new investment is needed to drag you into the modern era...

    60. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      The sites work in IE but do not work with other browsers.
      The link says ".asp".

      I don't care that it isn't part of the browser-- it only works with IE so I must use IE if I want to purchase boardgames from that site.
      Because they are using ASP, they've lost my business when they lacked a significant price advantage. I'll load up IE if they are $5+ cheaper tho.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    61. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      No, it's not because they're using ASP that it doesn't work in other browsers. It's because the developers are morons that it doesn't work in other browsers. Much like anyone that believes that using ASP automatically makes a page incompatible with other browsers. Let me rephrase your post to prove my point:

      The sites work in Firefox but do not work with other browsers.
      The link says ".php".

      I don't care that it isn't part of the browser-- it only works with Firefox so I must use Firefox if I want to purchase boardgames from that site.
      Because they are using PHP, they've lost my business when they lacked a significant price advantage. I'll load up Firefox if they are $5+ cheaper tho.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    62. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Good point except that I've never had .PHP fail and I've never had a site where Firefox was required. (tho I've had sites I considered too dangerous to visit without Firefox).

      Only sites with .ASP break. It happens frequently.

      I get the point you are trying to make- but my user experience is that "ASP in the link == IE Required".

      In this area, I'm a user. It should *just work*. If it doesn't- Microsoft made it too hard (possibly on purpose) to be automatic for ASP programmers.

      From what you are saying, I can't fix the problem anyway- some unknown programmers have to change something on the site.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    63. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      No, that's also wrong. ASP actually makes you write ALL the code, both UI and server scripting. Unless they used Microsoft Frontpage (which is an unequalled piece of shit) to make the site, it's entirely down to the person who wrote the code as to whether it works in other browsers or not.

      Unfortunately, since ASP allows you to write in Visual Basic Script (which almost equals Frontpage for shittiness), it attracts a lot of imbeciles.

      There may also be 3 or 4 good ASP/VB developers.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    64. Re:Proliferation of mobile browsers... by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

      Currently all non-IE browsers have more modern features than IE browsers.

      Microsoft ships a few, but no Firefox or Safari support

      That's the point!

      I couldn't have said it better.

      --
      We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
  5. It's the iPhOnE! by Spy+Handler · · Score: 0

    cos IE doesn't run on iPhone!

    1. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by alexborges · · Score: 1

      Well...

      Yes, it IS the iphone...

      Plus all those shiny new macs. Plus all those firefoxes out there (ff is still second on all charts and gains strongly as ie looses). Plus Chrome, which is backed by a strong player.

      Scary stuff for redmond.

      --
      NO SIG
    2. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by asa · · Score: 3, Informative

      iPhone/iPod browsing makes up about half of one percent of Web usage. Desktop Safari makes up about 10% of Web usage. Firefox makes up about 25% of Web usage. I don't think the iPhone is having quite the impact you think the iPhone is having.

    3. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux has more market share than the iPhone (2% vs 0.5%) but gets only 1/1000000'th the hype.

    4. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I am shocked by that number and I do think it will change.
      I have an iPod Touch. I use it a good amount of the time to surf the web. When I am at home it is just easier to grab my iPod than to get out a notebook or go into the computer room.
      My wife has a Pre and she uses it a lot of the time to surf the web. Mobile devices are getting very good for web surfing.
      My wife used it to order some pictures to be printed while we where on the way to my mother's home. She used it to get prescriptions filled at Walgreens.
      Mobile is going to really rock.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    5. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Sure, because none of the 14M+ iphone/itouch users think about trying out Safari.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    6. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iPhone is also used to tether with computers in order to run desktop browsers, but I digress..

    7. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by nsayer · · Score: 1

      No, but there's an app for that.

    8. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you're the person to ask ... what do you think it is? Since it seems to be leading the 3.5 release (which was my first guest), rather than following it, is there something in particular that you folks have seen? Was there a huge bump in Firefox downloads in June?

    9. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      When I saw iPhone browser having 3% share at my own sites, I said ''respect'' and nothing else. The other stealth giant is Opera Mini (J2ME) which does play a lot of pragmatic games to fool sites as mobile user isn't really up to some ''I will show my browser and you will serve me'' kind of thing. It is standards compliant too, just like Webkit.

      Anyway, all my sites are W3C standards compliant and it is up to browser to show it fine. So far, good even with IE. So I don't really care about these ''stats'' news. MS already made Windows and lots of third party apps impossible to run without their html rendering framework. They won ages ago. The only real big threat to that is webkit right now. It can do what MSHTML can do, can even fit to Symbian S60 entry level phones and performance king now.

    10. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by spectre_240sx · · Score: 1

      How much browsing does a person do on their iPhone as compared to on a computer? It's still much easier to browse on a computer, so people tend to do a lot more browsing on them. iPhones are good for looking up a quick fact, making reservations, etc.; simple one-action sessions as opposed to just surfing around.

    11. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think the iPhone is having quite the impact you think the iPhone is having.

      Remember when they sold fake car cell phones for people who could not afford the early cell phones but wanted the status of having one in their car? ("Sorry, dude -- we must be out or range! Dial again later!")

      When will Wally World start selling I-Phonies for the hoi paloi?

    12. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by DECS · · Score: 1, Informative

      Market share implies a market. Comparing "Linux" to the iPhone is like comparing "a 10% increase" of two totally different numbers.

      If you're talking about Linux on the desktop, then it can be compared to other desktop operating systems.

      - It's hard to pinpoint how many Linux users there are, because .iso downloads are meaningless and Linux isn't represented in hardware sales as Mac OS X and Windows are.
      - Browser logs give some idea of the installed base of Linux users, but compared to other PCs, it isn't very high. That's because most Linux PCs are acting as servers and not browsing the web as consumer oriented Macs and Windows PCs are.

      If you're talking about Linux on mobile devices, then it can be compared to the iPhone.

      - It's easier to identify the mobile market share of Linux, as it is tied to hardware. But Linux is rarely the platform on mobile devices. The Android, the Palm Pre, and many Motorola Chinese phones all use a Linux kernel, but it's not relevant to the platform or the software they run. The only mobile devices that are really Linux are maybe Nokia's failed Maemo tablets.
      - Browser logs clearly indicate that despite only representing a sizable chunk of the smartphone market, Apple dominates the mobile web with more than 50% of mobile web traffic.

      While it's true that mobile traffic doesn't compare with desktop traffic volumes, it is clearly the future and has the potential to dramatically alter the computing landscape. So Microsoft's current ~60% of the desktop (who'd have thought!) is close to Apple's share of the mobile web. That gives Apple the ability to push HTML 5 and the use of open standards, including ISO MPEG H.264 and Apple's IETF-proposed HTTP Live streaming protocol on the iPhone, the opposite of what Microsoft has done over the last 15 years to tie every standard to its own proprietary platform: Windows.

      Ogg Theora, H.264 and the HTML 5 Browser Squabble

    13. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by DECS · · Score: 1

      Opera Mini isn't really a web browser, it's a Java ME client for Opera's proxy servers, which render pages and send a proprietary slimmed down version to the applet. There's nothing "standards compliant" about it.

      Ogg Theora, H.264 and the HTML 5 Browser Squabble

    14. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      MobileSafari went from non-existent, to the number one by far mobile browser in less than two years.

      I'd say it's easier than you think.

      Last night I was looking up flood plain information on where I' planning on moving in the near future.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    15. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Do you think Opera runs IE on their proxy servers? They run Opera, a vigorously standards compliant browser. The result is essentially effected by Opera Desktop, my compliant sites are way more usable, browsable on Opera Mini.

      If Firefox J2ME shipped, it would be the same case. In fact, testing Skyfire S60 (which is similar concept), I have already witnessed same results.

    16. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      If I plan to be surfing for a long time, I'll go to my computer. If I'm watching TV and think of something I want to check on, I'll use the iPhone. It's surprising how often that happens, and not unusual for me to continue browsing on the iPhone after I've found what I was originally looking for.

      I would guess that I still spend longer on my long computer browsing than my many short iPhone sessions, but I do browse on the phone quite a bit.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    17. Re:It's the iPhOnE! by spectre_240sx · · Score: 1

      That doesn't really contradict my argument, though. It might have gone to the #1 mobile browser, but the mobile browser market is still a tiny sliver of the whole browser market.

      Sure, you were looking up flood plain information, but how long did you continue browsing once you found it?

  6. Not Surprising by gubers33 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Mozilla has grabbed a large portion of the market share and the explosion in Mac purchases has increased the use of Safari. The third browser which is taking many of the users away is Google's Chrome which is probably the most innovative of all of the browsers with many neat features which include interaction between windows, the most customization of any of the browsers in terms of placement of objects as well as bringing users unmatched speed.

    --
    Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.
    1. Re:Not Surprising by orsty3001 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree, the main reason I don't use Chrome is because of all the plugins I use with Firefox. Also I've notice more Macs in my server logs over the past few years. And definitely more people using Firefox. I've noticed a lot more Wii's and PS3's in the logs as well. Not sure if I'm just noticing it more though.

    2. Re:Not Surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the Chrome commercial.

    3. Re:Not Surprising by asa · · Score: 1

      Chrome has been available for about 9 months and it's managed to carve out about 2% of Web browser usage. It got about 1/3rd of that in only days after release. It's not "taking many users away" from IE unless by many you mean about half as many as Firefox has in the same time period.

    4. Re:Not Surprising by nschubach · · Score: 1

      At least it's not an IE commercial.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    5. Re:Not Surprising by spectre_240sx · · Score: 1

      Definitely agreed on the extensions issue. I also wish Google would get moving and do a real release for OS X.

  7. In utter disarray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it dying? Has netcraft confirmed it? Did it loose 73% of its core developer?

    1. Re:In utter disarray? by Endo13 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Did it loose 73% of its core developer?

      I dunno, but what I'm interested in is what they did with the other 27% of him.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    2. Re:In utter disarray? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Did it loose 73% of its core developer?

      I dunno, but what I'm interested in is what they did with the other 27% of him.

      Obviously, they tighted the other 27%.

      But that's sexist to assume it's a him.

      I'm interested with what they did with the other 27% of her.

      Or, since we don't know the state of the core developer, perhaps we should be interested in what they did with the other 13.5% of him and the other 13.5% of her.

      Or something. It's a little late in the day for me to be recalling Schroedinger.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    3. Re:In utter disarray? by Maestro4k · · Score: 1

      Did it loose 73% of its core developer?

      I dunno, but what I'm interested in is what they did with the other 27% of him.

      Try the meatloaf in the cafeteria.

    4. Re:In utter disarray? by at_slashdot · · Score: 1

      Did it loose 73% of its core developer?

      I dunno, but what I'm interested in is what they did with the other 27% of him.

      Fixing bugs

      --
      "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
    5. Re:In utter disarray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      But that's sexist to assume it's a him.

      It's not sexist, it's proper English: 'he' is the singular indefinite pronoun, 'she' is the singular pronoun of personification. ('he' and 'she' are _also_ the masculine and feminine personal pronouns, but that's not how they're being used here)

      http://www.infynity.spodzone.com/rants/pc.shtml
      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Her (see "Usage note:")

      Go away, Your Oversensitiveness. (But +1 for the "they tighted the other 27%" comment )

    6. Re:In utter disarray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone knows women can't code.

    7. Re:In utter disarray? by goofyspouse · · Score: 1

      Did it loose 73% of its core developer?

      I dunno, but what I'm interested in is what they did with the other 27% of him.

      I would assume that the other 27% either remained as-is or was actually tightened.

    8. Re:In utter disarray? by nsayer · · Score: 2, Funny

      But that's sexist to assume it's a him.

      I'm interested with what they did with the other 27% of her.

      Well, he was a he, before he had that 27% removed.

      He was also quite well endowed, apparently.

    9. Re:In utter disarray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the difference between Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and a Female Programmer ?

      Some people still believe that the first two exist!

    10. Re:In utter disarray? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Meh. The whole point of the pronoun distinction was to raise the Schroedinger issue.

      Besides which, if you're going to point to the usage note in your link for "Her", you should also read the usage note for "Him", where the issue at hand is explicitly addressed.

      FWIW, you're also mistaken about what kind of pronoun is being used. It IS a personal pronoun being used, not an indefinite pronoun. We are referring to a specific individual (though of indeterminate gender, which has nothing to do with whether it's a definite or indefinite pronoun).

      But, whatever, dude/dudette. You can get your panties/briefs/thong/boxers[1] all in a bunch over the fact that some people feel the use of he/him to be sexist, and insist on thrusting[2] a standard of language which offends some people upon the rest of us. Or you can instead just go with the flow[3], not get offended by the fact that some other people get offended, and go on your merry way while still having grasped[4] the idea/s the writer was attempting to communicate.

      [1] I know, I'm an insensitive clod, you probably don't wear underwear
      [2] My apologies in advance to feminists for using such a gender-typical verb that has connotations of rape.
      [3] In no way is this referring to menstrual flow. Again, my apologies in advance to any man, woman, trans-gendered, non-gendered, or multi-gendered individual or group of individuals who read this.
      [4] Again, apologies for using a verb that evokes imagery of the oppressive male taking advantage of the less powerful female, for we all know that females are the more powerful, or rather, equally powerful, or rather power is a poor term because it is a male construct.

      You want to see PC taken too far? There you go.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    11. Re:In utter disarray? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Funny

      What's the difference between Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and a Female Programmer ?

      There's no difference. None of them come while you are awake.

      Zing!

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    12. Re:In utter disarray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All this, and yet you wrote "for all intensive purposes" in another post today?

    13. Re:In utter disarray? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Did you assume it was unintentional?

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    14. Re:In utter disarray? by russ1337 · · Score: 1

      Or, since we don't know the state of the core developer, perhaps we should be interested in what they did with the other 13.5% of him and the other 13.5% of her. Or something. It's a little late in the day for me to be recalling Schroedinger.

      If you get into the whole thought process of the developer being a "him and a her at the same time" you'll possibly end up thinking they're from Thailand.

    15. Re:In utter disarray? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Don't be ridiculous. There's plenty of female programmers out there.

      However, they are, with very rare exceptions, only "female" in the most strict anatomical sense, not people you'd want to have any fantasies about.

    16. Re:In utter disarray? by superdana · · Score: 1

      None of them come while you are awake.

