Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

While Chrome Dominates, Microsoft Edge Struggles To Attract New Users (neowin.net)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the losing-their-Edge dept.

An anonymous reader quotes Neowin's report on the newest browser-usage figures from NetMarketShare: Microsoft Edge only commands a market share of 5.65% -- which is an increase of only 0.02 percentage points compared to last month... it only grew by 0.56% year-over-year. On the other hand, Google Chrome has continued its dominance with a market share of 59.49%. As a point of reference, this is a sizeable growth of 10.84 percentage points year-over-year... Data from another firm, StatCounter, depicts an even more depressing situation for Microsoft. According to the report, Edge sits at 3.89%... Chrome is the king of all browsers according to these statistics as well, with a market share of 63.21% -- a decrease of 0.14 percentage points compared to last month. Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Safari command 14%, 9.28%, and 5.16% respectively.
The firm also calculates that when it comes to desktop operating systems, Windows has 91.51% of all users, followed by MacOS at 6.12 and Linux at 2.36%.

105 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. Edge's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It was a POS when it came out but it got better. Now, it's usable.

    Interesting to think that forcing the Windows 10 upgrade while Edge was a total turd may have accidentally killed the web browser market for Microsoft.

    1. Re:Edge's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "usable"? Even links is usable

    2. Re:Edge's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Lynx

    3. Re:Edge's OK by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes, that, too.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Edge's OK by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Lynx zwo lynx zwo lynx zwo drei vier, Lynx!

    5. Re: Edge's OK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I just telnet to port 80 and manually type in all the HTTP commands for my daily web surfing needs. For HTTPS I have to use the s_client of openssl, but whatever. My brain renders all the visuals from my terminal at the fastest speed, than "Edge". Hold on, mom is calling from upstairs, BRB.

    6. Re: Edge's OK by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 1

      Hell yeah!

    7. Re:Edge's OK by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it's "usable" but that's not really the only metric that counts. Edge is half finished, it lacks major features present in other browsers and, in some ways, is actually a downgrade compared to, say, the Windows 8 version of IE11.

      Chrome and Firefox are both full browsers. They'll continue to be the standards until (and unless) Edge actually makes an effort to match them. I find it a little odd that a company the size of Microsoft can't better Chrome - Chrome isn't that great a browser, and it's only beating Firefox because they made better architectural choices than Firefox has.

      What is Microsoft waiting for?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    8. Re:Edge's OK by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Then you have Safari and Opera trailing around too.

      And here's a list of more browsers: http://www.thewindowsclub.com/...

      Anyway - Microsoft browsers are only useful as a last resort if you can't get anything else to work. Mostly on company intranets.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    9. Re: Edge's OK by kqs · · Score: 1

      Not just that; they are also useful for downloading Chrome, apparently.

    10. Re: Edge's OK by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

      I disagree. Microsoft's UI design language just plain sucks, and Edge is no exception. A great example of why it sucks is this page:

      https://www.bing.com/translato...

      On laptop and touch screens, the light grey to the right of the "auto-detect" dropdown box sends an impression (to most users I show it to) that this is where you're supposed to type the text. But it's not, where you're supposed to type text is in the little box below it with an outline so thin that it's barely even visible on many screens, so it's not immediately even obvious that the text field is actually there at all.

      Edge has this problem in the URL bar, where there's no UI hint that you can actually type there unless you happen to move your mouse over it, though most people who have used other web browsers tend to get it just because that's where the URL bar sits in other browsers so it's not quite a deal breaker, but it would otherwise be. Though a greater example of fail in Edge is when users want to change the default search engine. It turns out that they are rarely ever able to figure it out on their own without searching the internet for an answer, whereas they are more easily able to do so with IE and Chrome.

      And that's just for novice users. Edge also doesn't have a place for power users either since it lacks most of the features (beyond just rendering web content) that modern browsers have had for a very long time. The only audience that Edge is suitable for are hardcore Microsoft fans. Yes, they exist, and they're also every bit as annoying as Apple fans were back when nobody used Apple products.

    11. Re:Edge's OK by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      What is Microsoft waiting for?

      You fundamentally misunderstand Microsoft's motives. Microsoft's strengths have traditionally been bringing power user functionality to products that are also relatively easy to understand by novice users. However, that all changed when the iPhone came out, and then Steve Ballmer laughed at it, and then ended up eating his foot.

      After that, Microsoft changed its business strategy to target the lowest common denominator of users, because if it worked really well for Apple, then clearly it will work for them as well. But four windows phones later, Microsoft still doesn't understand that they can better differentiate themselves by not trying to be Apple.

      Until that happens (which doesn't seem likely) you can continue to expect more fails like Edge in the foreseeable future.

    12. Re:Edge's OK by Dracos · · Score: 1

      I find it a little odd that a company the size of Microsoft can't better Chrome

      This is the same company that couldn't better Netscape for 3 version of their browser, so they bought a rendering engine and built IE4 around it. That same rendering engine is the core of Edge, 20 years later.

      MS is rather bad at making software, they're much better at buying into market segments they want to be in, then using their dominant market position to push "their" product. Trident, Excel, Visio, Skype, Nokia, the list goes on. Or they partner up with another company and steal the result: OS/2.

