 DaemonPremium
join:2003-06-29
San Francisco, CA Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| i'd like to see yahoo, espn, and microsoft So far, all of the stats I've seen have been /., ars technica, and other geek oriented, OSS supportive sites.
A site like neowin, known for windows fan boys would be interesting, as would a large general interest site like yahoo or espn.
--
-Ryan
print "$yourBrowser sucks."
print "$myBrowser rules!" | |
|
 |  MikePremium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA | Re: i'd like to see yahoo, espn, and microsoft You have to start somewhere..... | |
|
| | DaemonPremium
join:2003-06-29
San Francisco, CA Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: i'd like to see yahoo, espn, and microsoft said by Mike:
You have to start somewhere.....
I get your point, but still. Inaccurate sampling doesn't prove anything anyway, so we might as well ignore the 'mozilla surge'
--
-Ryan
print "$yourBrowser sucks."
print "$myBrowser rules!" | |
|
|  sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sisterPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by Daemon:
So far, all of the stats I've seen have been /., ars technica, and other geek oriented, OSS supportive sites.
Where's BBR's browser breakdown?
--
Bush/Cheney '04!
"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." | |
|
| |  statestress magnetPremium,Mod
join:2002-02-08
Purgatory
kudos:6 | Re: i'd like to see yahoo, espn, and microsoft Wouldn't mind seeing that myself. | |
|
| | MikePremium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA | fine... give it a day. | |
|
| |
 fire100Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Twin Lake, MI | More Linux Users? I think this might be tied to more of the techy people moving over to Linux, which in Linux you generally use a Mozilla based browser.
--
Weather Forums | |
|
|  justinAustralian
join:1999-05-28
New York, NY
kudos:7 | Re: More Linux Users? no i don't think linux desktop share has improved by more than a percentage point in that time. | |
|
 antwanpBeyond FM, Beyond AM, XM Satellite RadioPremium
join:2002-05-14
Cedar Hill, TX | Browser Trend And so the trend continues. This is sure to piss the people who want Firefox to reamain small off! I don't know why though, it is a better browser. IE 6 on SP2 comes very close though.
-Antwan L.
--
What did the five fingers say to the face? ::SLAP:: I'm Rick James, Bitch! - Dave Chappelle | |
|
|  nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: Browser Trend said by antwanp:
IE 6 on SP2 comes very close though.
Not if you're a Web Designer, it doesn't. IE's about 5 years behind on standards compliance.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
|
| |  BeesTeaNetwork JanitorPremium,VIP
join:2003-03-08
00000 | Re: Browser Trend said by nixen:
Not if you're a Web Designer, it doesn't. IE's about 5 years behind on standards compliance.
-tom
Sad but true, here's a whole page of things that IE does terribly.
»www.phoenity.com/newtedge/
-BeesT
--
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq |dc | |
|
| | Great Just what web developers need. More browser fragmentation.
I wish these companies would just stick to standards, regardless of the branding of the browser.
bah.
--
Bipartisan politics has become a tallest midget contest. | |
|
|  nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1 | Re: Great er.. web developers worth a damn code to a standard which every browser ought to interpret.
--
Life is too short to be boring | |
|
| | | | Re: Great said by nil:
er.. web developers worth a damn code to a standard which every browser ought to interpret.
er...nice er...but er...why er...do er...browsers er...not all er...follow er...standards.
er.
Note: You said "ought to interpret"
--
Bipartisan politics has become a tallest midget contest. | |
|
| | | nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1 Host:
Webmasters and Dev..
Forum Feature Requ..
| Re: Great said by TheMadSwede:
er...nice er...but er...why er...do er...browsers er...not all er...follow er...standards.
er.
That's cute.
Anyway back on topic, I think you'll be hard pressed to find a browser that offends more than IE when it comes to following standards.
--
Life is too short to be boring | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Great said by nil:
said by TheMadSwede:
er...nice er...but er...why er...do er...browsers er...not all er...follow er...standards.
er.
That's cute.
Anyway back on topic, I think you'll be hard pressed to find a browser that offends more than IE when it comes to following standards.
Thanks.