      Speak for yourself.

    17. Re:In utter disarray? by pohl · · Score: 1

      I'm interested with what they did with the other 27% of her.

      Their core developer is a hermaphrodite, you insensitive clod!

      --

      The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...

    18. Re:In utter disarray? by akayani · · Score: 1

      That's a bit unkind.

      In my Uni course it's 3:1 female/male and the top students group is heavily weighted with females. I wouldn't be underestimating the skills of female programmers lads!

      And as for what they look like... well better than the lads in many cases. There are a heap of porky lads in programming.

    19. Re:In utter disarray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zing!

      For you dwindling IE users, he meant Bing!

    20. Re:In utter disarray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not sexist, it's proper English...

      Yes, if you regard English as a fixed language which never changes, and is defined by a fixed set of rules which we all agree on.

      Meanwhile, many people are happily using they/them in an 'incorrect' singular fashion for an abstract person of unknown sex, and finding it's an entirely natural way to evolve the language.

      If you want some sort of reference for this, the wikipedia article is quite informative:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

      In particular, wikipedia quotes the following from The Cambridge Guide to English Usage (2004):
      "Generic/universal their provides a gender-free pronoun, avoiding the exclusive his and the clumsy his/her."
      "It avoids gratuitous sexism and gives the statement broadest reference. ... They, them, their are now freely used in agreement with singular indefinite pronouns and determiners, those with universal implications such as any(one), every(one), no(one), as well as each and some(one), whose reference is often more individual. ... For those listening or reading, it has become unremarkable - an element of common usage."

      The wikipedia article makes it clear that this is still a matter of controversy amongst linguists, but there is a clear and definite movement towards the use of the "singular they" and at least some highly respected academic sources now regard it to be "proper English".

    21. Re:In utter disarray? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It's a little late in the day for me to be recalling Schroedinger.

      He's out on the porch drinking a beer anyway.

    22. Re:In utter disarray? by mcgrew · · Score: 1


      Did it loose 73% of its core developer?

      I dunno, but what I'm interested in is what they did with the other 27% of him.

      I'm interested in why they loosed him in the first place.

    23. Re:In utter disarray? by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      Hadn't heard about that for English, but I do remember from foreign-language classes that they're (Spanish is at least) is clear on the male form being used as the default for a mixed group.

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    24. Re:In utter disarray? by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      What a guy, makes you cry...

  8. My statistics by GoNINzo · · Score: 3, Informative

    I run a somewhat largish non-technology site, and I saw yesterday:
    40.91% MSIE 7.0
    27.11% MSIE 6.0
    14.60% Mozilla/5.0
    12.98% MSIE 8.0

    Everything else below .1%. So that's 81% MSIE, 14.6% Mozilla, and everything else in the remaining 4.4%.

    --
    Gonzo Granzeau
    "Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
    1. Re:My statistics by panaceaa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Does your web site not work on Safari or are you reading your statistics wrong?

    2. Re:My statistics by MrMista_B · · Score: 1

      How many of those MSIE browser percentages are /other/ broswers that are merely spoofing 'MSIE' to your site?

      If you can't measure that, you don't have an accurate measurement.

    3. Re:My statistics by bestadvocate · · Score: 1

      Do you have usage rates from a prior date for comparison? All websites have their crowds (I bet Slashdot gets more than its fair share of minority browsers).

      --
      my sig
    4. Re:My statistics by Dr_Ken · · Score: 1

      Same with my sites too. Factor out the cellphone users and you get a whole different set of numbers. I doubt if Redmond is sweating it more than usual. But their Black Swan nemesis is probably coming...

      --
      "If you want to know what happens to you when you die, go look at some dead stuff."
    5. Re:My statistics by GoNINzo · · Score: 1

      It works, we just don't see a lot of traffic from Safari. It's less than .01% according to the logs with the user agent: Safari*

      --
      Gonzo Granzeau
      "Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
    6. Re:My statistics by hansamurai · · Score: 1

      I've heard this thrown about a lot but how commonplace is this spoofing? Seems reasonable maybe six years ago but I don't see the reason behind it anymore.

    7. Re:My statistics by GoNINzo · · Score: 3, Informative

      No not really, we don't really track over time, though I have that capability. I do know that the MSIE 8 usage is way up, and really hitting the MSIE 7 usage more than anything else. The Firefox is about where it usually is.

      --
      Gonzo Granzeau
      "Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
    8. Re:My statistics by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      It's a pretty fair assumption that most people don't know what a user agent is, never mind how to change it.

    9. Re:My statistics by spyka · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I run a tech-related site, so Firefox does have an above average share but no major changes in share month to month:

      Firefox:
      June 6, 2009 - July 6, 2009 63.55%
      May 6, 2009 - June 5, 2009 63.77%

      Internet Explorer
      June 6, 2009 - July 6, 2009 20.83%
      May 6, 2009 - June 5, 2009 21.68%

      Opera
      June 6, 2009 - July 6, 2009 5.86%
      May 6, 2009 - June 5, 2009 6.48%

      Chrome
      June 6, 2009 - July 6, 2009 5.62%
      May 6, 2009 - June 5, 2009 5.07%

      Safari
      June 6, 2009 - July 6, 2009 3.44%
      May 6, 2009 - June 5, 2009 2.33%

    10. Re:My statistics by GoNINzo · · Score: 1

      Er, if they are reporting themselves as a type of browser, then yes, I have accurate usage rates of reported browser type. It's a non-scientific number, sure, but it's not manufactured to have a desired outcome either.

      In the end, I'm more interested in finding out what browsers my users are using, or even if they are just saying they're using, so I can better tune our site for their needs.

      --
      Gonzo Granzeau
      "Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
    11. Re:My statistics by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Gah - user agent string. Even the forced preview doesn't work for me.

    12. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The number of browser users that even know how to spoof their browser's user agent is infinitesimally small. Imagining that it's even enough to break through the noise is silly.

    13. Re:My statistics by dedazo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      2001 called and said you can't use that tired old argument anymore. The default install of Firefox since 2.x (I believe) does not spoof IE in the user agent string. Firefox being the largest market share aside from any version of IE, the weight given to any other browser would be a statistical blip at best. In fact, if I remember correctly Konqueror in KDE3 and 4 actually spoofs Gecko by default. And Opera stopped spoofing MSIE after 6.x, IIRC.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    14. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well, his site is the Ballmer fan-zone http://www.ballmerzone.com/content.htm
      so what do you expect?

    15. Re:My statistics by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I really doubt there are many people spoofing their user agent. Opera made that easy to do, but not a lot of people even use Opera, let alone using Opera while spoofing IE. I doubt many Firefox users are spoofing IE also, Firefox is big enough that nearly any website that works in IE also works in Firefox (if I find a site that doesn't work in Opera, like GoDaddy's stupid nameserver update process, I try it in Firefox before IE).

      So, my point is that there's no reason to believe that a statistically significant number of users are actually spoofing their user agent string. It's possible to do, but there's no reason to believe people are actually doing it.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    16. Re:My statistics by asa · · Score: 2, Informative

      2001 called and said you can't use that tired old argument anymore. The default install of Firefox since 2.x (I believe) does not spoof IE in the user agent string. Firefox being the largest market share aside from any version of IE, the weight given to any other browser would be a statistical blip at best. In fact, if I remember correctly Konqueror in KDE3 and 4 actually spoofs Gecko by default. And Opera stopped spoofing MSIE after 6.x, IIRC.

      No version of Firefox ever spoofed as IE. Safari has a "like Gecko" in their user agent string, and Opera spoofs only for specific sites.

    17. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are at 84.29% IE, 11.1% Firefox, 3.55% Safari, 0.86% Chrome, and 0.09% Mozilla. I think the kind of Web site has a big impact on what sort of visitors you have. We have a lot of small business users, which I have always connected to the high IE numbers -- old Windows machines.

    18. Re:My statistics by dedazo · · Score: 1

      Ah, even better then. I seem to remember *some* Mozilla browser doing some spoofing (maybe SeaMonkey back in the day) or maybe I'm just confused because I had to spoof in order to make something work.

      The Safari bit makes sense since it's the same as Konq AFAIK.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    19. Re:My statistics by Intron · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My stats show an increase in IE 7 at the expense of IE 6 but not much else. Also many spiders like msnbot.

      I wonder if some of the stats change is due to Bing? That might change the mix of browsers going to some sites.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    20. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use IE tab with Firefox rather than switching over to IE for those websites that don't like Firefox (Netflix streaming, nbc, some random others that I don't remember). So does pretty much everyone else I know.

    21. Re:My statistics by IntlHarvester · · Score: 4, Informative

      As others said, forget spoofing.

      However, ad blockers break the data collection for most analytics system. So it is likely that Firefox is being underreported, just because the of the popularity of ABP, NoScript, various cookie blockers, and so on.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    22. Re:My statistics by panaceaa · · Score: 1

      That's bizarre. I have no interest in Safari personally, but I'd expect 3-5% Safari unless you have a specific demographic that does not appeal to Apple users. Does your web site tailor to developing countries, for example?

    23. Re:My statistics by Gospodin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      FWIW, my stats over the past 6 months (plus 5 days of July):

              Jan     Feb     Mar     Apr     May     Jun     Jul (partial)
      IE      82.2    80.7    79.6    77.2    78.1    77.3    75.3
      Firefox 11.9    13.4    14.3    15.8    14.0    14.6    15.5
      Safari   3.2     3.5     3.7     4.4     4.3     5.2     6.4
      Others   2.7     2.4     2.4     2.6     3.6     2.9     2.8

      The site is for a financial company and skews toward an older demographic.

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    24. Re:My statistics by metkat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, that is weird, I'd wonder if you're missing something stats-wise or if your site has some Safari issue you're not aware of? I work with a range of different sites, and I don't think I've seen Safari usage under five percent for any of them any time this year. FWIW, I haven't seen the giant drop the OP is referring to, just a continuation of the slow slide.

    25. Re:My statistics by gmack · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I used to. The Canadian employment insurance website for some inexplicable reason checked the browser and demanded either netscape or IE they fixed that but then inexplicably locked you out if your OS wasn't mac or Windows. My choices were either travel for 45 minutes and file my reports in person, install windows, or spoof my browser ID. Thankfully they have since come to their senses.

      St-Hubert ordering system had the same IE or netscape (I need my rotisserie chicken) as did several other food ordering systems. They all got fixed as Firefox gained market share.

    26. Re:My statistics by Razalhague · · Score: 1

      Uhh... Mozilla/5.0? Don't pretty much all browsers other than IE and Opera report as a type of Mozilla/5.0?

    27. Re:My statistics by DMalic · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there's something very off there. Mac usage is, what, 3-5% and present in many demographics unlikely to use Firefox..

    28. Re:My statistics by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      Only 8% of people even know what a browser is, much less a user agent string.

    29. Re:My statistics by miro+f · · Score: 1

      so if you're surfing using IEtab, your hit is (correctly) counted as a hit for IE

      --
      being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
    30. Re:My statistics by bcrowell · · Score: 1

      However, ad blockers break the data collection for most analytics system. So it is likely that Firefox is being underreported, just because the of the popularity of ABP, NoScript, various cookie blockers, and so on.

      Huh? The easiest way to collect browser stats is to configure apache so it records the user agent string in the usage log. The user agent string is completely unaffected by ad blockers, etc.

      If someone is doing something more complicated than that, using a technique that depends on javascript, cookies, etc., then presumably it's not because they're trying to measure browser popularity, it's because they're trying to measure something else. And if that's the case, they'd be idiots to publish the fancy, less reliable stats on browser popularity without checking them against the more reliable stats based on user agent strings.

    31. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      What are you smoking? I use User Agent Switcher and set it to IE anytime a site purposely fubars Firefox. By default it can impersonate IE and Opera.

    32. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Run an Android blog...

      My stats show a slight dip in FF with Chrome and Safari gaining. IE is the only constant. FF3.5 usage spiked on July 2nd, obviously. 80% of my IE visitors use IE 7 and that was constant between May and June.

      MAY
      FF: 52.04%
      IE: 19.18%
      Safari: 14.55%
      Chrome: 10.40%

      JUNE
      FF: 46.97%
      IE: 19.65%
      Safari: 19.79%
      Chrome: 12.37%

    33. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That very closely gels with what I am seeing on our gov site (non technical site with very high traffic volumes). we do 50 million hits a day and firefox is at 13.7% with IE just over 80%. Not sure why people are getting such huge numbers for firefox, they honestly don't seem to gel with what large tech agnostic sites are seeing.

    34. Re:My statistics by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      No, for large sites, it's much easier to do web-bug stats rather than log crunching.

      And, yes, most of published browser stats come from companies selling services which "measure something else".

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    35. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for large sites, it's much easier to do web-bug stats rather than log crunching.

      I'll second that. One of our big sites uses both Google Analytics and DoubleClick's Spotlight web-bugs.

    36. Re:My statistics by annodomini · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It wouldn't have to be just developing countries. In South Korea, it's pretty much impossible to use anything but a PC with Internet Explorer, since they have some kind of national identity system that only works as an ActiveX plugin in IE.

    37. Re:My statistics by annodomini · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hmm. You do realize that Safari reports itself as Mozilla/5.0, right?

      Here's mine:

      Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_5_7; en-us) AppleWebKit/530.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.1 Safari/530.18

      They do this because various websites sniff for various browsers, and they want to show up as much like Mozilla/Gecko as possible. If your user agent parser isn't very smart, it might miss the Safari/530.18 part of that user agent string.

      Of course, another possible explanation is that you work for a dental insurance company, for whom the most common users of the website are likely dental receptionists (for submitting claims), followed by people in HR (for signing up for services and looking up services on behalf of employees), both of which groups likely use only Windows machines.

    38. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IE Tab is embedding IE in Firefox's GUI! So you are still using IE you imbecile!

    39. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Local portal, about 60k visits/month:

      2009: Firefox 45.52%, IE 44.21%, Opera 6.22%, Chrome 2.97%
      2008: IE 45.53%, Firefox 45.92%, Opera 7.06%

    40. Re:My statistics by Spliffster · · Score: 1

      They do this because various websites sniff for various browsers, and they want to show up as much like Mozilla/Gecko as possible. If your user agent parser isn't very smart, it might miss the Safari/530.18 part of that user agent string.