  2. Sucks on multiple fronts by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    It's neither compatible with IE, nor better.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Sucks on multiple fronts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But it comes with extra spyware, designed to integrate with Windows 10's spyware!

    2. Re:Sucks on multiple fronts by Angeret · · Score: 1

      But Microsoft spyware is BEST spyware! Chortle. When you have an OS which detects you changing your browser and then pleads with you to give Edge a chance and people still have something better in mind, you really need to rethink your strategy. Oh, this is Microsoft we're talking about here - fuck the User and full steam ahead with the OS rental plans.

    3. Re:Sucks on multiple fronts by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Netscape 4 detected you changing your browser and pleaded.

    4. Re:Sucks on multiple fronts by war4peace · · Score: 1

      And it didn't help at the time either :)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  3. Even with aggressive defaults by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Even with aggressive defaults or the missing eu browser ballot, most users appear to be deciding they do not want to use edge on Windows 10.

    1. Re:Even with aggressive defaults by tepples · · Score: 2

      But are people willing to pay $50 to leave Edge behind? Windows 10 S is locked down to run only Edge, just as iOS is locked down to run only Safari and other Apple WebKit wrappers. As of July 2017, Windows 10 S is targeted toward the school market, but I've read rumors here on Slashdot that Microsoft plans to eventually replace Windows 10 Home on new PCs with Windows 10 S.

    2. Re:Even with aggressive defaults by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Just as is the case with Apple, rumors on Slashdot determine what I believe about Microsoft.

    3. Re:Even with aggressive defaults by theweatherelectric · · Score: 1

      Windows 10 S is locked down to run only Edge

      No. You can run other browsers. It's just that Edge is always the default browser. Read the Windows 10 S FAQ

  4. Mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I use Chrome on my phone and tablet but don't even have it installed on my Window 10 desktop. There I use SeaMonkey, with Edge in the places where NoScript won't let through must see pages.

  5. Depicts an depressing situation by s1d3track3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

    depicts an even more depressing situation for Microsoft. According to the report, Edge sits at 3.89%...

    when it comes to desktop operating systems, Windows has 91.51% of all users...

    Depicts an even more depressing situation for the world...

    1. Re:Depicts an depressing situation by stooo · · Score: 1

      >> Linux at 2.36%

      Linux increased it's desktop market share. That's good, but a long way remaining to the top.
      Probably next year Linux could overtake Edge, that would be cool.

      --
      aaaaaaa
    2. Re:Depicts an depressing situation by tepples · · Score: 1

      X11/Linux taking desktop usage share away from Windows 10 is good for people who want to work on projects requiring more than one window at a time without being beholden to a known private spy agency.

    3. Re:Depicts an depressing situation by stooo · · Score: 1

      Good for me.
      It means more and more companies are switching to Linux desktops, which makes sense when nearly all infrastructure and often also products run Linux.
      This means my next job could has more chances to be bound to a Linux workstation, which would make me a happier guy.
      I already had the delight to work in a 95% Linux environment for 3 Years, it was like being on holiday, but at work.

      --
      aaaaaaa
    4. Re:Depicts an depressing situation by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      What is missing in that 91.51% of desktop users, is the rapid shrinking of that desktop user market, now smaller that smart phones. Which is why when you total up desktop, notebooks, smart phones, smart TVs, tablets windows loses to Linux and even Apple is looking to pass M$. So how rapidly will the desktop market shrink, is the real question and it most certainly is shrinking and that is what will kill M$ because they can not fall back to the server market, their game console market is shrinking and they are losing against Sony and they can not sell phones to save the lives, even when they sell Android. They are so fucked and they brought it on themselves forcing Windows anal probe 10 with spyware of every description and compulsary software install the user has no control over, people answered back to M$ by telling them to shove winphones up their khyber pass and arrogantly still M$ refuses to listen.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:Depicts an depressing situation by erapert · · Score: 1

      <quote>As soon as Oculus Rift has Linux support, I'll be switching OSes.</quote>
      <a href="https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Oculus_Rift">Doesn't it already?</a> If not then you probably shouldn't hold your breath.<br>
      Also, <a href="https://www.khronos.org/openxr">OpenXR is like OpenGL but for VR</a>.

    6. Re:Depicts an depressing situation by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Good for who? I can't imagine who Linux desktop market share is good for. Maybe Steam box game developers.

      It's good for almost everyone who is not a tech giant like Microsoft or Apple.

  6. User Interface by Tim12s · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It all comes down to the user interface.

    I'd still be with firefox if they didnt butcher the interface trying to copy windows ribbon with a shytty alternative.

    1. Re:User Interface by theweatherelectric · · Score: 1

      I'd still be with firefox if they didnt butcher the interface trying to copy windows ribbon

      I use Firefox all the time and I have no idea what ribbon interface you're talking about. When I use Firefox on Windows I turn on the menu and I also switch to the Compact Light theme, which is one of the three default themes.

    2. Re:User Interface by theweatherelectric · · Score: 2

      What are you talking about? There's already a WebExtensions version of uBlock Origin. Read the release notes.

    3. Re:User Interface by urbanriot · · Score: 2

      "Hey everyone! Look what we did! We threw Internet Explorer out the window, copied Chrome, added the Windows 8 Metro interface that everyone loves, and we took out all the options! ... and if anyone has any feedback, we don't care!"

      The fundamental point that both Microsoft and Google are missing with the latest iterations of their browser, is that Internet Explorer offered an alternative to Chrome that gave people more personally configurable options, plenty of corporate configurable options via group policies, and a menu interface that wasn't too complicated. Microsoft decided they'd try to copy Google and made the decision easier. Want to relocate temporary internet files? Nope. Compatibility view? Nope, that's Internet Explorer. Want to fix Edge when this store app breaks, which it often does? Good luck.

      I drank the kool aid between the Windows NT 4 / 2000 / XP / Vista / 7 days but these days Microsoft is a company I don't recognize and doesn't recognize its users. This is why Apple computers are popping up everywhere in my periphery, they actually care about the user experience.

    4. Re:User Interface by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      Too late they shouldn't have tried to become Chrome Jr.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    5. Re:User Interface by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You're basing your desktop choice on what browser is installed by default on the desktop OS? Browsers used to be something we installed after we chose an OS. Ooops, they still can be and are.

    6. Re:User Interface by Zerf · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately as is mentioned on their add-on page at https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/classicthemerestorer/ Classic Theme Restorer will no longer work in Firefox 57 which is expected to be released in November 2017. Mozilla is dropping support for XUL/legacy add-ons.

    7. Re:User Interface by urbanriot · · Score: 1
      I would be very appreciative for a citation on:

      None of the Apple executives use Macs these days and it shows.

      Not because I don't believe you but because I'd like to send that off to a few Mac zealots I know.

    8. Re:User Interface by mfearby · · Score: 1

      Why should I have to go hunting for a theme just to undo all of the stupid changes to the Firefox UI? Anyway, I stopped using it when I found that Chrome was faster at javascript (I use Ext JS a lot) but I do miss Firebug. I'd even go so far as to say that the world only needs one rendering engine: everyone should just use chromium. There, internet problem solved.

    9. Re:User Interface by samwichse · · Score: 1

      Try Windows 10S!

      It's a real product that exists and Microsoft is pushing right now!

      And the default browser is locked to Microsoft Edge and cannot be changed. You can install other browsers, but every link you click in an email, or in a store, or in a notification, or anything is going to take you right back to Edge.

      The future!

  7. Both are bad by tezbobobo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is actually still really bad news for consumers. Both browsers are designed to lock you into an ecosystem. In Chrome's case it is Google's advertising ecosystem; Edge is designed to keep you dependant on Microsoft tech. What is really needed is a move to Firefox and (yes) Opera. A diversification of browsers is good for compatibility and standards compliance and liberates users from monopolistic corporation whose motivations are unclear and convoluted.

    1. Re:Both are bad by donaldm · · Score: 2

      This is actually still really bad news for consumers. Both browsers are designed to lock you into an ecosystem. In Chrome's case it is Google's advertising ecosystem; Edge is designed to keep you dependant on Microsoft tech. What is really needed is a move to Firefox and (yes) Opera. A diversification of browsers is good for compatibility and standards compliance and liberates users from monopolistic corporation whose motivations are unclear and convoluted.

      With Chrome you can go into the settings and change what you want to be tracked or not tracked. In fact, you don't even have to log in to Google so if they are tracking for advertising purposes all they have is an IP address. There is also an "Incognito window" (Pretty well all browsers have this) although this does not stop tracking by ISP's and the target site. Yes TOR can but you have to trust that the site operators respect your privacy.

      Personally, I would rather trust a browser not to be annoying with regard to privacy since you do have some control and if you are not happy you can always use a different browser or search engine. On my system (Fedora 25), I have Qupzilla installed by default and it only takes a second to launch it (SSD's are great) and by default it uses DuckDuckGo. Of course, if your operating system by default effectively ticks all the boxes of Malware then it does not matter which web browser you use.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    2. Re:Both are bad by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You could also always just go for a chromium based browser like SRiron that strips the Google ogling from the Chrome.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Both are bad by fafalone · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Firefox is 100% dedicated to becoming indistinguishable from Chrome. They've been continually dumbing it down and shitting up the UI for years, and soon they're trashing the one remaining bright spot, plugins. Losing NPAPI plugins wasn't the problem, the real issue is coming this November with the elimination of XUL. The new WebExtensions offers far less power and customization. The only reason I don't use Chrome now is because of its god awful extension capabilities, so once Firefox is similarly crippled the last reason to use it flies out the window. They don't understand how they got a large userbase, don't understand why it shrunk, and don't understand that their current userbase doesn't want ChromeFox and cloning Chrome won't attract new ones.
      So no, nobody is going to be moving to Firefox, nor should they, and their existing userbase will largely be abandoning them this year. I'll be using a pre-57 version for as long as that's viable, then that's it.

      You say Yes to Opera, but does it really offer a compelling alternative to MS/Chrome like Firefox used to? Doesn't seem that way. The Pale Moon fork of Firefox seems like the only reasonable alternative at this point. But that's never going to be mainstream. So Edge v. Chrome here we come.