If you think I'm claiming that IE is compliant, I'm not. But I am saying that browser compliance doesn't mean a lick to users; they want their browser to work. The more browsers the users use, the more browsers we need to develop for -- that is, until all browsers only comply with uniform standards.
Since all browsers don't comply with uniform standards, it's a pain in the rear.
Anyhow, I must not have done a good job of 'splaining myself, but my complaint is against browsers that don't comply, all the while recognizing that the #1 browser that people use does not comply, but still must be developed for because it's the #1 browser that people use.
Whether or not IE is compliant is irrelevant. People use it, you have to consider it.
--
Bipartisan politics has become a tallest midget contest. | |
|
| | | | |  KoolMoeAw ManPremium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD | Re: Great Or...
maybe if all designers made all their pages standards compliant so almost every site on the net wouldn't render correctly in IE - perhaps MS would finally be forced to get their act together and abide by the standards?
Sure, lots of folks would be mad for a few weeks, but I suspect most would finally switch to a complaint browser once enough sites replied to their rants with 'use a complaint browser'.
Boy, that would scare MS poopless...
KM
--
If Clinton lied, so did Bush.
Iraq Casualties | War Propaganda
Air America - Radio for the Rest of US! | |
|
| | | | | |  Combat ChuckToo Many CannibalsPremium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA | Re: Great said by KoolMoe:
Or...
maybe if all designers made all their pages standards compliant so almost every site on the net wouldn't render correctly in IE - perhaps MS would finally be forced to get their act together and abide by the standards?
Here's the deal:
-from my experience IE will render pertty much everything, compliant or non-compliant
-"compliant" browsers( by which I mean non-ie because many of the "compliant" browsers aren't actually fully compliant) render varing levels of non-compliant code.
I've been asking for about a year now, why is a browser that vomits when digesting non-compliant code better than one that handles it seamlessly? I'll answer for you it's not. And I guarantee that the things that IE does not comply to would be added fairly quickly if webmasters started using them.
IE does not write non-compliant html; webmasters do. Lets place the blame where it is due.
--
John Kerry- doing for America whatever it is you want him to do for however long you want him to do it; except if you didn't want him to do it in the first place in which case he never did it. | |
|
| | | | | | | justinAustralian
join:1999-05-28
New York, NY
kudos:7 Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
Home/Office setup ..
| Re: Great IE has a number of outright html rendering bugs - where it does the wrong thing with the right html. the workarounds have been there for so long that people forget they are workarounds and assume that is just the way it should be.
as for browsers that try to do the right thing with bad html, yes, sure, but I'd prefer the browser made it clear that it was guessing. That isn't "vomit", that is promoting standards compliance. IE places equal emphasis on bad code as good code - to IE, there are just two (or more) ways to do the same thing.
html has to be unusually broken now to cause opera or firefox to not display anything useful vs IE displaying a good page. The list of sites that are unusable without IE are down to a vanishingly small percentage. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | said by Combat Chuck:
Here's the deal:
-from my experience IE will render pertty much everything, compliant or non-compliant
-"compliant" browsers( by which I mean non-ie because many of the "compliant" browsers aren't actually fully compliant) render varing levels of non-compliant code.
The problem is that IE doesn't support a lot of code that is standard. For example, according to standards, any element can utilize the hover pseudo-class. This can allow you to create roll over effects without the use of any JavaScript. Unfortunately, Internet Explorer only supports :hover on links. This means that developers have to resort to JavaScript to support IE.
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| | | | | | | | said by KoolMoe:
Or...
maybe if all designers made all their pages standards compliant so almost every site on the net wouldn't render correctly in IE - perhaps MS would finally be forced to get their act together and abide by the standards?
Are you serious? Would your business be willing to have a (at best) weird or (at worst) non-functional site for a few weeks just to make a point?
I think things like mortgages and food are a bit more important than sticking it to Microsoft.
--
Bipartisan politics has become a tallest midget contest. | |
|
| | | | | | | | said by KoolMoe:
Or...
maybe if all designers made all their pages standards compliant so almost every site on the net wouldn't render correctly in IE - perhaps MS would finally be forced to get their act together and abide by the standards?