      This is exactly the problem, browser sniffer should not sniff for products but for render engines. So for example sniffing for "safari" is as wrong as sniffing for "firefox".

      • Sniff for "KHTML" if you also want to detect safari (resp. khtml compatible browsers).
      • Sniff for "gecko" if you want to catch Seamonkey, Firefox, epiphany, etc.

      It's really quiet simple. Even better, there are tons of libraries which do it reliable already, I don't understand why so many people try to reinvent the wheel.

      -S

    41. Re:My statistics by marsu_k · · Score: 1

      This is exactly the problem, browser sniffer should not sniff for products but for render engines.

      *beep* Wrong. UA strings can be forged, so relying on them is not advisable. Instead one should detect browser features.

    42. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fairly large non-tech site I used to manage (hence Anonymous), around 35m visits/month according to google analytics:

      1. Internet Explorer
          June 7, 2009 - July 7, 2009 27,737,260 77.36%
          May 7, 2009 - June 6, 2009 26,546,644 76.41%
      2. Firefox
          June 7, 2009 - July 7, 2009 6,886,801 19.21%
          May 7, 2009 - June 6, 2009 7,079,929 20.38%
      3. Chrome
          June 7, 2009 - July 7, 2009 628,624 1.75%
          May 7, 2009 - June 6, 2009 553,845 1.59%
      4. Safari
          June 7, 2009 - July 7, 2009 410,155 1.14%
          May 7, 2009 - June 6, 2009 367,545 1.06%
      5. Opera
          June 7, 2009 - July 7, 2009 146,112 0.41%
          May 7, 2009 - June 6, 2009 150,814 0.43%

    43. Re:My statistics by Kiyyik · · Score: 1

      We run a B2B site over here, and I've noticed a definite drop in IE use, though admittedly rather less pronounced than, say, the Spongebob site above. Just at the moment for July, my numbers are running: IE: 77.88% Firefox: 15.18% Safari: 5.69% Chrome: 1.16% (finally broke 1% for us) Everyone else 1% of course. If I compare it to June, IE was at 79.04%, and June of last year was 90.58%, so a pretty good drop there over time. Funnily enough, the big mover seems to be Safari, which was less than 4% not so long ago, and esp. considering that our desktop software is windows-only (mind you--mac-head that I am--I have re-engineered the site to be more safari-friendly, so I like to think that's a factor).

    44. Re:My statistics by lomedhi · · Score: 1

      If the ad blocker does not allow the browser to issue an HTTP request to the analytics system at all, then the user agent is irrelevant. The ad-blocked browser is non-existent, as far as the analytics system is concerned, and therefore underreported.

      --
      Did you say "insightful" or "inciteful"?
    45. Re:My statistics by Kagura · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't have to be just developing countries. In South Korea, it's pretty much impossible to use anything but a PC with Internet Explorer, since they have some kind of national identity system that only works as an ActiveX plugin in IE.

      It's not just their national ID number system (which all websites require for registration) that's like that. Pretty much every Korean site with more than just text and pictures is so heavily ActiveXed that it's ridiculous. I have to run IETab on most popular Korean sites, such as CyWorld.

    46. Re:My statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some statistics on a website targeting a specific geological group of environmentalists (of which 60% were still on dial up in 2006) -
      49% MSIE 7.0
      21% MSIE 6.0
      15% Firefox 3.0.x.x
      5% MSIE 8.0
      4% Safari
      2% Chrome ... (all below 1%)
      0.35% Netscape (3 + 4 + 7) ...

    47. Re:My statistics by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm sure there are actually people spoofing, but when you're talking about aggregate usage numbers where the sample size is tens or hundreds of millions, you're talking about a .01 or .001 percent difference, it's just not statistically significant. Your example was accessing a Canadian insurance website from your Linux computer, you've got to admit that's a fringe case. Frankly, if a website can't manage to set up a cross-platform application, I doubt they're tracking usage for reporting in these types of studies. I used to have Opera spoof when I went to my bank site, but I haven't had to do that for years. I did it in the past for a while on a single site, but it's not something I practice. I would rather Opera shows up in their logs, just in case they actually look at them.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    48. Re:My statistics by gmack · · Score: 1

      Well employment insurance in Canada is where you go for money (up to 6 months) when you lose your job so it's not that fringe.

      My point was more that I used to have to spoof just to preform day to day tasks but I don't now. As alternative browsers have gained share the number of sites that to browser id checks has gone down and that I'll bet reduces the number of people who need to spoof.

      My actual point was that spoofing used to be a possibly valid argument for firefox and opera having higher share than shows up in the stats but I think that's long since not become an issue.

  9. No drop off here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    We've seen no major drop off, just a steady and slow decline. We track over 15 million users a day across the sites we manage here in the UK (mainly council properties).

    1. Re:No drop off here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it can't have really dropped off by 8% but their figures might show that. In that case they have to publish them as they are. What kind of "review" can change the facts?

    2. Re:No drop off here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are managing Council sites it's unlikely you would see a drop off.

      I work in IT in a UK Council and like most public sector organisations what browser is used is standardised across the whole organisation.

      I use firefox but only because I am a developer. The rest of the organisation (in the tens of thousands) has to use IE6. And their PCs are locked down so they can't use anything else.

      It's unlikely you will ever see a shift away from the OS standard browser in this kind of environment. Follow the same rules across other organisations and you could be looking at a large chunk of IE stats coming from users forced to use IE but who may use firefox/safari/etc. at home.

  10. hmm.... it's summer? by timtux · · Score: 5, Funny

    Couldn't it just be that all the geeks are running firefox/opera/chrome and everyone else is outside in the nice weather?

    1. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by nschubach · · Score: 1

      I think you underestimate the number of "non-tech" people that kill time on the Internet...

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    2. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not too mention everyone who uses IE at work is taking their vacation!

      Its not people switching browsers, its switching off!

      (probably an innaccurate statement, I haven't even looked at the numbers)

    3. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by asa · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, summertime is the worst time for Firefox usage. Firefox is a much larger percentage of European usage than U.S. usage and so when Europe goes on summer vacation for a few months, Firefox's global share falls measurably.

    4. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by LiquidFire_HK · · Score: 1

      I must be missing something, but why does it matter that Europe has more Firefox market share? It's summer in the whole northern hemisphere, and I bet that accounts for the majority of web hits.

    5. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by segfault7375 · · Score: 1

      But I would think most geeks take a laptop on vacation (hell, I took mine on my honeymoon). So Firefox's share wouldn't fall so much as shift to popular European vacation spots.

    6. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Informative

      European nations require companies to give employees more paid vacations--4-6 weeks on average. Some companies pretty much shut down during the summer months. In the US, you tend to get your two weeks and that's about it.

    7. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by phantomcircuit · · Score: 1

      It's simple. When Europeans go on vacation they're on vacation

      Crazy idea, right?

      Hell if you go to France the wrong time of year you'll end up without any restaurants open.

    8. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      In the US, you tend to get your two weeks and that's about it.

      They give employees paid vacations in the USA?

      I always just assumed that when an employee wanted a vacation the fired them on the spot.
      Then re-hired them when they felt the employee had learned their lesson.
      Sort of creating the effect of a vacation without having to pay them.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    9. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I live in Phoenix, Arizona, you insensitive clod! This is the time of year that everyone wants to stay inside, with the temperature currently at 106.

    10. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by tibman · · Score: 1

      I would hope those Europeans don't just disappear, they must be somewhere in the world

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    11. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Atario · · Score: 2, Funny

      Those crafty socialist bastards! Enjoying a high standard of living and getting loads of free time? Must be a plot, I tells ya...

      --
      "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
    12. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by glwtta · · Score: 5, Funny

      In the US, you tend to get your two weeks and that's about it.

      It's OK, we make up for it by being hideously inefficient most of the rest of the time.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    13. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Was that an unladen European vacationer? AIIIEEEeeeee...

      You Northerners and your backwards summers. We've got black ice. And penguins, musn't forget the penguins, although they're mostly down at Cape Schank. They seem to be comfortable.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    14. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh, I'm in the US, and get six weeks vacation now. In three years, that will go up to eight weeks vacation. I guess I don't fit into your little pattern, do I?

      Neither do most of the people I know, for that matter. It tends to either be significant reasonable vacation time for skilled work, or no vacation time for unskilled labor, not much in between these days.

    15. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Europeans don't use the Internet while on vacation?

    16. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Weather? What is this "weather" you speak of?

    17. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed - the German Wikipedia has an interesting table on the average amount of vacation days given to employees in 2003 here (the article's in German, of course, but chances are you'll be able to make sense of the table even if you don't speak that).

      Apparently, the USA are at 12 vacation days, while those European nations listed vary between 20 (Switzerland) and 33 (Sweden). Germany itself has 29.1.

    18. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by Basje · · Score: 1

      Right on: firefox relative usage peaks during weekends, IE dips during the weekends. It's easily visible in the graphs: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-daily-20080701-20090707

      I suspect the problem to be more subtle though. Possibly a change in the useragent string of firefox 3.5 that was not picked up correctly or something like that.

      --
      the pun is mightier than the sword
    19. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by DinDaddy · · Score: 1

      That was the only way I got time off to get married from my employer.

    20. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      How else could sites like Slashdot exist?

    21. Re:hmm.... it's summer? by mcfedr · · Score: 1

      two weeks?? ouch...yet another reason not to live in the nation of 'freedom' etc...

  11. even less, here by phriedrich · · Score: 1

    On some small pages I have to maintain the rates of IE dropped below 50%. The highest IE-rate I got on a page for a hotel with 46% and the lowest with 28% on the one for my soaring club.

  12. It's because IE 6 support was droped on some sites by denis-The-menace · · Score: 4, Informative

    There are a few sites where IE 6.0 displays things badly because the web master stopped kludging for it.

    Slashdot.org
    some parts of Google.
    (Help me here!)

    Joe-six paks noticed this and has found out that he has options...

    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  13. IE8 likely to blame by Cryophallion · · Score: 1

    I'm betting there is an issue with the user agent reporting with IE8, or the stats are focused on IE7.
    MS pushed IE8 out as a security update this month, and I bet most non-business computers got auto-updated.

    Either that, or they didn't like IE8 with compatibility mode (hey, there's an idea, let's re-break the sites so they display the way the webs designers had to code it to get around our own bugs), so they went to FF 3.5.

    Or, everyone could have just given up and gone to Mac and Linx/Unix derivative. But I think that is too much to hope for.

    1. Re:IE8 likely to blame by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Bingo. And it was a Critical update, so most users woke up to find it auto-installed for them.

      IE8 was a pretty big UI change, and users don't like it (they hate "new"). I know that when people ask me how to switch back I tell them that "they can't, but they can use Firefox instead".

    2. Re:IE8 likely to blame by clampolo · · Score: 1

      I'm hoping that all of this is true. I want to tear my hair out every time I have to do special code branches for IE since MS refuse to follow W3C standards

    3. Re:IE8 likely to blame by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      No, users LOVE "new" they just hate "different"

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    4. Re:IE8 likely to blame by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I'd argue there's a problem with IE7 and 8 in general. I've seen a slight bump in the number of infected IE7 and IE8 malware infections lately; often, the infection isn't systemic, and can be avoided by not using IE (because using IE is impossible due to brokenness). Most clients will opt for using Firefox over having to have their whole system reinstalled.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    5. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Torodung · · Score: 1

      I tell them that "they can't, but they can use Firefox instead".

      You can switch back by uninstalling it, as detailed here.

      http://support.microsoft.com/kb/957700/#altsteps

      That is...

      %windir%\ie8\spuninst\spuninst.exe

      generally does the trick. IE7 has a similar spuninst folder and executable, if you wanted to roll it back to IE6. It's a very clean uninstall, too, in both cases.

      Then you track down a copy of the IE7 full install. The link still works as I type this.

      It's a pain, but you can do it. I would recommend Firefox, but I wouldn't tell someone who specifically asks me how to get IE7 back that it "can't be done." That would be untrue.

    6. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Cryophallion · · Score: 1

      Will just uninstalling it make it not re-install as a critical update? I would think the next time automatic updates checks the installed software it would just re-install it again.

    7. Re:IE8 likely to blame by CyberDragon777 · · Score: 1

      I tell them that "they can't, but they can use Firefox instead".

      You can switch back by uninstalling it, as detailed here.

      No, he can NOT!

      They _WILL_ HAVE to use Firefox.

      Understood?

      --
      We both said a lot of things that you are going to regret.
    8. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I would recommend Firefox, but I wouldn't tell someone who specifically asks me how to get IE7 back that it "can't be done." That would be untrue.

      The ends justify the means...

      Besides, as you say, "It's a pain, but you can do it.". If it's that much trouble, it's not too far away to say that "it can't be done". Most people should know that when someone says that, it's not exactly true, as anything is possible given enough time, money, effort, etc., but what they really mean is that it's either not feasible, or not worth the trouble. After all, you could always just wipe the system, reinstall Windows, and that'll get you back to an older IE version, but at what cost in time and effort?

    9. Re:IE8 likely to blame by smash · · Score: 1

      According to my web logs, most users are running with windows updates TURNED OFF (ie, the majority of IE users hitting my site are from 6.0 or previous).

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    10. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Torodung · · Score: 1

      There's a blocking tool for that, or you can just set Automatic Updates to "notify" and then ignore it and check "never show me this again."

      I don't recommend anybody set Automatic Updates to automatically download.

      Here's the blocking tool.

    11. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Torodung · · Score: 1

      Ya. Ya zey vill, von't zey? ;^P

    12. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Torodung · · Score: 1

      No. In this case there are very straight forward, but not readily available, remedies. That's why I put in the links. All you'd need is Google to find that stuff, though.

      I prevent both IE7 and 8 from installing, on request, by using the blocking kits provided by MS to block Automatic Update from installing them.

      Then I was foolish enough to try them on my own machine, to see what they did, and uninstalled them without a hitch. No need to do anything painful like a reinstall of the OS.

      It's only a pain to an end-user. One whose C: drive is still hidden from them and they're afraid to click "show the contents of this folder." Any reasonably skilled operator can fix it up in 5 minutes with the right Knowledge Base articles. It's finding the right Knowledge Base articles/tools that is the pain. There are toolkits for everything readily Googled. Both for blocking the update in the registry, and for uninstalling when there's no item listed in "Add or Remove Programs."

      They're non-obvious is all.

      As a technician, if someone said give me back IE7, or IE6 even, I could do it in minutes, and would prefer to do so in some cases because IE7 messes up large URL shortcut icons and IE8 slows down certain aspects (launching folder shortcuts from the desktop, for instance) of an older machine. I've never done IE8 all the way back to IE6 through IE7. I'm guessing that can't be done.

      Everything else is pretty easy for me. A pain if you've never looked up all the KB articles.

      BTW, I can't stand to use any version of IE for anything but Windows/Office Update, and have a dual-boot into Debian when I want to get any real work done. I just maintain this crap, I don't actually like it. ;^)

      --
      Toro

      Posting from Firefox, in Windows XP because he was gaming earlier.

    13. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Torodung · · Score: 1

      If it's that much trouble, it's not too far away to say that "it can't be done".

      I might also add that anything I've ever needed support for in Linux required me to look it up and cut/paste it into a terminal. Steps like the one's I gave above are SOP in Linux. I mean that it is "a pain" by Windows standards, for typical end-users of Windows.

      I am defining "a pain" as my clients do: You need to open up the console. Most of them have never seen the console!

      So long as you have modest search engine skills, these steps should be no problem for most readers of Slashdot.

      --
      Toro

    14. Re:IE8 likely to blame by Dullstar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then you have me. I just put on one of those "Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox" things (except it's worded differently). If you aren't going to follow the standards, why should I waste my time coding my website to look right in your browser? Also, I rejected the IE8 "update." Why should I update to the "latest version of the web browser I am most comfortable using" when I don't use IE? No need updating unused OS components... I don't know how you feel, but it offends me how Microsoft told me that IE8 was the latest version of the web browser I am most familiar with and most comfortable using, or something along those lines! If I use Firefox, then IE8 does not fit the description, Firefox 3.5 does.

    15. Re:IE8 likely to blame by A12m0v · · Score: 1

      IE8 isn't much different from IE7 in terms of UI.

      --
      GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  14. Looking from multiple angles by asa · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you look at the longterm trends reported by Net Applcations, something that StatCounter doesn't offer, it's hard to conclude that anything dramatic has just happened.

    http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2009/06/historical_view.html

    These longer trends are steady and smooth and there's nothing that's happened in the last couple of months that would cause IE to fall off the cliff.

    That being said, there is a lot of churn in the various browser versions. IE is really a collection of browsers with measurable share, IE 6, IE 7, and IE 8. Looking at these versions, it's clear that a lot is happening.

    http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2009/07/a_browser_prediction.html

    It's likely that IE 7 and IE 6 will fall to under 10% global share by the end of this year and that IE 8 will grow to approximately 40%. That would give IE 60% overall, Firefox about 25%, Safari about 10%, and "other" would hold the remaining 5%.

    1. Re:Looking from multiple angles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The nice thing about StatCounter is that it offers statistics for different countries/regions for free (Net Applications needs a subscription for that).

      According to StatCounter, Firefox has almost caught up with IE in Europe and there are several countries (Germany, Finland, etc.) where Firefox is the number one browser. China, on the other hand, seems to be completely dominated by IE with a 96% share :)

    2. Re:Looking from multiple angles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IE6 is never going to die. It is the punishment for our sins.

    3. Re:Looking from multiple angles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you look at this graph of long-term trends from statcounter:

      Source: StatCounter Global Stats - Browser Version Market Share

      you'll see that mostly what's happened is that IE7 has dropped in almost exact step with the growth of IE8, probably because most of it represents autoupgrades done by windows update, and apart from that IE overall has lost a few percent to FF in the same period, and that's about it.

  15. Skeptical by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So it will probably be healthy to remain skeptical until trend this is confirmed by other organizations.

    Especially after all the breathless "Firefox is taking over" stories on Slashdot, submitted by fanboys every time there's a spike in downloads (like after a release!) or the browser's market share gains a tiny fraction of a percent.

    Mind you, I'm really glad to see that we're finally getting some serious competition in the browser marketplace. But before you congratulate yourselves too much, send a psychic "Thanks for Shooting Yourselves in the Foot!" to Steve and Bill. Firefox, Safari, Chrome and Opera all have real advantages, but none of these would have overcome IE's big advantage: being the default browser on the desktop OS that owns 90% of its market. The only thing that could have overcome that advantage is not the advantages of the competition, but the extreme crappiness of IE itself.

    1. Re:Skeptical by pbhj · · Score: 1

      [...] but none of these would have overcome IE's big advantage: being the default browser on the desktop OS that owns 90% of its market. The only thing that could have overcome that advantage is not the advantages of the competition, but the extreme crappiness of IE itself.

      Isn't Win7 shipping without a default browser (in Europe at least I expect)?

      No I can't be bothered to Google it.

    2. Re:Skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't Win7 shipping without a default browser (in Europe at least I expect)?

      Yes, and no.
      MS is proposing to ship full retail versions with no browser, but in the OEM case (probably 95%+ of the consumer market) they expect the OEMs to install one or more browsers which apparently can but does not have to include IE.

      However, that's just a proposal; MS is still in discussion with the European competition authorities about this issue and things may change...

    3. Re:Skeptical by skeeto · · Score: 1

      If it didn't suck so much it also wouldn't matter so much to have alternatives be popular. Because it's, by far, the worst non-niche browser and at the same time the most popular it does so much harm to the web.

    4. Re:Skeptical by fm6 · · Score: 1

      If it didn't suck so much it also wouldn't matter so much to have alternatives be popular.

      I disagree. If the alternatives hadn't started getting a following, web developers would have gone on coding for IE, and not worrying about being standards compliant. IE-compatibility would have ended up being the de-facto standard for web applications.

      Look at what Microsoft did when they created the de-facto standard for desktop platforms. Monopoly issues aside, do you really want the web to be designed around the kind of complicated, inconsistent, and poorly documented conventions that Microsoft invents?

    5. Re:Skeptical by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I can't be bothered to tell you.

    6. Re:Skeptical by pbhj · · Score: 1

      lol

  16. 1% maybe... by mwhahaha · · Score: 3, Informative

    On the two sites I have access to for this info IE dropped about 1% for May vs June. One site (~19M visitors a month) it was 57.91% vs 56.64%. The other (~132M visitors) it was 60.17% vs 59.40%. I always question these sort of numbers because browser usage is very closely tied with demographics, and I wonder just what sites are they using to get them...

    1. Re:1% maybe... by LiquidFire_HK · · Score: 1

      How about July?

    2. Re:1% maybe... by mwhahaha · · Score: 1

      For July only another 1% drop from June. 55.60% and 58.47%. The point is, not an 8% drop. Now January vs July is an 8% drop for one of the sites. The other one is only a 3% drop. In Jan, 59.74% and 64.11%..

  17. Re:Not true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kaspersky reports that links to a virus

  18. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering that the unemployment numbers continue to rise, less business users running IE + more consumers running iphones might account for part of the change.

  19. Virus here by GoNINzo · · Score: 1

    Yeah, this is a set of viruses that does a lot of popups and more. Skip this link, if you can. Think we'll see more of it in the future as well.

    --
    Gonzo Granzeau
    "Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
    1. Re:Virus here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whats a virus? is that some kind of windows/ie feature?

    2. Re:Virus here by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      It is some nucleic acid - protein complex that mutiplies inside cells.

      You should know, the one named infueza is getting quite a bit of media exposition recently.

  20. Re:Not true by Urd.Yggdrasil · · Score: 1

    The link goes to on nimp, don't click it.

  21. What would really be useful... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    Would be a breakdown of browser share by type of user/system.

    Different users and systems have, by their browser choices, effects on different aspects of the web. For instance, Big Serious Corporate setups are likely a bastion of IE6, maybe some 7 among the adventurous ones. This has an enormously strong influence on developers of corporate intranet stuff, and portal sites; but probably has relatively little effect on your trendy web 2.0 entertainment/social networking outfits. Most places that are still using IE6 probably have IT staff blocking friendTube and Twitbook and whatnot.

    The situation with, say, college students is pretty much exactly the opposite. Aggregate numbers are interesting, and it is always fun to watch IE's share sink; but they don't really tell you what you actually want to know; which is "What mixes of browsers are particular sites or categories of sites running into, what browsers are different groups of people using(and how willing are they to switch)?"

  22. Re:Not true by anonymousNR · · Score: 1

    don't click parent's link

    --
    -- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
  23. I know why its broken.... by twebb72 · · Score: 1

    Q: Whats all that churning and bubbling in there? A: That's Mr. Inexplicable Statistical Variations

  24. Please let this be true! by mcrbids · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not only would this change be welcome, but it would force Microsoft to "play ball" with the standards for HTML rather than roll their own and mark all the bug reports "will not fix".

    Take a look at the history:

    1) Microsoft is all about selling stuff on CD-ROM with the marketing vision "Information at your fingertips".

    2) The Internet happens, and overnight, Netscape is a raving success because it actually PUT information at your fingertips.

    3) Billy boy issues a memo to the whole company to turn as fast as possible to support the Internetz.

    4) IE comes out - first a sucktacular mess, and finally almost livable around IE 5 or so.

    5) IE 6 comes out, Netscape crumbles.

    6) Netscape goes underground at AOL who throws a few developers at it while using it to negotiate a link on the Desktop. IE Dominates so tremendously that it's the platform of choice simply because it's installed everywhere.

    7) Microsoft stops doing anything for half a decade. (whistle whistle)

    8) Navigator continuously improves, finally re-emerging as Phoenix/Firefox. Suddenly, Microsoft's browser looks like a 5-year-old pile of cruft that's difficult to program for.

    Suddenly, Microsoft will give a shiat. They might finally fix the things that developers!developers!developers! have been whining, bitching, complaining, and screaming about all these years.

    Irony: "Free Internet Exporer 8" ad at the top while I type this message!

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    1. Re:Please let this be true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually in it's latter days netscape was bloated and slow. It had tons of features nobody needed or wanted, and IE was just faster. Back in the day you may remember Microsoft had the fastest Java VM, and it was baked into IE. Netscape didn't crumble because of IE, Netscape crumbled because it was slow POS, and IE was there to pick up the pieces. I mean what other browser were you going to run in those days, HotJava? I don't think so!

    2. Re:Please let this be true! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At point 6) you really should put "IE dominates because netscape was, by comparison, confusing, bugridden shit that was shamed by IE4 and IE5".

      It took _ages_ for netscape/firefox to actually be a quality product worth comparing with IE. Do you not remember how uncomfortable Netscape 6 was?

  25. JavaScript AI to the rescue for Internet Explorer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Artificial Intelligence created expressly for MicroSoft Internet Explorer (MSIE) will save the day (but not save the Planet Earth from rapacious HomoSapiens forebears of Machine Intelligence).

    JavaScript for artificial intelligence lets the True AI Mind come alive in the IE browser.

    Artificial intelligence in Forth and JavaScript encourages a continuing high market share for Internet Explorer (IE).

  26. MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by kenh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    First, the MJ factor - these stats my be low, but I bet they will rise again once all the web-surfing born-again Michael Jackson fans are reflected in the stats for July.

    Also, the summer factor is huge - at $WORK (Public school district) we have over 1,000 windows boxes that are now sitting idle through August, their IE 7 and IE 8 browsers aren't flipping through the most popular websites anymore. There are likely MILLIONS and MILLIONS of idle Windows machines at Universities and public schools skewing the stats down for IE 6, 7, and 8.

    --
    Ken
    1. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by nschubach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Plenty of time to go install FF3.5 on all those machines so the students will enjoy working in the lab again... ;)

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    2. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by nschubach · · Score: 1

      Actually, now that I think about it...

      If that's true, that would only show that IE is only popular because of silly campus/business mandates that their students/employees be forced to use IE and that they choose to use other browsers when they can. I know I fall into that situation. I'm sure I'm not alone.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    3. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by AscianBound · · Score: 1

      I doubt this school effect is really as significant as you claim (with no support). And even then, probably a decent portion of school computers use alternatives to IE. As equally anecdotal counter-evidence to your claim that summer decreases IE usage, I'd like to point out that the browser I am forced to use at my summer workplace is IE. There is no reason to believe that changes in user habits during summer will only move away from IE. And finally, has this kind of change away from IE been seen before during the summer? I do not keep up with broswer shares, but if this was normal for summer, I doubt people would be pointing it out or checking their numbers.

    4. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not to mention holidays and layoffs hitting corporate users hard.

    5. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by hydromike2 · · Score: 0

      um, IE is not being skewed down, that means that when people have the choice of what browser is installed on the machine they use it is something other than IE, so it could be said that during the school year IE is skewed UP

    6. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by divisionbyzero · · Score: 1

      Surely these students surf the web from home? Are you suggesting many of them use FF et alia? If so, I'd say schools and universities skew the results up for IE, because when these folks are in the real world they will be using something other than IE.

    7. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by Megahard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Take a look at the line graphs over a year. http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-daily-20080701-20090707 There's a bounce every weekend for Firefox. Also, what happened in Brazil last September 18?? http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-BR-daily-20080701-20090707

      --
      I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
    8. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      IE at work here. Wow, IE6.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    9. Re:MJ Factor, plus, it is summer by sirrunsalot · · Score: 1

      Google trends don't lie. Firefox bounces up on the weekends while IE dips down. The difference between work and home? (See also sex/news. Hmm...) http://google.com/trends?q=firefox&ctab=0&geo=all&date=mtd&sort=0 http://google.com/trends?q=ie&ctab=0&geo=all&date=mtd&sort=0

  27. I CHANGED IT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Window just isn't ready for the intelligent yet. It may be ready for the web servers that you blonds use to distribute your porous subroutines across the world wide web, but the average computer user isn't going to spend months learning how to use a CLI and then hours compiling packages so that they can get a workable graphic interface to check their mail with because they don't have to with Linux, especially not when they already have a Windows machine that is so security flawed and is backed by a major corporation, as opposed to Linux which is only supported by a few million developers verses a few hundred droids. The last thing I want is a level 5 windows dwarf providing me my secure-less OS.

    There I fixed that for you.

