Microsoft IE Browser Share Dips Below 50%

alphadogg writes "Microsoft's Internet Explorer, which has dominated the Web browser market since blowing by Netscape in the late 1990s, last month fell below the 50% market share level for the first time in years. IE's share of the worldwide market fell to 49.87% in September, down from 51.3% in August and 58.4% a year ago. It is followed by Firefox, which increased its share slightly from 30.09% to 31.5% and Google Chrome, which grabbed 11.54% share, more than triple its September 2009 share, according to market watcher StatCounter."

Comments

Re:good riddance

[click2005]

MS will never acknowledge anything except that IE9 is better/faster/safer/blingier than the other browsers.

The point is that with IE9, all of the major browsers aren't that bad really.
Thats the way it should be. Your choice in browser shouldn't matter.

Competition FTW

[Ben4jammin]

FTA: While web browser advances were few and far between a decade ago, competition among IE, Firefox, Chrome, Apple Safari and Opera has fueled new developments, including increasingly faster browsers

Imagine that...competition FTW.

Re:Competition FTW

[The MAZZTer]

Although I dislike the idea of Internet Explorer actually becoming somewhat usable, (if there's no villains, there can be no heroes!) I suppose it's better for everyone that it happens. Besides, when everyone improves, consumers are the real winners...

Re:good riddance

[hedwards]

Indeed, but until IE 6, 7 and 8 are out of the way, it's likely still going to matter. It really should be a matter of personal preference, at least that's what I thought standards compliance was for.

Hmm..interesting

[Lunix Nutcase]

I find it rather interesting that the source for this figure is the same StatCounter that the same people cheering this figure about IE will claim is wildly inaccurate due to the fact that it shows Linux with like a 1 or 2% market share. But since in this case it shows something negative about Microsoft (IE market share, Windows XP vs Vista & 7 market share) it is taken as holy gospel truth. Hypocrisy. Isn't it grand?

Re:Hmm..interesting

[falcon5768]

because usage like this stat is actually a important statistic, while market share is useless since market share does not equal usage. Its not so much hypocrisy as much as market share is a pointless statistic that is constantly misrepresented to mean something it isnt which most people in the IT field know already to disregard it.

Re:Hmm..interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

they are biased towards sites that are willing to include a privacy-violating stat counter.

So "Horse Owner Forum" yes, "My PC Helpsite" maybe, "Linux Weekly News" no.

This affects both the browser usage counts and the OS pref stats, making them invalid in the same sense that an amateur phone survey (call 100 numbers, extrapolate to the whole population without adjusting for demographics) is invalid. But that may not mean they're useless for your purpose, depending on what that purpose is.

Very importantly, these people are a fairly good source for making the decision "Which browsers should I test my generic mass audience site on?" but not for "Which operating systems do I need to support in my next scanner/printer combo device?". Because what they're measuring is only tangentially related in the latter case.

Re:Hmm..interesting

[timeOday]

I agree counting of this nature is somewhat dubious since it's hard to sample the web uniformly. That said, the milestone matters less than the trend, which is most likely reflected accurately so long as they don't change how they count. In other words, it doesn't really matter whether the absolute percentage is now 50%, 60%, or 40%; what's certain is the web monoculture Microsoft wanted so badly and nearly achieved at the height of their power has failed. And that's a good thing.

Re:Hmm..interesting

[icebraining]

they are biased towards sites that are willing to include a privacy-violating stat counter.

I have to disagree about privacy violation - if the data is broken up (by which I mean, not keeping Browser/OS/plugins/etc linked in a single "profile") and not tied to any personal info, I don't see what privacy are they violating.

No real increase for firefox...

[daid303]

Firefox has been around 30% for the last year, while IE dropped 10% in the same time, and Chrome gained 10%.

If this trend continues then it might balance out at 30/30/30/10 for IE/Firefox/Chrome/Other. Which should be good for everyone I think. There is no holy browser (except lynx), so a good balance of users should make sites more standard compliant in the end.

Re:No real increase for firefox...

[Monkeedude1212]

so a good balance of users should make sites more standard compliant in the end.

Or will the browsers fight to become more robust than their competitors to deal with the non-compliant sites?

Hold on

[musicalmicah]

The methodology question in the FAQ leads me to believe that all their stats are from sites that use this tool - "the best free web counter in the world." IE may indeed be below 50% market share for this population, but I bet it leans towards recreational rather than business browsing.

Google Chrome Frame

[tepples]

until IE 6, 7 and 8 are out of the way, it's likely still going to matter.

But what's the fraction of the audience 1. runs IE <= 8 and 2. doesn't have privileges to install Chrome Frame?

Re:good riddance

[poetmatt]

once firefox and/or chrome have enterprise tools to make it work with activedirectory, you'll see IE share drop to 0. Until then, it's sadly a bit higher than you think it is.