Having a standards compliant site and having it work in IE aren't mutually exclusive. I'm working on a redesign right now of my company's site and I'm making it fully XHTML 1.0 Transitional and CSS compliant. There are a few quirks that have to be addressed here and there to accommodate IE, and I need to use JavaScript where I wouldn't need to with FireFox, but that doesn't mean that my site won't be compliant.
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| | | | |
| |
| | ariez
join:2004-01-09
00000 | Re: Great said by Jason Levine:
It's not like there's a sudden resurgence of Netscape 4. *shudder*
what was wrong with netscape 4? | |
|
| | | sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sisterPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| Re: Great said by ariez:
what was wrong with netscape 4?
Really, really crappy CSS support. As in, feed it something that is to spec and the browser crashes.
--
Bush/Cheney '04!
"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it." | |
|
| | | | ariez
join:2004-01-09
00000 | Re: Great didn't know that. used 4.79 for years (as primary browser) and still do at times but as a secondary | |
|
| nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | said by TheMadSwede:
Just what web developers need. More browser fragmentation.
I wish these companies would just stick to standards, regardless of the branding of the browser.
bah.
You know, that might actually be a valid point....
If it weren't for the fact that browsers like Firefox, Safari, Opera, etc. strive to be standards compliant. That is to say, so long as you code to established standards, your pages will render the same in any given browser.
IE, on the other hand, simply DOESN'T, or at least, doesn't conform to updated standards. And, the things that it doesn't support, tend to make developing basic content more time consuming (read expensive) and more restricted to just that browser. If anything, IE is the source of fragmentation at this point (shocking, eh?).
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
|
| | | | Re: Great I guess my point is that I'd LOVE to develop on pure standards like CSS2, etc. etc.; however, if even 50% of the browsers aren't compliant, then my work magically doubles.
There's no point in writing to standards that browsers ignore.
--
Bipartisan politics has become a tallest midget contest. | |
|
| | | justinAustralian
join:1999-05-28
New York, NY
kudos:7 Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
Home/Office setup ..
| Re: Great said by TheMadSwede:
There's no point in writing to standards that browsers ignore.
The biggest offender has been IE. They should set the example, not show others how to dodge standards.
Anyway the point is practically moot. IE has hardly changed a jot in 5 years! having achieved what it thought was a stranglehold, and bundled the browser into the OS, microsoft simply stopped advancing its features. So as the world becoming insecure due to extreme homo-geniality, we also got hardly any improvements, because microsoft had other fish to fry with its free cash. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Great said by justin:
Anyway the point is practically moot.
I thought one of the points of the article was that perhaps it's becoming un-moot. Which is why I'm whining like a big baby about this.
--
Bipartisan politics has become a tallest midget contest. | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | said by TheMadSwede:
I guess my point is that I'd LOVE to develop on pure standards like CSS2, etc. etc.; however, if even 50% of the browsers aren't compliant, then my work magically doubles.
Currently, about 91% of the browsers aren't compliant. 
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
|
| | | | said by nixen:
IE, on the other hand, simply DOESN'T, or at least, doesn't conform to updated standards.
I think that's the best point. IE 6 hasn't been updated in too long. When IE 6 was first released, it was the most standards compliant browser around. The major alternative was Netscape 4 which supported virtually no CSS.
IE 6 rightfully gained market share while Netscape first tried to develop a new version, then scrapped it to start over, then got buried in coding for the next few years. For all intents and purposes, Netscape let their browser languish while Microsoft took off. (Yes, there's also the issue of bundling, but IE5 and IE6 were vastly superior to Netscape's offering at the time.)
Of course, once they gained dominance, Microsoft made the exact same mistake that Netscape made: They all but stopped improving IE. So while the standards shifted, IE didn't keep up and is now out of date. Of course, it's still more standards compliant than Netscape 4.
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| | | nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: Great said by Jason Levine:
Of course, once they gained dominance, Microsoft made the exact same mistake that Netscape made: They all but stopped improving IE. So while the standards shifted, IE didn't keep up and is now out of date. Of course, it's still more standards compliant than Netscape 4.