  28. Matches my numbers by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 1

    While my various sites (blogs) are all relatively low-traffic, I consistently run at about 56% IE with the rest dominated by Firefox and Safari (although some sites have a lot more Firefox traffic than IE traffic).

  29. end of semester by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could this be in part attributed to the time of year? There is less surfing at schools and universities that run IE and more usage at home with the alternative browsers.

  30. My stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, I've just checked my stats for my site, which is reasonably high-traffic but a geology/earth-sciences site so it may be skewed with a large percentage of university campus access - so please don't read too much into the figures, but it still makes interesting reading:

    7/09 is of course July 2009 and the earliest stats I have is March 2005. Note that earlier stats also had a few % for Mozilla which I haven't added to the Firefox total, so it's simply Firefox v IE v Safari v Chrome.

              7/09        1/09           7/08        1/08           7/07                           3/05
    IE        65.9%       68.5%          73.7%       74.2%          75.4%             --- -        83.4%
    Firefox   22.6%       21.2%          19.2%       15.3%          14.6%                           6.1%
    Safari     4.6%        4.8%           2.9%        2.5%           2.2%                           0.8%
    Chrome     2.3%        0.1%            -           -

    So, not exactly a dramatic falloff, but certainly a trend that's continuing to give bad news to Microsoft.

  31. I hope someone made screen shots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This report's data is currently under review. It will become available as soon as possible.

    [http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8]

    All reports are reviewed at the beginning of each month to ensure the following:

    • No data collection errors occurred
    • There are no major inexplicable statistical variations

    All reports that have not been reviewed are prominently labeled with a warning. If any part of a report's data falls outside the reviewed timeframe, a warning is also displayed.

    [http://marketshare.hitslink.com/status.aspx]

  32. ~20% here, and still in decline by Enleth · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's for a major Polish website devoted to a popular, long-running game series. The userbase is indeed a little more tech-conscious than the average Internet user around here, but not by much - just a few power gamers and techies, lots of "casuals". Nevertheless, IE was at ~70% in 2004, ~50% in 2005 and so on down to ~25% in the late 2008 and ~20% now. Right now it's kind of stabilizing (but still falling) and I don't forsee it falling below 15% anytime soon, but I'm starting to suspect that by the end of the year, Opera might overtake it (16% and rising, mostly ex-Firefox users right now).

    We're not actively doing anything anti-IE or pro-FF/Opera (well, maybe except that IE is getting all the CSS/JS bugfixes lats, but that's *because* it's so low in the stats - we can afford letting the IE support lag behind), so it's mostly an outside trend, I think.

    All the statistics I'm basing this post on were generated by Google Analytics, by the way.

    --
    This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
    1. Re:~20% here, and still in decline by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Eastern Europe has traditionally seen much higher usage of alternative browsers, since the very first Mozilla versions. It's also the only place where Opera has a notable userbase (which is also evident from your stats).

    2. Re:~20% here, and still in decline by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would that be?

    3. Re:~20% here, and still in decline by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have no good explanation, only some guesswork. Computers came to the Soviet bloc later, and weren't even luxury items, but were only available at universities and at some workplaces. Because of that, a certain hacker-like mentality arose around them - quite similar to what happened in the West a decade or two earlier, but this time it was an epoch of PC already, and therefore the knowledge and skills were centered around that. The result is that CIS and Eastern Europe have an abnormally high concentration of DOS/Windows power users, who aren't afraid to mess with their system - and who historically prefer browsers other than IE for obvious reasons. Opera in particular was so successful because it was there (and more stable and feature complete) before Mozilla, and because the fact that it was then a commercial, for-pay product was entirely irrelevant in a software culture where using licensed software is considered eccentric.

      One of the Opera guys had a market analysis of their market share recently, with essentially the same results as what GP describes for CIS and Eastern Europe (there's more there if you care to follow the links deeper). And Here is a map that shows the distribution visually (it's an interactive SVG, and Firefox screws it up, so you'll need Opera or Chrome to view it properly - but for the most part it just shows that the more eastern the country, the higher the Opera usage, peaking at ~50%).

      In general, you can assume that wherever Opera is popular, so is Firefox (though it's interesting that Opera actually overtakes Firefox in Russia).

    4. Re:~20% here, and still in decline by elashish14 · · Score: 1

      That's good to know. I'm using NoScript to block Google Analytics, and I'm willing to assume people on your site are using it too. There's a good chance that Firefox usage is higher than reported. Nobody using IE would do that.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    5. Re:~20% here, and still in decline by mcfedr · · Score: 1

      better support for non english speaking users is often the reason, or at least got there first in the case of vkontakte.ru v facebook.com, facebook added international language support, but only after everyone had an account on vkontakte...

    6. Re:~20% here, and still in decline by mcfedr · · Score: 1

      oh, and its free, people in this part of the world cant afford windows, so there are many hacked versions that people use, often preinstalled with firefox (and photoshop and office and everything else you normaly install yourself when starting with an offical windows disc)

  33. Is this New York Post for nerds? by brasselv · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not on MS payroll, but honestly, is this article worth any attention?

    I hope FF gets 99% of the market soon, but this type of baseless speculation certainly does not help.

    --
    "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." (Oscar Wilde)
    1. Re:Is this New York Post for nerds? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 1

      I hope FF gets 99% of the market soon...

      I don't. I don't want any browser getting so much marketshare that it can dictate standards the way IE has.

  34. I hope so! by Abalamahalamatandra · · Score: 1

    I tell everyone I know, along with everyone I work with, that surfing anything but internal corporate sites with Internet Exploder is the same thing as saying "take my machine, please!" to the world at large. Since I'm in charge of security infrastructure for a nationwide company with over 10K employees, I get listened to a bit more than your average geek. I'm single-handedly responsible for at least 30-40 people, if not more, switching to Firefox over the last 6 months, I'm quite sure.

    The current ActiveX video 0-day, plus the constantly-updated list of sites that are actively exploiting it, is perfect proof that you're a fool to surf with IE.

    You're also a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis, but that's another topic.

  35. Hmm by trifish · · Score: 2, Funny

    Or maybe NetApps just came up with a creative way to earn more money from ads by delaying the release and having people come back every day for one week to check if the data is already there...

    Well, why not. It's ok. But let's not misinterpret that.

  36. w3schools doesn't show anything by Xtifr · · Score: 4, Informative

    W3 Schools which has an admitted alternate-browser bias does not show any sort of abrupt drop-off for IE, and if anywhere were going to, I would think it would be this site. In fact, it shows Firefox dropping for the first time since September of last year (when Chrome was initially released), but only half a percentage point. IE7 is losing ground to IE8 rather quickly, but IE6 actually gained a half a percentage point since May. Chrome is also up another half a point, and nothing else really had enough movement to be worth mentioning (Safari up a tenth, Opera down a tenth).

    1. Re:w3schools doesn't show anything by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Wrong. If you want to see where people have switched from IE to another browser, you need to go to where > 80% of the users have had IE. If those people switch you know something momentous is happening. If a few percent of a minority switch on a site that's already diverse - could just be blip.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    2. Re:w3schools doesn't show anything by pbhj · · Score: 1

      it shows Firefox dropping for the first time since September of last year (when Chrome was initially released), but only half a percentage point. IE7 is losing ground to IE8 rather quickly, but IE6 actually gained a half a percentage point since May.

      Unless this is actually a nightmare and not RL then IE6 didn't gain any extra users.

      In the UK and across Europe colleges and universities have now closed for the summer, maybe some schools (under-16s) too?. If these users are generally using Firefox then that would probably account for FFs loss, the total userbase shrinking would then account for IE6s apparent gain?

      The same blip doesn't appear to show for June last year though so I'm probably wrong.

    3. Re:w3schools doesn't show anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I would expect w3schools to be a lagging indicator, since web developers running IE to test in it won't start dropping off until long after it's widely acknowledged that IE's market also has. Although, to be fair, that belies my own behavior -- I usually visit w3schools in FF or Safari, even if I have an IE open elsewhere for testing.

    4. Re:w3schools doesn't show anything by mcfedr · · Score: 1

      surely most of the people using w3schools are the people with every browser under the sun on their computer, which will make there stats really weird

  37. As long as techs give the same advice I do by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    which is to avoid using IE and use Firefox, I suspect this trend will continue.

    Every tech knows that most spyware comes in via ActiveX controls on IE (or stupid users clicking on crap, which is probably more responsible than IE itself). Regardless of what improvements Microsoft has made in IE7 and IE8, my advice - and likely that of every other tech in the industry - will be for organizations and home users to avoid using IE and only use Firefox. That and not clicking on crap are the two main things users can do to avoid spyware.

    This drop in IE usage, if confirmed, is almost certainly due to the penetration into "common wisdom" that IE is insecure. Even home users I get as clients these days are usually using Firefox.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  38. My Stats Disagree by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 3, Informative

    The stats for MagPortal.com (should be fairly unbiased) are not showing a drop in MSIE of that magnitude. Here is a comparison going from the last week in May to the first week in July:

    MSIE: 66.10% -> 64.34%
    Firefox: 25.71% -> 27.41%
    Safari: 5.90% -> 5.61%
    Chrome: 2.29% -> 2.65%

    1. Re:My Stats Disagree by vitaflo · · Score: 1

      My site doesn't see much of a difference either. 175,000 visits per month and here's the change in browser usage from May to July:

      IE: -0.91%
      FF: -0.13%
      Safari: +1.15%
      Chrome: +0.32%

    2. Re:My Stats Disagree by anomalous+cohort · · Score: 1

      I saw a 10% drop in my stats this past month but I have seen such drops before and the IE stats come back in subsequent months. My wife still uses IE and I have noticed that she complains more about browser crashes than she used to. I have set windows update on her machine to automatic for critical updates. If that perception was shared by others, then I could see a precipitous drop in IE usage in the future.

  39. Re:Yes, of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The percentage is irrelevant. We need a certain absolute critical mass for open source to work. I don't care if 50 thousand or 50 billion people use other systems, as long as we have enough people to keep the core systems supported and improved.

  40. Google Analytics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My stats (from google analytics) show a monthly ~2% drop in IE since the beginning of the year. June was below 48%. Used to be much higher...

  41. Ugh!!! by ohtani · · Score: 1

    Ugh ugh ugh UGH! STOP IT PEOPLE! Stop it!

    Seriously stop basing a SINGLE SITE that is NOT well known to the GENERAL PUBLIC as a meter of how many people use IE or not.

    Infact I just looked at my stats for June. Guess what browser was #1 and was probably ATLEAST 50% of the hits (also including bots)? IE 5!

    Not 6, not even 7. 5. 70,000 hits marked as IE5. Next inline was Firefox 3 w/ 5600 hits.

    Let's take what is considered the "top 10" or "top 100" sites of the internet and use THEIR stats to figure things out.

    --
    Pancakes. Oh I blew it.
    1. Re:Ugh!!! by JobyOne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I appreciate your sentiment, but you come off sounding like a raving loon.

      If we're not supposed to base our opinions on a "SINGLE SITE" (which we're not, most discussion revolves around aggregate data), why should we care about your site? Also, what the hell is the topic of your site to attract such a crowd of drooling mouth breathers (as I assume anyone still using IE5 must be)? I want to get in on that action, I bet my click through rates would go through the roof.

      What browsers to actively test/support is a decision best handled on a per-site basis. No two sites are the same demographic, and different demographics have different tastes in browsers. My personal site gets about 20% IE, with negligible IE6 and below. I don't even bother testing for it because I don't care. At work on the other hand, we get about 60% IE and I do test for it. What to do depends on the situation...just like it always does.

      --
      Porquoi?
    2. Re:Ugh!!! by nsayer · · Score: 2, Funny

      I appreciate your sentiment, but you come off sounding like a raving loon.

      You must be new here.

    3. Re:Ugh!!! by Yosho · · Score: 1

      Infact I just looked at my stats for June. Guess what browser was #1 and was probably ATLEAST 50% of the hits (also including bots)? IE 5!

      Holy crap, IE5? You know that Windows XP came with IE6 installed as the default browser, right? What kind of site do you run, a Windows 98 driver repository?

      --
      Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
  42. Looking at my (hobby) site's stats by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    My personal gardening site (smallish, roughly 1000+ visitors a day) shows IE usage has dropped a huge amount - it's down to 43% of visitors. It's been a long time since I've looked at browser splits, so I don't know how the trend has tracked.

    Since it's a gardening site, I'd assume it's less likely to be a big target for work-based browsing. That, I'd guess, would still be dominated by IE.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  43. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

    I'd argue that point... you're ignorant or a fool if you run XP unsecured on a daily basis.

    It is possible to configure the OS to be fairly secure. Unfortunately it takes a hell of a lot of effort to make it as secure as it should be out of the box.

  44. NetApplications vs StatCounter by trazan · · Score: 1

    I really wish this was true, but StatCounter's numbers seem a bit dodgy, with big swings in market share for no apparent reason. Example: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-na-daily-20090307-20090506 NetApplications number are more stable; yesterdays market share for all IE versions was 63.47%, which is still a drop, but less dramatic.

  45. This report removes mobile browsers by caffeinejolt · · Score: 1

    The StatOwl.com guys have their reports updated for this month. I know one of the guys who runs it and he mentioned they have been working on a bunch of mobile reports to handle just the mobile data.

  46. Slashdot browser shares?? by BlackCreek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What I really would like to see is the browser share of the Slashdot logs.

    1. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by selven · · Score: 5, Funny

      Internet Explorer: 0.37%
      Firefox: 13.45%
      Safari: 4.23%
      Chrome: 6.97%
      Lynx: 22.43%
      Self-created web browser: 23.12%
      No browser - reading HTML directly: 14.22%
      No browser - interpreting modem signals directly: 15.21%

    2. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by kallisti5 · · Score: 0

      No browser - reading HTML directly: 14.22% Did you mean: No browser - direct HTTP requests: 14.22% HMTL is a format... not a protocol ;)

    3. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by Eberlin · · Score: 2, Funny

      CowboyNeal Reads Slashdot Stories To Me (and also does my math): 40.33%

    4. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by jrumney · · Score: 1

      How could you leave Cowboy Neal out of any survey connected with Slashdot?

    5. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by selven · · Score: 1

      Did you mean: No browser - direct HTTP requests: 14.22% HMTL is a format... not a protocol ;)

      I meant it as "write a 10 line script to grab the raw html off of webpages and read that instead of having a program interpret it" but that works too.