    4. Re:Both are bad by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      SeaMonkey is also a choice.

      But it's never going to be mainstream.

      But who cares about it being mainstream??? Isn't this Slashdot?

    5. Re:Both are bad by short · · Score: 1

      Firefox performance sucks, what do you have against Chromium?

    6. Re:Both are bad by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      There probably wouldn't be much opposition to it if there were something that would replace it without losing functionality.

      But there isn't.

    7. Re:Both are bad by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Personally, I strongly dislike Chromium because it's hard to use and feels limited.

    8. Re:Both are bad by samwichse · · Score: 1

      Yes, posting from Vivaldi now.

      It's the best I've tried.

    9. Re:Both are bad by samwichse · · Score: 1

      Have you tried Vivaldi?

  8. I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by Ramze · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Edge is the only browser that Netflix supports for 1080p (and even 4K streaming with certain processors). All other browsers are stuck at 720p or less for Netflix. It's an artificial limitation created by Netflix for piracy protection, but until I set up another device (perhaps an Amazon Fire TV) that can do as well or better for Netflix, I'll stick with Edge. Netflix's Windows 10 app will also allow 1080p, but the interface is a bit wonky, and for some reason, it doesn't work well on my laptop (though it works perfectly well for another laptop I have, and I have no idea why.) The app will just up and crash.... but, Edge works just fine.

    Sure, I could use a different browser and watch Netflix in 720p, but why when Edge can do better?

    My 1080p smart TV has its own Netflix app, but I believe it's also limited to 720p (it's pretty old for a 1080p TV)... maybe if/when I get a 4K TV I'll just use the app that comes with it instead.

    1. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by fafalone · · Score: 1

      I honestly don't think it's about piracy protection. It's definitely not about hard protection, because even their 4K streams are currently available on pirate sites. And preventing casual piracy could be done in any browser. So what does that leave? I suspect they're being paid or threatened to limit support to whatever particular technologies MS or possibly the film studios want.

    2. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by Ramze · · Score: 2

      I tend to agree... but, it's their official reason.

      I don't think Netflix really cares about piracy -- they dominate the online streaming market & they're about to surpass any cable company in terms of subscriptions in the USA alone (assuming they haven't already). Why would they care if anyone pirates Orange is the New Black when almost everyone has a subscription and can watch it for free (with paid subscription) whenever they like anyway. Watching a pirate version just means you aren't using Netflix's bandwidth when you watch if you're already a subscriber. (and Netflix is now allowing downloaded content to various devices as they know this is true.)

      They have to pay lip service to piracy prevention for content creators, though -- and I'm sure the content creators are also dictating what platforms they can do what on. Edge uses a different security model than other Windows browsers, so I'm sure that's the real difference... for now.

    3. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by Ramze · · Score: 1

      Fair point. I was limiting my focus to Windows, Linux, and Android as that's all that's in my household. I often forget there are Mac and iOS users out there. I don't know why that is since my cousins use Mac laptops exclusively.

    4. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by Ramze · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip... but, my issue is entirely different.

      If I run the Netflix App at all (without even logging into the Netflix App), it will crash. Sometimes it will let me play one movie, then refuse to go back to the browse screen... and then freeze/lock up. I assume the app itself is corrupt and/or it's not playing well with video drivers.

      It's the strangest thing as I have no issues with any other software on that laptop. I think I made some attempts at googling fixes for it, but didn't find anything helpful at the time... so, I just ignore the app and use Edge. I really don't care for Windows 10 apps anyway.

    5. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by Ramze · · Score: 1

      I do this too for Firefox and Chrome. Sometimes it's just easier to use separate browsers than to switch users.

      This is kind of why I like having multiple browsers anyway -- backups should one fail and for different uses.

    6. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by Ramze · · Score: 1

      As an update, I fixed my Netflix App issue. Uninstalled, Re-installed... then noticed the app would still open, but remain minimized. It was trying to display on a monitor that didn't exist. I told the computer to display to 1 monitor only... and that didn't work. Then, I reversed the monitor display settings (monitor 1, monitor 2 to monitor 2, monitor 1 instead) , and the app suddenly appeared where I could move it to where I needed it... then I swapped the monitors back.

      So... the app is stupid assuming secondary monitors will always be there and no option to display on the only monitor existing on the PC. My guess is that it suffers from the same issues many of the Win10 apps have trouble with -- understanding that it's not running on a tablet and that monitor connections can change and other applications want to be displayed as well. *shrugs*

    7. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      It makes you wonder if they bother testing anything.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    8. Re:I use Edge for Netflix and nothing else by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I just use multiple FF incognito mode windows.

  9. Chrome, the One Percenter by CyberNigma · · Score: 4, Funny

    Chrome may only be 59.49% of the market share, but it owns 99% of the memory out there. It's the browser one percenter!!

    1. Re:Chrome, the One Percenter by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

      I recently switched from Firefox to Chrome (Chrome portable actually because Google won't let you change the install directory on regular Chrome). The speed increase is incredible, granted my PC is quite old.

      I do notice that sites like Wired and WaPo have started telling me I am using an ad blocker. When I Google for a solution all I get instructions for uninstalling an extension, but I have no extensions to uninstall, and I can't find anything in the settings.

      I may have to go back to Firefox for this reason alone. Anyone have any suggestions?

  10. Can Chrome become the new IE? by wvmarle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Chrome becoming the new IE is what I'm afraid of. Its market share is >60 and rising fast - at this rate in a few years Chrome is reaching 90% and everything else is marginalised. That opens up the opportunity for Google to start "extending" its browser and for web developers to develop sites that are Chrome-only as "it's what everyone uses", instead of coding to standards as they just about have to in the current situation.

    The risk of Google stopping browser innovation and stalling the web for a decade is less likely than back in the IE vs Netscape days but it is a distinct possibility when we again have a single browser dominating the field.

    1. Re:Can Chrome become the new IE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It would be a problem, but not as huge as the IE f***up..

      The issue with IE was that it not only prevented other browser from gaining popularity, but also preventing people from running anything else than Windows, and it still does in some cases (there *still* exists IE6 only sites!!). I would say this is one of the causes they have reach such a user-count today. If applications would have been built for multiple platforms it would be a fight for what is best, not what has the largest user-base... And with a bit of competition *maybe* microsoft would have actually made a good product. With good i'm not talking about usability but all the things around like security/stability etc.

    2. Re:Can Chrome become the new IE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Having lots of market share is fine as long as you dont abuse it which is what microsoft did.

      Lets look at the issues with IE.
      It was proprietary to windows only and had lots of proprietary extensions so many many webpages were only viewable in IE.
      It was full of security issues. which microsoft did nothing about. they even had no IE team for years because it had been dismantled!!!
      It would take other peoples technology and then screw with it on purpose so it wasnt compatible with the original thing anymore. since IE had dominant market share it really hurt that technology - java. sun successfully sued them for it.
      For years people had to put up with annoying pop ups and no ad blocker because microsoft would do nothing about it and update the browsers features, namely because they didnt have a development team anymore because it was dismantled!!
      IE is uninstallable and it comes built into the OS (even windows 10 still has IE lurking in it). Most of the time people only have chrome in windows because they installed it themselves. Whether they did or didn't they can still uninstall it at any time.
      To view webpages all you need is chrome. WHile in the IE days you needed IE plus activex and vbscript, silverlight etc. installed which were all microsoft only and were a security nightmare.
      Chrome is open source. Google doesnt care which OS chrome goes on. Anyone can take the open source chrome engine and make a competing browser that can view all chrome pages properly.
      Google makes money from ads. They make the most money by keeping the web accessible by all. Not walling it in like microsoft tried to do so people would be stuck with windows (the only os with IE). Saying that Chrome could be like IE one day is rediculous.

    3. Re:Can Chrome become the new IE? by Voyager529 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Partially, I agree with this - anyone having 90% of a market in just about any computing segment turns into a problem pretty quickly. Google, however, is in a place where they've been EEEing 'the internet'. Google fonts are everywhere. Google AMP is becoming a de facto requirement for mobile sites. GCC might be bouncing between second and third place with Microsoft for cloud hosting, but don't underestimate Google's ability to play the long game. Google also basically-owns the advertising market, meaning that they largely control the financial aspect of what runs many of the smaller sites. Even if they switched market shares with Opera, an internet without Google is basically a broken internet now.

    4. Re:Can Chrome become the new IE? by BenFenner · · Score: 1

      You're a few years too late with this worry. We are solidly in the middle of "best viewed in Chome" websites. Use a standards compliant browser off the beaten path and you'll run into all sorts of barriers you can't get around and sites that don't work well, all because they are wittingly or unwittingly designed with Chrome in mind. It is awful, and as a web developer I feel it is no longer responsible to build or test with Chrome.

    5. Re:Can Chrome become the new IE? by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      an internet without Google is basically a broken internet now.

      Indeed. And that's pretty scary in itself.

    6. Re:Can Chrome become the new IE? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Use a standards compliant browser off the beaten path and you'll run into all sorts of barriers you can't get around and sites that don't work well, all because they are wittingly or unwittingly designed with Chrome in mind.

      That may be the case, but all that means to me is that those are sites that I will never go to. Much like sites that don't work if I've disabled javascript or block ads: that's fine, those sites are now nonexistent to me.

      It hasn't harmed my browsing experience at all.

    7. Re:Can Chrome become the new IE? by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

      If you think that open source software and technologies can be used to EEE, you don't understand how open source works.

      I'm well aware of how open source works. I'm also aware of how Google AMP works, and it still involves a dependency on Google. More to the point, Google isn't using AMP to EEE the internet, they're using their search indexing algorithm - which is not open source, to do so, and using AMP as a part of preferable rankings. That's the kind of thing that would have gotten 90's Microsoft in trouble, but since it's Google, and AMP is open sourced, and they're a darling of Silicon Valley, it's not a problem.

  11. Have to code better by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Give the world the ability to write tools. Block ads, block scripts, save content.
    Imagine been able to create something useful on a Microsoft OS thats not a computer game.
    Edge does nothing thats useful.
    Been a browser that can surf the web without crashing or not failing as much is not a really a selling point.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re: Have to code better by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      There are many useful pieces of software on Windows otherwise no one would use it.