Yeah, but at least NS4 had roaming profile support. That's been an open RFE since like 2000. It's never gotten solved since noone could agree how to reimplement it into the new Mozilla code.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
|
|
| |
| | | The anti-MS crowd jump on any bit of info that looks negative for MS and then exaggerate it's importance. To them being anti-MS is a religion and not just a technical or user decision. | |
|
| | krobarIs this thing on?
join:2002-09-15
Columbus, OH | Re: Another technical community that's not always true, and in fact uses the same logic you're trying to attack as the basis of your attack. Nice try though.
I'm a huge fan and proponent of FF, I strongly dislike IE, however I love XP and win2k and many other MS products. Just because people dislike IE doesn't mean they're fanboys.
--
Power corrupts. Absolute power is kinda neat. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Another technical community I use both IE and Firefox and also use many non-MS products. I just grow weary of the religious fervor and exaggeration that many in the Linux crowd resort to when greeting any news that mentions MS. Is having competitors to MS a good thing? Sure. But why resort to the bogus chest beating that many sites use to try and pump up the accomplishments of competitors that are often mere flea bites to MS. How about reporting with a touch of reality thrown in.
--
A forum with fair moderators
The Kerry/Edwards Team
When the eagles are silent, the parrots begin to jabber. --Winston Churchil | |
|
| | MikePremium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA | It's not a religion because there is some logical thought behind it.
*rimshot* | |
|
 palbriPremium
join:2000-10-22
Bristol, VT | Marketing Hype for a small minority More marketing hype for a small minority of users.
Millions and millions of people won't notice or care to know.
While many of the non-tech people I had shown FireFox to, all said that it was too much work to install themes, extensions and plug-ins.
--
"Canada is a good model for where the world needs to go in the 21st century" -- US Pres. Bill Clinton, Aug. 5, 2004, Toronto ON. | |
|
|
See 23 replies to this post |
|
| | No Title Here... I'm actually a convert from Mozilla/Firefox back to IE after the SP2 Updates. The new integrated Popup Blocker works seamlessly for me. The additional security updates help as well.
Overall, is it perfect... no, but it suits my needs perfectly with other protection I'm running. Run what is suitable for you, try out other platforms if they interest you, determine what is best for you. Don't jump on the bashing bandwagon without actually having some background yourself.
/Trying to catch the "next" browser flamewar before it begins in 3... 2... 1... | |
|
1 edit | Questionable Nevermind, same info was posted above by Jason Levine  . | |
|
 DennisPremium,Mod
join:2001-01-26
Algonquin, IL
kudos:5
Chicago
Users find Hot Deals
Users find Hot Dea..
Requests for Hot D..
Home Improvement
| my site's stats Hits Percent Agent
629,175 42.06% MS Internet Explorer v6
366,313 24.49% Other Agent
201,667 13.48% Spider/Robot
162,889 10.89% MS Internet Explorer v5
40,047 2.68% Netscape Navigator v6
27,156 1.82% Netscape Navigator v5
11,557 0.77% Download Manager
I wonder if "other agent" is mozilla?
--
I want to be different, just like everybody else.
Beer Review's | |
|
 antiphishingPhishing Scam TerminatorPremium
join:2004-06-09
Wilkes Barre, PA
kudos:2
 ·PenTeleData
·ProLog
| IE popularity plunge Over ninety five of users who visit my website (which is off line) are using either Internet Explorer five or six.
It makes you wonder if the claims of this news article are a little far fetched. I realize that my site is very small in comparison to the billions of websites on the internet but it still makes you wonder if Firefox will take down Internet Explorer in the months to come.
--
Dslreports.com Forum No-Spin zone starts here.
»www.antihotmail.com
spammers_are_scumbags@antihotmail.com | |
|
| justinAustralian
join:1999-05-28
New York, NY
kudos:7 Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
Home/Office setup ..
| Re: IE popularity plunge said by antiphishing:
It makes you wonder if the claims of this news article are a little far fetched. I realize that my site is very small in comparison to the billions of websites on the internet but it still makes you wonder if Firefox will take down Internet Explorer in the months to come.
What claim? the claim that on a techie site, IE is fast losing popularity? the stats make that very clear. On the wider net the slippage is much less.