    6. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by salesgeek · · Score: 2, Funny

      These numbers are faked. If your stats were accurate exactly 11.7% would be showing Emacs/w3m. Of course, you cold just be a jealous vi user who has no web browser or Rogue client built in to your text editor.

      --
      -- $G
    7. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by Eevee · · Score: 2, Funny

      No browser - use wget to mail the page back: 0.00001%

    8. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You forgot the traditional last option:

      Internet Explorer: 0.37%
      Firefox: 13.45%
      Safari: 4.23%
      Chrome: 6.97%
      Lynx: 22.43%
      Self-created web browser: 23.12%
      No browser - reading HTML directly: 14.22%
      No browser - interpreting modem signals directly: 15.21%

      Cowboy Neal: .01%

    9. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by glwtta · · Score: 1
      Pfft, who needs a script for such a simple thing?

      $ telnet www.google.com 80
      Trying 64.233.161.104...
      Connected to www.google.com (64.233.161.104).
      Escape character is '^]'.
      GET / HTTP/1.1

      HTTP/1.1 200 OK
      Cache-Control: private, max-age=0
      Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:01:56 GMT
      Expires: -1
      Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
      Server: gws
      Transfer-Encoding: chunked

      etc...

      That's how real men use the internet.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    10. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by dkf · · Score: 1

      That's how real men use the internet.

      Meh. Real Men just touch the Cat-5 to their tongue and work it out from there (with muscle contractions to send electrical signals, of course).

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    11. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by Bugs42 · · Score: 1

      These numbers are faked. If your stats were accurate exactly 11.7% would be showing Emacs/w3m. Of course, you cold just be a jealous vi user who has no web browser or Rogue client built in to your text editor.

      Text editor? When did they add a text editor to the Emacs OS?

      --
      Programmer: an ingenious device that converts caffeine into code.
    12. Re:Slashdot browser shares?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again slashdot shows an anti Opera bias!

  47. Have no fear, the report will be posted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    As soon as Microsoft's check clears the bank.

  48. my stats by alta · · Score: 1

    June:
    IE:68%
    FF24%
    Safari: 5.47
    Chrome: 1 .14

    May:
    IE:68%
    FF: 21%
    Safari: 7%
    Chrome: 1.2%

    So, for me, a very NON technical site... IE is the same while FF stole a little from Sarari.
    Chrome is the same... And that's probably all me.

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
  49. I've seen a huge drop in IE... by genghisjahn · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...for my blog. 100% of all hits are Chrome, but that may be because I am the only person who reads it. I'm still doing analysis before I release a full report on the statistics....check my blog for more details.

    --
    Sorry about the mess.
    1. Re:I've seen a huge drop in IE... by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      There I just fixed that for you. I just had browser shots visit your page with everything they have.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
  50. my site by Stinking+Pig · · Score: 1

    averages 18,500 hits per day

    my stats say:
    Robots 27 %
    Unknown 6 %
    Firefox 8 %
    MSIE 3 %

    --
    "Nothing was broken, and it's been fixed." -- Jon Carroll
  51. How do you get the IE usage rate to fall to Zero: by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    Program your site standards compliant.

    That's all.

    Be a leader, not a follower. Because if everyone is a follower, nobody leads but randomness and evilness.

    Others will follow you the sooner, the more you are sure of yourself and the bigger/more you are.

    If Microsoft then complies to the standards again, we can gladly welcome them.

    Seriously. See Google drop IE support because of some fight with MS, and the IE will be done.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  52. OS shift? by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    Is this a shift from WIndows to Mac as well? Microsoft hasn't made a version of IE for the Mac in many years. A lot more Macs have been sold and IE 4 is too old and insecure to use on a Mac.

    1. Re:OS shift? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe. Also possible:

      Is this a shift from WIndows to Linux as well? Microsoft hasn't made a version of IE for Linux at all. A lot more Linux distros have been installed and IE 4 is too old and insecure to use on anything.

  53. A little but very minor by AsmordeanX · · Score: 1

    The site I run is attractive to older crowds so I expect it to move with the speed of frozen molassas. Here are some numbers with a sum total of all versions for each:
    May 2009
    MSIE: 70%
    Firefox: 23%
    Safari: 6%
    Chrome: Just shy of 1%
    Opera: 8 users.
    Lynx: 1 - Who the heck is that?

    June 2009
    MSIE: 69%
    Firefox: 24%
    Rest unchanged.

    1. Re:A little but very minor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lynx: 1 - Who the heck is that?

      Please give me a link to your site. Now I want to go visit it with all sorts of esoteric browsers just to add some variety into your logs. Come on, I've already got elinks, w3m, and Konqueror open...

  54. Will drop further surely by nixish · · Score: 1

    I think it's a matter of "when" rather than "if" that the IE share will tumble further down due to the EU requirement that MS's OS give a browser choice to customers. It's inevitable that the playing field will be level soon. (I am counting on the fact that such a law exists in our US too)

  55. Numerous Typos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to the benefit of Firerox

    What the hell is Firerox?

    1. Re:Numerous Typos by Ma�djeurtam · · Score: 1

      A group of fanatical arsonists.

      --
      Instant Karma's gonna get you, Gonna knock you right on the head (John Lennon, 1970)
  56. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by DriedClexler · · Score: 5, Funny

    In fairness, Slashdot displays things badly in Firefox 3.0. And Safari. And Opera. And Chrome. And probably Mosaic if you gave it a spin.

    Please, just give me back the old site.

    --
    Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
  57. Germany! by yet-another-lobbyist · · Score: 1

    I just went to the statcounter.com page and looked at Germany. I always knew Germans liked Firefox, but look at these shocking numbers: #1 Firefox 3 (52%), #2 IE7 (22%), #3 IE6 (8%), #4 Firefox 2 (5%)!

    1. Re:Germany! by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      If you look at a shorter time period, you'll be shocked even more!

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  58. IE on iPhone by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

    wait, I just thought of something: has Microsoft released a version of IE for the iPhone through the Apple App Store? That would be funny...

    1. Re:IE on iPhone by DECS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft hasn't released any apps for the iPhone, clearly indicating that it isn't a legitimate software company, but merely a marketing company that perpetuates the Windows monopoly.

      Ogg Theora, H.264 and the HTML 5 Browser Squabble

  59. Haven't noticed a thing by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    "Have any of you seen drops in IE usage share for Web-sites you administer?"

    IE users never manage to load my site, for some reason. Of course, no one would be stupid enough to actually BREAK their own site for IE users, would they? That little script that redirects any browser identifying itself as IE to my "YOU'RE AN IDIOT! GET A REAL BROWSER STOOPID!" page wouldn't influence anyone, would it? It certainly wouldn't bias my statistics!

    So, my figures are at least as fair, balanced, and unbiased as Fox News.

    IE usage has been below 1% for a long, long, long time.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  60. Now... by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    ...if the rest of the web developers who rely on "Silverlight" or Cracktive-X or some other M$-centric technology and worry more about making the web truly platform agnostic we can get on with it and get some business done. I really dislike having to switch from Lynx or Firefox to IE becuase the e-commerce site relies on some stupid feature of IE that no one's been able to translate to the OSS browsers. Happens once in a while, still annoying.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    1. Re:Now... by Shados · · Score: 1

      Im not too sure why you bring up Silverlight and in the next sentence talk about needing to switch from Firefox to IE though. Not like silverlight is IE (or even windows) centric.

    2. Re:Now... by DECS · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, Microsoft promises not to sue users to propagate Silverlight creep on Linux, as long as they are content to use an old version.

      Silverlight = MS Flash: replacing the open web with a closed binary that only works well on Windows.

      Ogg Theora, H.264 and the HTML 5 Browser Squabble

    3. Re:Now... by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      I really don't know that much about silverlight. I do know that some web sites require me to use IE as their shitty web site breaks on ff. And I do know that annoys me.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    4. Re:Now... by Shados · · Score: 1

      I definately agree with you, and I'll be the first to throw a fit when that happens (lately though I'm seeing more and more of the opposite. It is still rare, but FF/Chrome/Safari-only web sites are starting to pop up... The irony is that in some cases, those sites make use of things where those browsers are not standard compliant: since they tend to use each other to validate themselves, instead of validating against the actual standard, it happens more than you'd think...fortunately its still rare).

      Anyhow, was just pointing out that Silverlight is most definately not IE-only, or even Windows-only for that matter. It -is- officially supported even on Macs, and while it is only indirectly supported in Linux via Moonlight, microsoft themselves will redirect you to Moonlight's (open source! not even made by Microsoft!) web site if you try to access silverlight-content in Linux.

  61. "statistical anomaly"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can believe in problems in the measuring process, or maybe a botnet changed its faked user agent string to firefox. Or maybe IE genuinely lost so many users.

    But "statistical anomaly"? are you kidding me?
    Without even reading TFA I'm sure they measure at least 1 million visitors per month, probably at least one order of magnitude more. For such a large sample size statistical anomalies can be neglected.

    1. Re:"statistical anomaly"? by McGiraf · · Score: 1

      If it was negligible it would not be an anomaly.

  62. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    There are Joe Sixpacks on my Slashdot?

    Ewww! Kill 'em with fire!

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  63. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by JPLemme · · Score: 1

    I still haven't discovered a way to protect XP from the user. People who's computers I've tried to secure have:

    1. Found IE after I deleted all but one IE shortcut and moved the last one into Windows/System32 so he wouldn't find it.
    2. Disabled NoScript so the web would "work".
    3. Canceled SpyBot every time the scan started (at 2:00 AM!) because it was taking too long.
    4. Bypassed the router because he thought it was causing problems with his Internet access.
    5. Disabled the firewall because it kept notifying him that various applications were trying to contact the Internet.
    6. Turned off WOT because it was preventing him from getting to sites marked as "Unsafe".

    WTF? Short of installing a proxy server in my house and routing all of their traffic through it, there's nothing I can do except rebuild the box every six weeks. When the only REAL solution is to educate people and make them care, you can't possibly win.

    (Linux FTW)

  64. Cmd Taco, please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...can we get live browser stats in /. ?

    Fixed it for you... now we just need to wait and a link to browser stats will appear.

  65. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by indi0144 · · Score: 1

    Maybe he's talking about the NSA backdoors and the kind of stuff you can't secure by any means in the OS because is hiding in the closed source.

    I'm still waiting for the ubberanal FOSS firewall that don't spread the legs every time Windows calls home. Is there any? :D

  66. In Private browsing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about all of those people using porn mode in IE....I mean InPrivate browsing?

  67. Internet Averages According to Omniture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IE: 68.5% Firefox: 17.2% Safari: 6.0% Chrome: 1.5% Other: 5.9% Netscape: 0.1% Opera: 0.1%

  68. Can't trust the User-Agent string by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pffft. That doesn't mean the stats for IE are *really* that low. People are probably forging their IE User-Agent string to "Mozilla/5.0 ....etc." to get greater compatibility from web sites that are Firefox-only. :-)

  69. Re:Firefox 3.5 Memory Leaks by indi0144 · · Score: 1

    You leave your computer on, in the workplace, for 3 days, and you are waiting to find it as You leave it? Oooook. Maybe the pages were auto updating so cache was being made, maybe they have rotating Ads, Maybe it signed up to a Botnet by itself. Maybe the maid was lurking 4chan in your PC for a while on Sunday, maybe that guy from marketing was downloading CP from your PC.

    I'd be more worried by checking what happened to my PC in 3 days than worring by the memory leaks on FF. Because, you know, shit happens.

  70. Browser usage in a college atmosphere by Nalk · · Score: 1

    Interesting usage statistics from the union website of a technical university: Students are required to buy a school-issued Thinkpad. For the last 3 years the Thinkpad has had a 1680 by 1050 screen. Among users of the union website who are on the the school's ISP and using a 1680 by 1050 screen, 53% use Chrome, 38% use Firefox, and 6% use IE. The share of firefox users declines even more when the results are filtered to Windows only. Data for non-1680 by 1050 screens is as follows: Firefox 54%, Chrome 33%, IE 11% This shows that college age kids are much more receptive to Google's browser, while professors, staff, and lab users favor Firefox.

  71. I have a guess... by hugerobot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I own a computer service/repair business mostly for residential customers... like geek squad, for lack of a better national example. There's lots of small businesses like me all over the US and I'm sure abroad...you get the point... Anyway... One thing I can say for sure, is that IE8 has really changed things for Microsoft in the browser wars. It's horrible! It seriously crashes more than it gets closed normally, it is REDICULOUSLY slow, even compared to IE7! Hell... I long for the days of IE7 and when that came out it it was hard to explain to my non-technical residential customers what this new browser was...It takes SOOOO long to load, pages render slow, its just unusable. I've never seen seen anything as bad as IE8... while FF, Opera, Chrome are all competing to make the fastest, most compliant browsers, Microsoft is STILL(?WTF?) doing it's own thing releasing a bigger, fatter, slower browser that have features that even technical people aren't asking for... I think they've finally made the people who have no idea what a browser is to become so fed up as to say "This thing is going so slow, maybe I should try that firefox thing I heard about..." I bet the numbers are right. I believe IE8 is THAT BAD

    1. Re:I have a guess... by smash · · Score: 1

      There are ways you can speed it up (google, ie8 speed up) - but yeah, the average end user won't bother and just assume it is shit.

      On a clean windows 7 box it is MUCH faster - i suspect 7 has a few things going on behind the scenes that previous OSes don't which make the difference.

      However, I'm inclined to agree with the general end user assessment - its pretty shitty compared to the alternatives. I mean, come on now microsoft, its been in development for what... 3 years now (forgetting the past 7 versions for a second), and you still can't pass acid 3? Still can't implement standards that apple (and to a large extend, a bunch of hobbyist developers in the case of Mozilla) has managed to do with a fraction of your development resources?

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    2. Re:I have a guess... by salesgeek · · Score: 1

      Let's stop the Apple love fest for a moment and let's give props where they belong. There would be no Safari, Chrome, iPhone or Android browsers without the work done by these guys who wrote KHTML which was then updated with Apple's help into WebKit.

      Ok, let's go back to the Apple love fest and all agree that MS can't keep up your favorite open source browser.

      --
      -- $G
    3. Re:I have a guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean you don't like/want/use Accelerators and Webslices. I personally can't live without them. The moment IE8 came out I kicked Chrome out of my life! /sarcasm

  72. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by merreborn · · Score: 1

    There are a few sites where IE 6.0 displays things badly because the web master stopped kludging for it.

    Slashdot.org
    some parts of Google.
    (Help me here!)

    Joe-six paks noticed this and has found out that he has options...

    There are several places around facebook that tell you to upgrade your browser if you visit with IE 6.

    We're big fans of that around the office.

  73. IE8 is a mixed bag by rdean400 · · Score: 1

    I appreciate the improvement in standards support (though it still lags the competition considerably). For some reason, when I try to visit certain sites from my work PC, IE 8 will crash in urlmon.dll unless I have those sites in my Trusted Sites list. I'm only using it on that PC because I'm validating several applications against it -- I otherwise use FireFox or Chrome.

  74. Demographics by angst_ridden_hipster · · Score: 1

    I looked at reports for three sites for which I have analytics access.

    Here're the results. IE: 53%, 58%, 71%, Firefox: 29%, 27%, 19%, Safari: 13%, 9%, 4%

    One of the sites is for commercial vehicles. One is for motorcycle gear. The other is an alternative wedding site.

    I see a lot of likely demographic differences. All of this is supposition, with no studies to back it up, so take it with a small mountain of rock salt.
    There's likely an age difference among those sites. I'd guess that two of the sites skew older than the other. There is also a likely difference in income: one being primarily people with disposable income, one for people with less disposable income, and one being primarily small to medium business owners. There's likely a gender gap among visitors to these sites: one of the sites is probably 75% women, the other two sites probably have 85+% men.

    Given those assumptions, I'd argue that young, affluent women are more likely to upgrade their browsers than older small-business owners.
    In other news, I'm beginning to think water tends to be wet at room temperature, and ice is not very warm relative to fresh waffles.

    --
    Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
    www.fogbound.net
  75. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by Carnildo · · Score: 4, Funny

    In fairness, Slashdot displays things badly in Firefox 3.0. And Safari. And Opera. And Chrome. And probably Mosaic if you gave it a spin.

    If you ignore the five screens of Javascript at the top of each page, Slashdot is actually more usable in Mosaic than it is in other browsers.

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  76. Get the Fuck Out! by dangitman · · Score: 1

    56% of people use IE? My God, that's amazing. Who the hell are these people? I can barely remember the last time I saw somebody using IE.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
    1. Re:Get the Fuck Out! by smash · · Score: 1

      More scary, is that according to my web logs, probably 80% of the IE users are still back on IE6 or previous.

      I.e., its quite likely they're on un-patched windows XP boxes... hence the fertile botnet ground out there.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    2. Re:Get the Fuck Out! by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      That isn't scary. It means that, due to the current recession, those people will upgrade to Firefox instead of a new version of Windows. A portion of them may even move on to other Open Source programs and operating systems.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    3. Re:Get the Fuck Out! by smash · · Score: 1

      I think you're being overly optimistic. More likely, their computer will get owned and become so slow and unresponsive, they'll simply buy another one.

      With Windows on it.

      Stupid? Yes. They're end users...

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  77. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kids these days. Looks just fine in lynx.

  78. lusers didn't just get smart over night by lanner · · Score: 1

    Let's see, did all the lusers using MSIE suddenly get a lot smarter? Probably not.

  79. Not down substantially for us by koalapeck · · Score: 1

    IE is only down about 2% for us over last year. It represents about 62% of our visitors.

    Firefox is up to about 26% now, and Safari is nearly 9%.

  80. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But it sure looks great in Links.

  81. What is this IE of which you speak? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, all we use are Firefox, Opera, and Safari.

    Is this some kind of fake browser that provides security holes free of charge?

  82. N=N+1 by roelbj · · Score: 1

    I am the webmaster of the webpage for the band Billy Pilgrim, http://www.billypilgrim.net/

    June6-July6:

          IE: 51%
          FFx: 30%
          Saf: 10%
          Chr: 04%
          Moz: 03%

    Average visitor is probably well educated & in mid-30s as this band was popular in colleges in the late 90s but is no longer active.

  83. yes i believe it is by smash · · Score: 1

    ... not drastically yet, but the alternatives (Chrome, Safari, Mozilla) are beoming more markedly different in performance. Despite what Microsoft may claim with IE8, a typically install over an old windows box is a pig. It runs slowly, locks up the UI whilst seemingly doing nothing while loading pages, etc.

    It is *MUCH BETTER* on a clean install or upgrade of Windows 7 (i was shocked at the performance difference, on vista it was a pig, same machine), but there aren't a hell of a lot of windows 7 users out there yet.

    Also, the mac is gaining market share, and Safari is actually good on PC with version 4 (for the first time).

    Hence, my daily browser of choice is currently Safari 4, as its basically the same between both platforms I regularly use for desktop use, gets 100% in acid 3, is pretty quick, and i'm addicted to coverflow bookmark browsing (thought it was a gimmick until i used it, finding a page by looking at it is SOOO much easier than remembering the title that no one looks at while reading it).

    If i'm on a free nix box its generally Firefox...

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  84. My website stats show 65% IE usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the past year has been pretty stable on my website stats, all 3 browsers were registered and one of them was a googlebot.

  85. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by Atario · · Score: 3, Informative

    It is driving me up the wall that an article page looks different if you go to it from the front page vs. hitting the headline embedded in the display controls. One goes to http://foo.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=yy/mm/dd/idnumber and the other goes to http://foo.slashdot.org/story/yy/mm/dd/idnumber/Hyphenated-Article-Title . And the latter sucks.

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
  86. Share dropping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I have been seeing a steady decline in the percentace of IE compared to other browsers. Astonishing as most of these sites are inside our network where our corporate desktop image is XP and IE is our officially supported browser 8)
    Same or similar stats however on our public sites, again mostly visted by corporates, but many are allowing multiple broser platforms now, and many users choosing to use an alternative browser where they can.
    Also seeing a large upturn in iPhone Safari over in mobile IE. Ie, Win Mobile, almost nothing, but mobile safari getting up close to a full 1%

  87. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by smash · · Score: 2, Informative
    • Did you take their admin away?
    • Did you enforce group (or local) policy on their machine?
    • Did you apply any of the pre-built microsoft admin templates for security?
    • Did you make use of IE's security zones
    • No? Then you haven't tried all ways of trying to secure the box. XP (or any windows really) can be configured to be pretty sure, you just need to know shit from chocolate, pull your finger out and actually DO IT.

      Do I like doing that? No. Do I do that? No. But if i was desperate to secure a windows box from idiots, this is the path i'd be going down...

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  88. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by smash · · Score: 1

    Pretty SECURE, i meant, not pretty sure. Its early and i'm halfway through my coffee... :-\

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  89. The economy. by Repossessed · · Score: 1

    People are browsing from work less as they get laid off/worry about getting layed off. IE usage has always been higher thanks to its dominance in the workplace.

    --
    Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
  90. My retail site by C_Kode · · Score: 1

    My http://www.chess-boutique.com/ retail site reports over the last seven days:

    51% IE
    40% FF
    5% Chrome
    3% Opera
    2% Unknown.

    Odd thing is, I haven't gotten a single Safari hit in the last seven days. Usually it's higher than Opera and sometimes higher than Chrome. Though Chrome appears to be picking up steam of late.

  91. Here, here !!!! by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think he'll be OK. There are a lot of stupid people out there...

    There is no shortage of them here either ;-)

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  92. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  93. It is now official... by GameMaster · · Score: 1

    Netcraft has confirmed: Internet Explorer is dying.

    --

    Rules of Conduct:
    #1 - The DM is always right.
    #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
  94. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by nikanj · · Score: 1

    Facebook used to show a warning to IE6 users, don't know if they still do

  95. To drive their .Net framework by msobkow · · Score: 1

    Microsoft doesn't need a "browser" for the sake of the internet, but rather for the sake of driving the deployment of .Net and Silverlight applications to the desktop in the corporate world. The fact that you can VPN-client those applications is crucial to a world where remote support and wandering workers are now a fact of life.

    I don't think they really care about web standards, because the "standards" supported by their own tools are all that matters to the corporate world. I've recently (2 weeks) started doing some code in C#.Net instead of Java, and I must say it's one seductively integrated toolkit/framework compared to Java land. I'm actually productive after only a couple of weeks, where Java and J2EE took me a couple of years to learn to any useful degree.

    Nor am I finding that C#.Net is anything remotely like Java. It's more reminiscent of VB to me than Java.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  96. It's the Linux figures... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the statistical anomaly was more about Linux's share dropping from 1% to 0.50 (a 50% drop!). But no, we couldn't possibly bring THAT up on Slashdot, could we?

  97. It's the economy, stupid! by number6x · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The drop in IE use is probably inversely proportional to the rise in unemployment.

    With millions of people being laid off work, they are surfing at home and using sensible browsers.

    Only people surfing at work get stuck using IE. My current gig is still using IE6!

    1. Re:It's the economy, stupid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My current gig is still using IE6!

      What department do you work in I will stop by.

  98. IE 6 support for Ajax is bad by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    IE is bad with Ajax sites for example Citadel email.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  99. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by trawg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We stopped supporting it on our site - www.ausgamers.com. If you go to it in IE6 you get a big fat warning at the top advising you to upgrade along with a link to Firefox.

  100. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  101. No, thanks by Mystra_x64 · · Score: 1

    Why should we suffer for your sins, AC?

    --
    Quick way to get 30% Funny 70% Troll: defend Opera browser on /.
  102. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by IntlHarvester · · Score: 3, Informative

    Disabled NoScript so the web would "work".

    That sounds completely reasonable, disabling scripting does in fact make sites "not work".

    Why are you foisting an extension for hardcore goatporn browsers onto regular corporate users?

    --
    Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
  103. Here are some stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://static.worldsoft-cms.info/doc/agent-trends.html (trend from around 25K domains)
    seems msie is losing some share but not as dramatic.

  104. Google Apps and IE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had to stop using IE because it is running slow on Google Apps. And I keep getting JS errors. Switched to chrome and it's like the browser was designed for those apps. Wait, was it?

  105. Re: Is IE Usage Share Collapsing? by Magnome · · Score: 1

    Perhaps Firefox' greatest contribution to the web will not be it's own coronation, but as the entity that provided the elbow room for true competition to develop. This is consistent with the spirit and intent of the modern WWW as a great equalizer, distributing freedoms, voices, and choices throughout the world. The free market is cool when it works...

  106. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their original strategic reason is still there - they don't want internet applications to replace Windows as the application platform of choice, and to the extent that internet-based applications do take over, they want to control the software platform (ie. IE). That's why they went to such lengths to drive Netscape out of business, and that's why they keep pouring money into IE development and fighting related antitrust case in the EU, Korea and Japan. If they gave up and let Firefox take over the browser market, Firefox-only web applications would become viable... and since Firefox is available on multiple operating systems, it would only weaken the Windows monopoly.

  107. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been working on a custom LAMP application for about 4 years now. I stopped worrying about IE a year ago. That is to say, no IE testing what so ever. I just don't care how bad it looks in IE. If the users don't like it in IE, they need to find someone who cares. And I mean in any version IE 5, IE 6, IE 7, IE 8, IE 9, IE 10, IE11...

  108. I collect stats too.... by BigBadBus · · Score: 1

    ...but on a month by month basis: http://www.paullee.com/computers

  109. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by haifastudent · · Score: 0

    Try this site that I found on some /. sig:
    http://what-is-what.com/

    It displays all wrong in IE, and has some broken ad at the bottom for Firefox. A _broken_ add, even broken in Firefox.

    --
    Thank for reading to the sig. You may stop reading now. It is safe. There is no more content. Why are you still reading?
  110. server on my box by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've setup an apache server on my box to share some photo's and data with my friends. Only one of them was using IE. The rest of them mostly chrome, one safari, and about two firefox users.

    Even my dad is switching ;)

  111. mozilla firefox typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a 12.5% drop

  112. Indian site stats by varundhussa · · Score: 1

    I run the website MapmyIndia.com (http://maps.mapmyindia.com). Reading this post I did a quick check on the browser usage. Here are the current stats:
    IE (all variants): 58%
    Moz (all variants): 28%
    Webkit based (Chrome/Safari): 13%

    Based on the trend of about one year, both IE and Mozilla shares have dropped! Webkit based browsers have increased from about 1-2% to 13%. Opera usage is still negligible.

  113. our site doesn't support ie6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the site I am currently working on we push for an upgrade to ie7 or some other browser that isn't ie6. Since it is a fairly popular site, I suspect ie6 usage will drop off soon.

    1. Re:our site doesn't support ie6 by ledow · · Score: 1

      And, if my users are anything to go by, a drop in ie7 usage too...

  114. It's the differences 6-7-8 by Werrismys · · Score: 1

    Even the most adamant IE users here are starting to switch to firefox because it's too much of a pain in the ass to use IE. FIrst they changed things in IE7 - and now again in IE8 - and the browser complains with stupid dialogs all the time asking this or that. Many sites just don't work in IE8 with default settings ...

    --
    'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
  115. Likely depends on the demographic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am close to the hosting of a wide range of official musical artiste sites and am not seeing any particular variation in IE's share over the past six months. The breakdown varies according to the artist's demographic (with a few international artist sites down to ~60% MSIE), but in terms of certain artists, where the audience is largely the average tech-unsavvy Joe / young family home (think: soap opera / reality TV enthusiasts), if anything IE is up a percentage point or two in the past few months. Then again am looking at awstats so anything is possible

  116. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by A12m0v · · Score: 1

    working fine for me in Chrome :)

    --
    GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  117. hmm by thatblackguy · · Score: 1

    Probably, though it still will be large. woots test.

  118. It depends where you live by realkiwi · · Score: 1

    I have access to Google Analytics data for several sites:

    US site non IT subject matter - 65/25 IE/Firefox for about 80,000 unique visitors/month

    Global site (US+Canada 50% of visits) similar subject matter to above - 54/33 IE/Firefox for about 9,000 visitors

    The 5-6 French sites I have access to are also in the 5x/3x range - subject matter is agriculture. IE is banned in many public services in France which is one of the reasons.