Re:The IE interface has become awful

[LinuxIsGarbage]

I liked IE but it is now a clusterfuck of bad design. The icons are tiny, illegible and poorly positioned... I'm sure it can be customized but why bother when there are other browsers that do it better by default.

My question is why in IE7 and 8 are there two "Tools" menus with different items? Makes phone instructions interesting. "Click tools. No not that one, the other tools."

Depends on whom you ask

[asdfington]

Measuring browser market share is kind of a tricky task since any one site can only tell you who visits *their* site, or the sites whose stats they aggregate.
Check out the stats here:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers#Summary_table and you'll see that depending on whom you ask, IE has anywhere between 48 and 63% of the market share. Stats from sites that cater to developers (notably w3schools are skewed heavily* towards Firefox and Chrome, mainstream sites towards IE. Then there's the factors that lead to over-estimation, under-estimation... it's a sticky wicket for sure.

I say look at the aggregate results. Then I mention I have no idea how those aggregates are tabulated and weighted (Do W3Schools' stats have the same weight as WeTrack10mSites.com?). The only thing you can know for sure (more or less), is the traffic statistics on *your* site, which, to the developer, should be pretty much the only ones that matter. Pro tip: explain that last sentence to your clients.

*I don't really know if something can be "skewed heavily," but what the heck, you only live once, right?

Re:Depends on whom you ask

[maxwell demon]

The only thing you can know for sure (more or less), is the traffic statistics on *your* site, which, to the developer, should be pretty much the only ones that matter.

But your own site's statistics may be biased as well: For example, if you have an IE only page, that fact by itself will make IE the dominant browser on your page. However that doesn't tell you about the statistics you would get if your site would not be IE only. You cannot distinguish between hits you don't get because the user isn't interested in your site, and hits you don't get because the user can't access your site (or because your site looks ugly in his browser).

No IE 9 for Windows XP. Promote switch to 7.

[tepples]

IE9 is good that I wont have to go to friends and family and talk them into the merits of switching

So now you've replaced talking them into switching to Chrome with talking them into switching to Windows 7. That can involve a substantial investment in hardware and operating system license, especially with multiple PCs in the household.

Re:good riddance

[AnonymousClown]

A lot of folks don't care. Many many folks think that, since they have [name brand] Anti-Virus, they're safe.

Although the new IE isn't the security train wreck that it once was.

Re:good riddance

[Bert64]

IE9 is still a problem tho...
When IE6 came out it wasn't all that bad compared to its peers, just like IE9 today. However, if everyone moves over to IE9 and other browsers die out then you can kiss goodbye to any updates, IE9 will stagnate and become the new IE6.
Market share of any browsers other than IE should be as high as possible, otherwise MS will just screw the web like they have done before.

Re:% of People consciously using IE is way lower

[fadir]

I'm pretty sure that a reasonable amount of those people have someone at hand to "fix" the computer for them, which often includes the installation of an alternative browser. I agree that the majority of the Windows users are clueless. But I wouldn't go so far to say that this is >90%.

Fuck 'em

[SteveFoerster]

IE6 won't die until XP dies; even though IE7 and IE8 run on XP as well, there will always be people who Just Won't Upgrade.

Fuck 'em. IE6 is nine years old. If the laggards are going to try to stand in the way of progress they should expect eventually to get run over.

Re:good riddance

[TheRaven64]

He said "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

And you think that's better? I'm sure people like Alan Turing and Oscar Wilde would have appreciated that advice, when they were alive.

Re:good riddance

[HermMunster]

I don't want to seem facetious, and I'm very happy that the browser market share is shifting. What went through my mind when I started reading this is that if you took the statistics from Microsoft's website hits the share would be strikingly higher for IE.

What I'm saying is that when you get stats from sites such as English language sites you would expect English to be seen as the predominant language. If you hit Linux sites you would expect to see Linux as dominant there. If you don't seek foreign sites in your stats you will never see them represented as those people most certainly account for a higher percentage of non-Microsoft products such as Linux.

Unless you can accurately account world-wide you'll never get a real picture of the market share and unless you can represent to those foreign countries the bad about a specific company they'll never know to try some other OS or browser.

Re:good riddance

[PCM2]

No he didn't. He said "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

And how is that better/more reasonable than the GP's interpretation?

I don't think it's anybody's business how my girlfriend likes to have sex. I guess we should practice abstinence only, huh?

I don't think it's anybody's business that I have leukemia -- at least, it certainly shouldn't affect my employment, my access to health care, the outcome of my divorce, etc. Guess I should stop growing those cells, huh?

I don't think it's anybody's business what route my kid takes to walk to school. Guess I should home-school her, huh?

I don't think it's anybody's business how I voted. Guess I shouldn't vote, huh?

Schmidt comes off like a Nazi to any reasonable U.S. citizen.