But a non techie asks a techie friend how to clean up their PC, what will happen? firefox is often likely to get installed. Hence the prediction that the tech site share may be a leading indicator.
IE becoming a minority won't happen in months to come though, it may never happen. It does get pre-installed, after all, so it does not have to ever be the BEST browser. Firefox and Opera etc are fighting and gaining with one hand tied behind their back. | |
|
| |  keith2468Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB | Re: IE popularity plunge I seem to remember manually replacing Netscape with MSIE at one point.
It is the nice thing about software. You can easily replace it.
FF can replace MSIE 5 & 6.
But so can MSIE 7.
And MSIE 7 can replace FF.
The most likely market impact of the big Firefox marketing campaign will be to push MS into making MSIE 7 better than it otherwise would have been.
I'm pretty sure Ballmer and Gates will invest whatever it takes to keep MSIE in a dominant position.
--
(Virus&Hijacking FAQ + Submit suspected malware + Backups FAQ + Security FAQ TOC) | |
|
| | | | | Re: IE popularity plunge Except there will be no MSIE 7.
So in order for MSIE "7" to replace FF, you'll have to upgrade to longhorn.
Ooops. | |
|
| |
| | A touch of saninity. Before we get the inevitable flood of "I hate Firefox" and "I hate IE" posts, I'd like to point out that variety is good for EVERYONE. Remember, that no matter how much you like a particular browser, if everyone used it, we'd be back in the same situation again, where a single security hole in one browser is a massive problem.
Though admitedly if that one browser is open source, we'd at least have made *some* progress, as it wouldn't be controlled by any single mega-corporation.  | |
|
|
See 9 replies to this post |
|
 pipdipchip8 Megabits A SecondPremium
join:2003-12-04
Hanover, MN | Hmm.... I'm the webmaster of serveral web sites varying in subject matter. My geek site, WRT54G.com is almost 50/50 Mozilla/ IE. My two teenage fan sites (I'm 16) are only about 15% Mozilla. Really not bad if you think about it. I want Mozilla to become a major browser although I'm a minor Microsoft fan boy.
*using Firefox*
--
CCNA Training in Progress | |
|
| | How do you tell? How do you tell which browser was used? Above are the stats for my personal site for the month of September up until midnight last night (the 27th). How can I tell which ones are FireFox/Opera/etc vs IE?
--
I'll take "Things Only I Would Know" for $10,000 Alex. | |
|
|  rjacksonPremium,Mod
join:2002-04-02
Ringgold, GA
kudos:1
SMC Networks
VOIP Tech Chat
ViaTalk
Teleblend
Vonage
| Re: How do you tell? The ones that say "MSIE" are Internet Explorer, and the ones that say "Gecko" are Mozilla/Firefox.
Reading browser strings is somewhat confusing. Back in the day when Netscape ruled the roost, and IE was a minority, Netscape developed a lot of new HTML markups that worked only in (surprise) Netscape.
A lot of sites were using this new "Netscape-only" code, kicking IE to the curb. So Microsoft enhanced their product, and threw "Mozilla compatible" into their user-agent to fool sites into thinking it was the real deal. | |
|
| | | | Re: How do you tell? said by rjackson:
The ones that say "MSIE" are Internet Explorer, and the ones that say "Gecko" are Mozilla/Firefox.
Thanks rjackson. Never knew how to tell which is which.
--
I'll take "Things Only I Would Know" for $10,000 Alex. | |
|
| | | | said by rjackson:
The ones that say "MSIE" are Internet Explorer, and the ones that say "Gecko" are Mozilla/Firefox.
Unless someone has set their copy of Mozilla/FireFox to fake it's User Agent string. In that case, some of the Internet Explorer might actually be Mozilla/FireFox, but they'll be counted as IE and Mozilla's market share will be seen as less than it is. (User Agent switching is a pet peeve of mine.)
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| | | rjacksonPremium,Mod
join:2002-04-02
Ringgold, GA
kudos:1 Host:
SMC Networks
VOIP Tech Chat
ViaTalk
Teleblend
Vonage
| Re: How do you tell? That is correct, it is fairly trivial for someone to spoof their user-agent. That only means you can't trust any of these web statistics to be completely accurate.