    --
    realkiwi
  119. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 1

    You can get the old site back. Help and Preferences > Classic Index > General > tick "Use Classic Index". Pow, begone, shitty JavaScript.

    I did this a couple of months ago and haven't looked back. It makes /. tolerable again.

  120. So, what happened in June? by darkonc · · Score: 1
    In June, a lot of kids stopped using their schools' computers.

    If lots of school computers use IE, and lots of kids use other browsers at home, then this could explain the sudden shift.

    --
    Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
  121. website stats in UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i just checked 3 sites i look after (admittedly with Google Analytics)
    1. Uk wide site - for designers/advertising so more Macs used and business, less likely to change browsers
      - May: IE 58%
      - June IE 59%
    2. Hi Fi Shop Glasgow - more home visitors
      - May: IE 65%
      - June IE 60%
    3. Pub/Venue London - more home visitors and more tech aware than Glasgow??
      - May: IE 53%
      - June IE 50%

  122. I accidentally the whole computer by booyabazooka · · Score: 1

    After my bud clicked on a link (just a frikkin link!) on the yahoo message boards, he had to reinstall his entire computer!?!?!

    Reinstalling your entire computer seems easy... just carry it out of the room, then set put it back???

  123. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by iVasto · · Score: 1

    Looks fine in lynx. Have you tried that?

  124. Vacation is negotiable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can negotiate for more vacation unless you are at an entry level.
    I've successfully negotiated an extra week of vacation for the first 6 months of work. I took that week 2 months after arriving on the job.

    As a contractor, vacation is easy. I don't work, I don't get paid. Getting a nice paycheck means you can afford to take more time off.

    Finally, most of America wastes a week of vacation over Xmas. That usually leaves just 1 more week. 2 days taken Thanksgiving week and now you're left with a few long weekends. That's it.

  125. Net Applications, eh? by notrandomly · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not exactly the most reliable statistics. How can a browser have a higher market share than another browser with 3x as many users? Yeah, Net Applications reported that.

    1. Re:Net Applications, eh? by lamapper · · Score: 1

      Thanks for posting the link to that site, I always knew that some companies changed their stats, but did not have any proof. It would not surprise me that a company like Microsoft was trying to prevent negative public perceptions (they call it perception, I call it reality) that their browser share for Internet Explorer (IE) is dropping. And quite frankly it comes as NO SURPRISE, I just did not expect it this soon!.

      I was aware that many of the companies get most of their usage from North America as opposed to Europe were there is a quantifiable drop in IE browser market-share. That has been occurring for years and is NOT a new trend. So obviously a company that monitors more North American sites than the rest of the world, especially Europe, you expect to artificially inflate the IE browser statistics. (I assumed the artificial inflation was between 15% - 30%) Its nice to start seeing numbers that are more and more difficult to pad and hide. It is even better that the companies that have been doing this are starting to get publicly outed as their skewed and artificially inflated IE browser stats thrust them into the light of day.

      Sure I knew a few stats companies inflated IE numbers. I even expect that some of these companies have unofficial agreements with Microsoft or are out and out Shills for the company. This has been going on for years. Its not new. What is new is that the drop in IE stats is so much that their efforts are causing the light to be shined back on them. New, but hardly unexpected.

      it was only a matter of when, not of if IE market share would drop.

      Back when some sites were still posting above 85% or 95% browser share for all IE browsers; other sites with a more world view, not North America centric, were reporting IE browser shares in the 60% - 69% range. That was two to three years ago.

      A year and a few months ago I predicted that IE browser share would drop below 50% within 2 to 3 years. It appears that it has happened faster than I expected. So that is a welcome and pleasant surprise.

      I stopped doing special scripting for websites related to IE back when they refused to support open web standards and took their IE browser implementation in a less standardized direction. All for the hope of future vendor lock-in, call it what it is. A Mistake!

      They made the choice, no need to feel sorry for them. Granted they were not banking on the backlash due to all the exploits and viruses attacking only IE and Active X.

      This is a very good sign! I take it as a sign that the general computer user, while still predominantly using a Windows PC for their desktop, are becoming more aware of the issues and probably more frustrated with the attacks and problems related to IE. Thus they are switching to browsers that will not force them to re-install their operating system (OS), just because they clicked on a link and the ActiveX and IE combo does additional things without their permission. Sadly they can not protect themselves from this terrible behavior.

      The only prevention to these exploits is to NOT use IE and to limit your use of Active X, period. Looks like people are noticing and using browsers other than IE.

      Will this carry over into frustration with Active X and .NET in general, I honestly hope so as I detest vendor lock-in and the limiting of options for me computer wise. Sure .NET is not as bad as Active X with viruses and exploits, but it does run on a proprietary Windows platform, thus exploits are still an issue. With .NET the vendor lock-in is certain based on Microsoft actions, not their words, but their actions over the last 20+ years.

      The sole reason for my prediction of the collapse of IE browser share of all kinds was primarily due to viruses, cross script injections and other cracks (hackers do not crack) that would result in a consumer s desktop, la

      --
      Is your Internet Throttled? Install DD-Wrt, OpenWRT or Tomato to learn the truth! Google: 1Gbps/1Gbps: 5 Communities
  126. IE total drops 19% in 4 months on sports site by KayakFun · · Score: 1

    My site kayakfun.info (dutch-language site about whitewater kayaking, so no tech-bias) runs Webalizer stats so I only see the top 15 agents, amid lots of bots, but here is the summary from feb 2009 to jun 2009:

    • IE total went from 44% to 37% (-19%)
    • Moz 5 (Fx and Safari people explained above) went from 12% to 18% (+50%)
    • Opera 8.5 went from 0.9% to 2.5% (+170%)
    • IE6 dropped from 13 to 9%
    • IE7 dropped from 30 to 23%
    • IE8 went from 1 to 5%

    So "collapsing" ? No, IE total is just slowly degrading for evolutionary reasons, most likely asymptotically approaching zero after a long time. I sincerely hope IE6 and 7 drop out of the top15 really soon, IE8 is not that bad.

  127. Yep by kcredden · · Score: 1

    I run three web sites, including a company's site. All of them have shown significat drops in IE usage, including (Thank goodness) IE6. The faster we get rid of that stain the better for Lady McBeth's mind.

    - Kc

    --
    -- Kevin C. Redden kcredden@ gmail 392992 .com (take out the 392992 for e-mailing me. Spam control)
  128. Opera in the rise. by Zoidbot · · Score: 1

    Our high traffic sites in Europe have seen a VERY large month on month rise in Opera usage, mostly taken from Firefox which has stagnated and even dropped slightly in the last couple of months. Safari or Chrome barely registers on the list at all.

    It's something like.

    65% IE
    20% Firefox
    8% Opera
    Then everything else.

  129. A better question is.... by kaizendojo · · Score: 1

    Why are these "statistics" reported here every freaking month, despite the fact that they are suspect in their validity and that their collection methods are not open for review or comment? The statistics that Net Applications collects are based solely on their customer base, and yet despite my pointing this out every time it is posted - the posts continue each month.

  130. Large Credit Union - Stats by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

    I work for a large Credit Union; our site gets about 23,000 visits per day, and is obviously not a "tech" site. 2nd quarter 2009 stats:

    IE: 76.98%
    FF: 18.39%
    Safari: 3.24%

    So maybe we have farther to go that people suspect. But given our completely non-tech-savvy visitors, FF at almost 20% is amazing.

    --
    With the first link, the chain is forged.
  131. IE dominance in the workplace by viralMeme · · Score: 1

    "People are browsing from work less as they get laid off/worry about getting layed off. IE usage has always been higher thanks to its dominance in the workplace"

    That and it being impossible to use anything else but IE in the workplace and IE beign tied to Bling as its default search engine.

  132. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by JPLemme · · Score: 1

    He isn't a corporate user. It's a friend of mine, and his wife asked me to lock down the box as much as possible because she needs it for work and her husband and kids had blown it up twice in a two-month period. I told her that NoScript was a PITA, but she was willing to try it to protect her PC from her family.

    So while I agree with you in a general sense (that NoScript is not for novices), this was a special request. But I was sure to emphasize how important it was, and to try to pre-whitelist the sites they used frequently, and to encourage them to try unlocking one domain at a time, and I defaulted it to "temporarily allow target domain".

    AND I told them to lay off the goat porn, but she has a husband and three adolescent boys. :-)

  133. IE8 by Zebra_X · · Score: 1

    Perhaps someone already brought this up - IE 8 may have a user agent string that is not being grokked properly. IE 8 has been a recommended update for about the last month and a half and that coincides nicely with the anomalous statistics.

  134. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by JPLemme · · Score: 1

    1. Kids yes, hubby no. (Although last week his wife got fed up and so he lost admin privs, too.)

    2. a. It's XP Home
    b. I'm a programmer, not a sys admin
    c. I use Linux, so Windows isn't my strength
    d. It never occurred to me :-)

    3. Over my head. Isn't that domain-related stuff? Can it apply to XP Home?

    4. I told them to stop using IE and use Firefox, instead.

    And although I'm tempted to retaliate for the "shit for chocolate" remark, I'll be a gentleman and assume you weren't being malicious.

  135. Re:JavaScript AI to the rescue for Internet Explor by lysdexia · · Score: 1

    Is that you Hexslinger? You are the only guy I know perverse enough to create a FORTH in javascript.

  136. off-topic by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

    Hi Tom,

    I read your journal about hating the home page. Allow me to suggest the Lite mode preferences: "Use Classic Index, Simple Design, Low Bandwidth, No Icons".

    It looks a little boring but loads quickly.

    -l

    --
    Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    1. Re:off-topic by Tom · · Score: 1

      Thanks. "Classic Design" alone makes things a ton better.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  137. People surfing from home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More people being out of work means they are doing all their surfing from home.

    Conclusion: Fewer corporate computers on the net means less IE on the net.

  138. Re:It's because IE 6 support was droped on some si by cenc · · Score: 1

    I dropped support for IE 6 a long time ago.

    That said, I have had reports of some older web sites recently that are very broken in IE 7 and 8 all of a sudden.

  139. Down, way down on my site. by stonewolf · · Score: 1

    I checked December 2008 and June 2009. I only looked at pages, not at requests, and I did not factor out robots. I have roughly 235k page views in both months. In 12/2008 17% were from all versions of IE. In 6/2009 only 3% were from all versions of IE. In 6/2009 IE 8 was on the list of browsers.

    My site appeals to game programmers so the viewers are mostly geeks like me and it has always been light on IE visitors. But, wow, only 3%?

    Stonewolf

  140. Stats for www.managerleague.com by chrislas · · Score: 0

    I run a web-based online football manager game, and for July, I see:
    40.19% Firefox 3
    30.05% Internet Explorer 7.0
    8.01% Internet Explorer 6.0
    6.37% Opera 9
    5.95% Chrome
    4.49% Internet Explorer 8.0
    1.95% Safari
    1.65% Firefox 2
    98,66% of my traffic consisted of these browsers
    42,55 of the traffic was coming from IE
    ----------
    In june, the numbers read:
    40.75% Firefox 3
    30.06% Internet Explorer 7.0
    8.20% Internet Explorer 6.0
    6.09% Chrome
    6.04% Opera 9
    3.39% Internet Explorer 8.0
    1.99% Firefox 2
    1.86% Safari
    98,38% of my traffic consisted of these browsers
    41,65 of the traffic was coming from IE
    ----------
    Way back in January, the numbers looked like this:
    36.51% Internet Explorer 7.0
    35.49% Firefox 3
    13.70% Internet Explorer 6.0
    4.95% Opera 9
    3.92% Firefox 2
    1.95% Chrome
    1.54% Safari
    0.58% Firefox 1
    0.40% Internet Explorer 8.0
    99,04% of my traffic consisted of these browsers
    50,61 of the traffic was coming from IE
    ----------
    Whether anyone feels like making any conclusions based on these numbers, I don't know :)
    But from my end, it seems I had the biggest changes in IE/Non-IE ratio in the months November last yer until April this year...

    --
    - Here's to everyone with no signature!
  141. IE6 usage up for one of our clients by HannethCom · · Score: 1

    No, you read that right. One of our clients had their IE6 usage climb from about 20% to about 23%.

    --
    Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
  142. 750,000+ visitor sample last two months and year by jwhitener · · Score: 1

    Google analytics for our community college website. I do see IE trending down over time, but no large jump from last month to this month.

    Jun 7th through July 7th 2009
    1. Internet Explorer--459,138 --59.99%
    2. Firefox--226,804--29.64%
    3. Safari--60,745 --7.94%
    4. Chrome--13,584--1.77%

    May 7th through Jun 7th 2009
    1. Internet Explorer--572,732--60.80%
    2. Firefox--293,206--31.13%
    3. Safari--57,168--6.07%
    4. Chrome--12,858--1.36%

    May 7th through Jun 7th 2008
    1. Internet Explorer--577,544--70.07%
    2. Firefox--199,085--24.15%
    3. Safari--41,548--5.04%
    4. Mozilla--3,766--0.46%

  143. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by smash · · Score: 1

    re: shit from chocolate, just a saying I'm fond of. no not malicious, but just saying... there are ways and means of doing things. Changing OS and throwing away all your apps is a bit of a drastic move.

    XP home is a bit brain damaged though I'll admit that... didn't think anyone bothered with it.

    Just had a look, xp home can't run administrative templates out of the box. However, you can do the same thing by registry editing: http://www.j79zlr.com/gphome.php

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti linux, anti-mac or whatever. Just annoys me that people blame the OS for being so insecure when largely its a configuration issue...

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  144. Re:a fool to run Windows XP on a daily basis by JPLemme · · Score: 1

    It looks like an excellent website. Thanks for the tips!

    I'm not blaming XP for being insecure. I'm blaming all the jackasses in the world who try to hoodwink the unsophisticated. XP is merely the victim of its own popularity in this regard.

    The other pisser is that I have sixteen years' experience as a programmer. I've been paid real US dollars to program in COBOL, C++, VB, bash, and Apple Script (ugh). I'm comfortable with TSO, Windows, OS X, Linux, OS/2, and Solaris. I can do CLI or GUI. I have a heterogeneous home network (XP, OS X, and 2 Linux boxen) that's usually mostly working (even with two precocious boys who like to test it).

    And I STILL sometimes struggle with the administrative tasks. How is Joe Six-Pack expected to cope?