    2. Re:Have to code better by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I use SeaMonkey on a Windows desktop. I am not aware of any other browser that so easily allows me to 'save content' from websites. With SeaMonkey you open a new draft page on the HTML Composer. You highlight the formatted HTML text on the browser window, you cut and past it to the composer window. If you like, you can then touch it up and/or go into the 'raw HTML' editing tab of Composer to make changes.

      For pulling content off web sites to store locally, the ability to build HTML tables in a WYSIWYG method and then cut and paste formatted web content into table cells is absolutely fabulous.

      SeaMonkey, BTW, is available for every OS. I can check out the tarball and build it from source on NetBSD if I choose, or install a Windows binary.

      We are actually lucky that SeaMonkey remains obscure, because 'web content creators' would wee all down their leg if they realized how easy it is for any ordinary person to snatch and store their content locally using it.

  12. When "other" eats most of the half of IE... by mapkinase · · Score: 1

    A differential shows that more than a half of percentage points lost by IE (.71%) since the last month go to "other" (.38% increase) which is more than twice larger than the increase in Safari points (.16%) which is actually a largest winner (by a small margin) last month (Chrome has only .13% increase)

    Month June, 2017
    Chrome 0.0013
    Internet Explorer -0.0071
    Firefox 0.0004
    Microsoft Edge 0.0002
    Safari 0.0016
    Other 0.0038
    Sum 0.0002

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  13. Re:But what OS? by donaldm · · Score: 1

    91.5% of users on Windows isn't that surprising, the real fun stat will be how many are on 10.

    Windows worked really hard to shove that down peoples throats weather they wanted it or not. I bet adoption numbers are lower than MS wants by a lot.

    Currently Windows 10 is 26.8% compared to Windows 7 at 49.04%. What is surprising is Windows XP is at 6.94% while Windows 8.1 is at 6.4 and Windows 8 is at 1.37%. Check out the following site for more information on Linux (2.36%) and Mac (3.49%). Actually, the site is worth bookmarking since it can usually settle or create arguments pretty quickly. :)

    --
    There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  14. And someone thinks this is news? by aglider · · Score: 1

    Microsoft products can attract users only and only if they can create an "artificial" environment where that product is the only one to work.

    For example, can you tell me where and when a Microsoft browser is preferable to any other one?

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    1. Re:And someone thinks this is news? by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      You don't remember the time when Netscape was becoming so broken that people longed for the much better working and faster IE?

      That, by the way, was only partly due to the strong lock-in MS created with their extensions. A lock-in that led to the disaster of IE6 (which, when it was just released, was a pretty advanced browser).

    2. Re: And someone thinks this is news? by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 1

      Nope... you win the thread.

    3. Re:And someone thinks this is news? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      can you tell me where and when a Microsoft browser is preferable to any other one?

      It is preferrable when I have a new Windows machine freshly installed and I need a browser window to open up and type 'Download SeaMonkey' into.

      That is the only time I commonly open a Microsoft browser.

    4. Re:And someone thinks this is news? by damnbunni · · Score: 1

      On a touchscreen, actually. Edge has a reasonable tablet/touch UI. Chrome and Firefox used to, but they removed them.

    5. Re:And someone thinks this is news? by aglider · · Score: 1

      Is there anyone really using a Microsoft environment with a touch UI?

      --
      Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  15. Edge is usable now by JohnScott1514 · · Score: 1

    I definitely think Edge is usable now. But Chrome is far more compatible on many devices. Edge is locked to Win 10 a big disadvantage and even Win 10 users seem to have ignored it. Edge might have a advantage in battery life? Kind of debatable the significance of that. So it's possible some users have tried Edge and weren't compelled enough to switch.

  16. Re: Not flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Agreed.
    Windows is still king on the desktop but the desktop market is in decline. Instead of one desktop or laptop, many users have multiple devices. Like tablets, phones, etc. I have friends that have ditched their laptops all together and just use their phone/pad.

    Sure Windows is king but the kingdom is shrinking.

  17. Re: Not flamebait by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    The consumer desktop market is for sure but the business desktop won't be switching huge spreadsheets, graphic design and so many other things to a 12in iPhone that actually costs more than a laptop.

  18. Four-function calculator filling a 10 inch screen by tepples · · Score: 1

    Desktop? But my tablet is on the desktop.

    To me a "desktop operating system" is one whose GUI shows more than one window at a time, as opposed to the "all maximized all the time" window management policy of stock Android versions 6 ("Marshmallow") and earlier, where a four-function calculator fills the screen.

    Surfing on a "desktop" copy of Windows or a "non-desktop" Android device is still surfing the web. Writing documents in Windows or Android is still writing documents.

    Can you surf the web in half the screen and write a document about the site you're surfing in the other half? Or do you have to switch back and forth and suffer doorway amnesia?

  19. The problem is Microsoft by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 3

    Too many negative connotations with MS. Nice guys until they're on the winning hand. And then they turn into big, cocky scoundrels.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
    1. Re:The problem is Microsoft by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      When was Microsoft ever "nice guys"?

  20. Excellent situation by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 2

    The dominance of MS in the desktop is an excellent situation for those of us who like Linux in such an environment: all the security issues will be blamed on Microsoft, and the bad guys will continue focusing on Windows, leaving us mostly alone. We might not get access to the latest and greatest hardware immediately, and we might not have some key applications (none, in my case - YMMV) albeit a Windows VM (or even Wine) fixes that. But we enjoy a fully functional desktop, that does everything that we want, that is secure and (when avoiding the Windows wannabees hogs that are KDE and (especially) Gnome) efficient. Thank you, Microsoft. May things continue this way indefinitely.

    1. Re:Excellent situation by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I agree wholeheartedly!

      Linux is, in my opinion, in a bit of a sweet spot. Popular enough to have decent development happening, but not so popular that it suffers from all of the various nastiness that happens to popular operating systems.

  21. Gosh by ledow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gosh, I wonder why people don't really choose to use a browser that's a replacement for a previously atrocious browser from the same company, that was foisted upon people resulting in monopoly lawsuits, that choose just about every non-standard and insecure method of rendering a page that it possibly could, that only ever runs on a single operating system, is again bundled so you can't avoid it and pesters the shit out of you on upgrades to make it the default AGAIN, and really doesn't do anything that other browsers don't do, while also NOT doing quite a lot of things that other browsers do.

    I can't possibly work it out.

    1. Re:Gosh by mfearby · · Score: 1

      Bingo!

  22. Re:But what OS? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    So even today Windows XP has twice the marketshare of MacOS?

  23. Not a fan of Edge, but.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... the javascript engine that it is bundled with is sure nice. I've been working on a project that will require an embedded javascript engine, and I've been looking very seriously at using ChakraCore.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  24. Edge downloads chrome faster than any other browse by jessepdx · · Score: 1

    This should be the headline.

  25. GOOD!!!! by Heebie · · Score: 1

    The last thing the world needs is more people using crappy Microsoft software!

  26. You needn't worry by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Chrome is just an advertising platform for Google. It exists to make sure Microsoft didn't cut them out of ad revenue. They don't care what browser you use as long as you can see their ads.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  27. add-ons make the difference by swell · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I stick with Firefox because of the addons. No Flash nonsense with slide shows, popups, flashing adverts, etc. No unwanted trackers or spyware. No suspicious remote scripts. And the ability to change the format of a page: for instance, seeing Slashdot the full width of the window instead of wasting half my expensive screen space.

    It seems that some of these addons are available for other browsers, but perhaps less effective. I'd experiment with other browsers but I really don't care as long as Firefox gives me a clean browsing experience. Yes, your browser may be 1.6% faster, but if it can't cut the crap from the screen I don't care. The choice of browser for me is not a religious obsession, it is simply a plea for peace of mind as I try to navigate aggressive web pages and preserve some privacy.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:add-ons make the difference by swell · · Score: 1

      HackTheWeb
      https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...

      --
      ...omphaloskepsis often...
    2. Re:add-ons make the difference by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Yes, I am the same. I don't really care about speed -- all of the browsers are fast enough. I really care about two things: the user interface and whether or not I can have the functionality that NoScript provides. RIght now, that means Firefox with the Classic Theme Restorer.

      Once CTR stops working, I think that Pale Moon is the only refuge left.

  28. Firefox's FireFTP by C0L0PH0N · · Score: 1

    As long as Firefox has FireFTP extension working, I will be staying with Firefox. If any of Firefox's upgrades permanently breaks FireFTP, then I will be shopping for a new browser. Edge does not support in-browser FTP nor does Chrome. If none ever do, then it may be Chrome or a Chromium offshoot in the long run. Edge seems born to make MS money from me, so I doubt I will use it. I realize Chrome is the same way :). I support a lot of beginners, and I usually configure their Windows 10 systems to use Chrome, with the bookmarks bar and home page turned on. As someone pointed out, releasing/pushing Windows 10 when Edge was "such a turd" pretty much killed Edge.

  29. Would have to wrap EdgeHTML by tepples · · Score: 2

    From the Windows 10 S FAQ: "When in Windows 10 S configuration, you are able to download any browser available in the Windows Store"

    From "Windows Store Policies", as reported in "Microsoft Has Effectively Banned Third-Party Browsers From the Windows Store" by Catalin Cimpanu:

    10.2.1
    Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate HTML and JavaScript engines provided by the Windows Platform.

    Thus all web browsers for Windows 10 S are wrappers for the same EdgeHTML engine that Microsoft Edge uses, in the same way that all* web browsers for iOS are wrappers for the same Apple WebKit engine that Safari uses. If a user encounters a site that relies on a new web platform feature that Edge does not implement, the option to switch to a Blink or Gecko browser in order to work around lack of support in Edge is paywalled to users of Windows 10 S, as the user would first have to purchase the upgrade to Windows 10 Pro.

    I know Google has made Chrome In Name Only for iOS, and Mozilla has made Firefox In Name Only for iOS, both of which wrap Apple WebKit. But to what extent would it be a worthwhile effort and positive brand move for Google and Mozilla to produce browsers that wrap EdgeHTML for Windows Store?

    * Except Opera Mini, which is more like running Remote Desktop to a web browser running on a VPS somewhere.

  30. Re:Question by Ramze · · Score: 1

    Because I have a laptop with a really long HDMI cable connected to a 60" TV that I regularly use for gaming, multimedia streaming, and watching my cable TV streaming from without a cable box. (Spectrum TV's browser based streaming is actually a LOT better than their coax-based tv without a box, and it's faster switching channels and searching than the HDTV box) So, basically the laptop is already connected to the TV, so opening a browser to watch Netflix is trivial. I used to use the SmartTV's Netflix app, but I noticed the Edge browser's Netflix interface is easier to use, faster, and appears to be higher quality streaming.

    I'm considering getting an Amazon Fire TV box or something similar... but, really I don't need to spend $40 to $100 for a device that doesn't do anything for me that my current setup doesn't.

  31. Re:Chrome Plugin Saves Time by Ramze · · Score: 1

    I tend to agree that 720p is fine for most uses. I watch Netflix on a Linux machine in 720p, but it has a 24" monitor. For the size and the distance from the screen, I really can't tell if the stream is 720 or 1080p on the 24" screen. But, my TV is 60", and I can usually tell the difference between 1080p and 720p, though not always. I've heard of the speed modifiers before, and while that's very interesting, I don't find myself needing to speed through shows. I watch them for leisure and often pause them while I do other things.

    I imagine my next upgrade will be to 4K or beyond, and assuming broadband speeds and compression allow streams of that quality when I purchase a new TV, I wouldn't want to be relegated to 720p -- the difference between 4K and 720 is quite noticeable.

  32. Same thing happened to me; submissions marked SPAM by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    ... then I could not post any replies. It took me a couple of months to figure out what had happened. I had just figured Slashdot was failing with some weird error message, guessing incorrectly perhaps related to the IP range of my ISP. I was also going through mixed feelings about Slashdot, so fixing it was not high on my priority list.

    I eventually had to contact someone at Slashdot via email to fix my account. Then I could post again.

    But they never unmarked the submissions as SPAM.

    Here are the three submissions I posted that got marked SPAM:

    "SPAM: Investigation of Nano-Nuclear Reactions in Condensed Matter"
    https://slashdot.org/submissio...

    "SPAM: Employment Law and Robotics, AI, and Automation"
    https://slashdot.org/submissio...

    "SPAM: Trump GOP convention infringed copyright for at least seven songs "
    https://slashdot.org/submissio...

    My stats on submissions over the past fifteen years or so:
    https://slashdot.org/~Paul+Fer...
    "47 declined, 12 accepted (59 total, 20.34% accepted)"

    I did get one front page submission again today (on Moore's Law ending). The problem is that many interesting tech stories are about specific companies that might sell something -- like that one by HP Labs. I could maybe understand the reasoning that an article about a law firm's report about employment law (and technology) might seem spammish. But a fact-based article about the GOP convention (and tech hypocrisy)? Or an article from a US government agency about cold fusion replication (vindicating the original researchers)?

    The person who responded to my email (maybe six to nine months ago?) said Slashdot had been working on its spam filters.

    Still kind of annoyed those all three still have bright red SPAM tags since they were not intended as such and I have no financial interest whatsoever in those groups mentioned. But I was glad to get posting privileges back.

    Much more frightening was the time my GitHub account went away after posting an issue on Calypso (for WordPress). That felt like having my whole career deleted. I had spend hours writing up the comment previously intending to post it on Matt Mullenweg's blog, but it did not go through (guessing for length and links), and then decided to make a GitHub issue instead. Their spam filters must have detected that a lot of text with links was pasted right after opening an issue. Fortunately GitHub put my account back right away after I contacted them. That issue:
    https://github.com/Automattic/...
    And a post about that to Mullenweg's blog:
    https://ma.tt/2015/11/dance-to...

    Both cases serve as reminders to me of the problems of investing time into specific commercial online services with creating a body of published works and an associated online reputation. Fortunately, both companies fixed things up -- since they have reputations to maintain too.

    Anyway, hope Slashdot resolves the account issue for you too, Mosquito Bites! I see Slashdot marked twelve of your submissions as spam -- which all look like good articles to me:
    https://slashdot.org/~Mosquito...

    Seeing this happen both to me and someone else makes me really wonder about the risk of submitting any more articles to Slashdot? I'd rather be able to discuss stuff than get front page articles posted.

    Anyway, could be worse -- see the movie Brazil (hopefully not the darker Director's cut version though).

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  33. Re:But what OS? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

    You have some selection bias going on. Your enterprise clients are likely dominated by a particular demographic and not representative of the population as a whole.

    That said, About 75% of the Windows users I personally know are using Windows 7 on their personal machines (and about half of the WIn 10 people really, really wish they had Windows 7 back, the other half don't care). It's somewhere near 100% Windows 10 on their works machines.

    But I have the same selection bias thing going on.

  34. Dreamer by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    I'd like to think that Edge hobbled itself because of the removal of privacy features.
    Then again, Chrome.