Occasionally, I have to change my user-agent string to convince a site I am capable to view their site. You don't see too many of sites these days using a draconian method of browser lockout, but generally what I do when I encounter them is to never ever visit again.
User-agents should be used as intended, for statistical reasons. They should never be used as a means for content control. | |
|
rpsmith
join:2004-04-19
Huntington Beach, CA | Color me unsurprised... Color me unsurprised. ArsTechnica...of course it's gonna be FF/Moz. That's an extremely specialized crowd.
Still, I'm glad to see FF taking off, with reports in major mags etc. Would suck if everything else was obscure and we were forced to use IE because of website support. | |
|
|
|  NeilStop All The Downloadin
join:2003-08-20
New York, NY | Re: Glad that I don't follow trends/fads I was wondering about that myself. | |
|
|
|
See 30 replies to this post |
|
 twizlarI dont think so.Premium
join:2003-12-24
Brantford, ON
kudos:3 | Stats Period 09/2/04 - 10/2/04
Browsers Hits Percent
MS Internet Explorer 33248 91.4 %
Mozilla No 1673 4.6 %
Netscape 768 2.1 %
Safari 366 1 %
Unknown ? 190 0.5 %
Konqueror 48 0.1 %
Opera 24 0 %
Links 12 0 %
firebird 11 0 %
Galeon 9 0 %
from my site | |
|
| | Well maybe they need to look at "normal sites" Yeah geek world sites are going be non IE....
Browsers Percent
MS IE 79 %
Mozilla 13.3 %
Netscape 5.2 %
Safari 0.8 %
Unknown 0.8 %
Opera 0.4 %
Konqueror 0.1 %
Firebird 0 %
WebTV browser 0 %
I-Mode phone 0 %
Others 0 %
--
»www.cqbarms.com | |
|
 Bobb5Premium
join:2001-02-16
Kent, WA
1 edit | Pretty funny stats there, hilarious even! Want some Real numbers? Only ones you'll be likely to see!
Can you say global usage share
-
WebSideStory Inc.'s real focus is its on-demand Web analytics services for business customers, said Erik Bratt, the company's corporate communications director. But the data collected from thousands of Web sites and 20 million to 40 million users a day has shown WebSideStory that there is a small decline in Internet Explorer use from 95.73 percent on June 4 to 94.73 percent on July 6.
-
It's not just WebSideStory observing this phenomenon. OneStat.com, a Web analytics firm based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, also reported a downturn in IE usage. The company "confirms this decrease of the global usage share of IE. On January 19, the global usage share of IE was 94.8 percent, and on May 28, the global usage share was 93.9 percent," according to a representative for OneStat.com.
--
A coward and a Huge liar does not make for a good man, let alone a President!
Think about it! Facts are facts.
-
»www.johnkerry.com/front/splash.html
-
»www.bushflash.com/ | |
|
|  ObdHPremium
join:2003-06-11
Litchfield Park, AZ | Re: Pretty funny stats there, hilarious even! said by Bobb5:
Want some Real numbers? Only ones you'll be likely to see!
Can you say global usage share
-
WebSideStory Inc.'s real focus is its on-demand Web analytics services for business customers, said Erik Bratt, the company's corporate communications director. But the data collected from thousands of Web sites and 20 million to 40 million users a day has shown WebSideStory that there is a small decline in Internet Explorer use from 95.73 percent on June 4 to 94.73 percent on July 6.
-
It's not just WebSideStory observing this phenomenon. OneStat.com, a Web analytics firm based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, also reported a downturn in IE usage. The company "confirms this decrease of the global usage share of IE. On January 19, the global usage share of IE was 94.8 percent, and on May 28, the global usage share was 93.9 percent," according to a representative for OneStat.com.
kind like the whole firefox spread thing, they wanted 1mil downloads in 10 days or something and got twice that (of course some cheating may have occured)
so I'm sure a couple million downloads could be the indirect reason for a 1% plunge in IE usage
--
arabic accent
General, our base is under attack!!! | |
|
|
|
·
Who is using up the other 39% that IE and Mozilla aren't using?
AND STILL!!