Slashdot Mirror
Firefox May Soon Overtake IE In Europe
peterkern writes "The July browser market share reports are somewhat inconsistent, but if we believe StatCounter, then it looks like Firefox will be overtaking Microsoft IE's market share next month. The two browsers are both within 1 point of 40% market share, IE above and Firefox below. Europeans are more crazy about Firefox than Americans: In Germany, Firefox has a 61% market share, while IE has only 25%. Google Chrome is, according to StatCounter, now above 10%. ConceivablyTech has more details, including market share data from both StatCounter and Net Applications (which as of this month is limiting its free data)."
as long as other browsers have a big enough market share that MS has to continue play nice and follow standards it's not even that important.
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
Of course this is all irrelevant to firefox making history by overtaking IE in Europe. An analogy, many parts of the world have universal healthcare but it would still be history for the USA if it was introduced there.
It's getting harder and harder for Steve Ballmer to point to his resume and be able to justify his work over the past decade. While Microsoft has pushed out upgrades to all its software, the big picture is gloomy enough to make him sweat at upcoming board meetings: total loss to the ipod in the music market, total catastrophe in Microsoft's internally-competing music formats and platforms (Plays for Sure?), impending catastrophe in smart phones as RIM, Apple, and now Android eat his lunch, and growing irrelevance of desktop office software. Yes, they skirted disaster with Vista and pushed out Windows 7 which is generally well liked. But Microsoft is slipping behind in key growth markets and lack of vision and leadership is a big part of that.
If I were on the Board, I'd be telling Ballmer to go work on his golf game, and bring in new leadership. Microsoft has lots of talented developers and engineers. But upper management is sinking the ship.
If this were Usenet, I'd killfile the lot of you.
I'm hoping the big change comes as corporations replace IE6. Moving to IE8 puts them in almost the same position they're in now 5 years down the road with respect to standards compliance, tie-in to the OS, etc, but it seems that's what most are doing. Perhaps some of them will have learned something.
In Germany, Firefox has a 61% market share, while IE has only 25%.
And a huge part of that is companies that are suffering from Microsoft lock-in. Seriously, when I see people's private computers, be it friends or people at the airport, etc. - it is probably 80% or more Firefox. In most of the companies, however, IE is still the corporate standard, and quite often the only allowed browser.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Could this be highly related to the fact that in Europe, as part of an anti-trust settlement, when you first log into a new Windows machine you are presented with a choice of internet browsers and no longer default to MSIE?
C17H21NO4
Really, selling online I've noticed that Europeans are terrible consumers. They don't listen well to our support staff, they immediately charge back if the service is not up to par, etc. etc. It's a hell dealing with Europeans.
If you're looking to make money, honestly, invest in US consumers first. Much easier to part them from their money and to convince them not to cancel/buy more.
So what you're saying is that we're less gullible and more demanding? Why thank you, that's really nice of you.
I'll let you get back to assraping ignorant 'merkins now ;-)
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
If Oracle keeps acting like retards. I work for an engineering college at a university. If you know anything about engineering they it'll come as no surprise we are a Solaris and Windows shop. Solaris has a heavy legacy, it was doing high end work before other things could, and even today there are products that are Solaris only (though they could be ported to other OSes, they just aren't). While I won't say Solaris is problem free, I see the value in it. There is a difference between a real enterprise UNIX and Linux, loathe though Linux heads might be to admit it.
However we are currently in the process of getting rid of as much of it as we can. We are cutting it down to 4 essential servers and that number will likely go down further, perhaps to just one. Why? Because Oracle has decided to be complete fucks when it comes to licensing. So you already pay heavy maintenance on these SPARC systems. We could buy a new x86 server per year for the cost of maintenance on most of these things. Now that's not enough, they want to charge for Solaris patches, and they want to charge a lot. Oh, and should you ever stop paying they not only do you no longer get patches you are required, and I'm not making this up, to UNINSTALL all patches you've installed.
That's right, they are extorting you: You have to pay a yearly per server fee, or have a vulnerable system.
Well fuck that. We are getting rid of that shit post haste. Going to be Windows and Linux for as much as we can do. In the end I expect we'll need a single SPARC system to run the few apps that run on nothing else but that's it.
Guess what? If Oracle continues strategies like that with regards to other products, you'll find that MS will just gain more marketshare.
Don't worry, eventually the metric system will take over the USA, inch by inch.
Oh grasshopper, allow your old and wise pal Hairyfeet to explain the ways that led to the garden of evil.
You see young one, once upon a time there was this thing called ActiveX. And in this naive and innocent time, when the web was young and the word bukkake was unknown in the west, the developers at Redmond pushed ActiveX as "everything you ever wanted...in a box!" it could build Rich Internet Apps, and turn even the hardest job into a simple form even sally in the typing pool could do. And even trained monkeys could write for ActiveX! And you know what? It was true! Oh how young and foolish everyone was! Every PHB on the block joined right in, and all thought it was well.
Unfortunately there was a REASON why ActiveX was so damned easy, and that was because it blew a hole right through the OS the size of a Peterbuilt. It turned out that trained monkeys also existed in China and Russia, and thanks to security not being taught the day the ActiveX guys were at school it quickly turned craptastic. MSFT, after getting laughed at and having rotten fruit thrown at them wisely treated ActiveX like the red headed stepchild and tried to quietly bash its brains out and bury it in the backyard. Sadly waaaay too many PHBs had bought into ActiveX Intranet apps, and found out that IE 6= works, and IE anything else =toast. But PHBs, being a rather stupid lot, decided that rather than spend the money to rewrite their Intranet would simply keep IE 6 4EVAR BWA HA HA HA HA!
So there you have it my son, the reason why a crappy browser nobody really liked is still used day, after day, after day, after day. It is because PHBs are stupid, more crappy Intranet ActiveX sites exist than you'd care to know (I even know of a few that still use IE 6 ActiveX based sites for processing CC info of their customers EEEK!) and until XP is quietly pushed out on that iceflow to die IE 6 will continue to slowly lumber on.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Monopoly healthcare. No choice healthcare.
Only if you believe the drivel forced down your neck by the US media.
Government healthcare is NOT monopoly healthcare or "no choice healthcare". Here in the UK I have the option of being treated on the NHS (government) or I can go private, it is entirely up to me.
Here are some useful links to anyone interested in private healthcare in the UK:
http://www.spirehealthcare.com/
http://www.bupa.co.uk/
http://www.privatehealth.co.uk/
Unfortunately I still have to pay for the government healthcare out of my taxes but that is not what you were complaining about at all was it?
I dont read
Why is it that a bewildering number of smart people has been indoctrinated into believing that the "free market" is the only solution to everything?
If the cost benefit ratio is less for a market-based solution compared to an alternative solution, then maybe it's time to go with the alternative.
By all metrics, the US healthcare system is delivering comparable medical outcomes to other industrialized nations at about 2 times the cost.
It is beyond debate that a completely laissez faire approach to markets ultimately leads to distortions that prevent efficient resource distribution in most (if not all) sectors of the economy. The is just no reason to object based on the facts, yet people still object. Funny this ideology thing.....
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers