Posted by The Natural Philosopher on 01/09/08 08:30

Diogenes wrote:
> Kind readers,
>
> The first cut of this was originally posted in
> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
>
> I was dismissed as being off topic.
>
> The reason for posting in 'stylesheets' was I felt
> this group would be the most sensitive to the differences
> between the browsers and what their respective audiences
> were using.
>
> So I repost again, this time with more specific information.
> I may or may not have a point here, depending on how you read
> this, and your general temperament.
>
> ================================================================
>
> IE is losing market share because it is an inferior product. A number
> of news articles (from google news) regarding the demise of the Netscape
> browser cited FireFox as having 16% of market share.
>
> I think that number is low. I provided a link to a site that more than
> doubles that figure.
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>
> I'm not saying these numbers are the final authority. It's
> just one sample.
>
> I manage 2 sites, one personal, the other commercial. Both are low
> traffic. Here are their numbers for Dec, produced by AWSTATS:
>
> Personal Comm
> FireFox (all versions) 57% 68.5%
> IE 39.2 24.4
> Others 2.9 6.9
>
> Granted, this is a very small sample, a selective audience, yada,
> yada, yada, but I trust these numbers.
>

I can't offer data,but can offer a view.

I think that powerusers who surf a lot tend to use Firefox to do it.

Whereas the people who just buy a computer and give it to their kids to
get seduced by paedophiles,.will tend to leave it just the way it came
out of the box.

I suspect if you went to google, my tube or facebook, the stats would be
very different.



> I was wondering what other are experiencing on their 100K
> visitors/month website.
>
> I imagine that the FF usage in Europe is MUCH higher that 16%.
>
> FWIW, another twist to all of this is that Microsoft is using the
> demise of Netscape an an argument in court that an extension of its
> 'anti-trust oversight' should NOT be extended. The original reasons
> for this oversight have disappeared (NS is gone).
>

As will MS in a few more years..


> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/03/microsoft_scoffs_antitrust_extention_seekers/
>
>
> My recent experience in buying computers in the retail market in
> Calgary, Canada, is that Microsoft Vista is the ONLY windows OS
> on offer and IE is the only browser installed on these whiz bang
> machines that do everything with almost everything pre-installed
> (including stuff you don't want).
>

Yup. The world is full of users who want XP or even 2000, and can't get it.

> You have to pull strings to get XP, for instance, and download FF
> yourself. Right? Please tell me I'm wrong.
>
> It's not the Adam Smith 'invisible hand' that is guiding the market
> here, it's the invisible hand of Bill Gates.
>
It was always the marketing arm. Bill is actually not a bad guy, he just
listened to too many corporate bullshit artists.


> One last link, by John Dovorak, says it better than I ever can.
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2246368,00.asp
>
>
> Cheers
> -Dio
>

[Back to original message]