Over the last few years, Microsoft Internet Explorer has seen huge loses in market share. In the final month of 2008, the trend continued. Internet Explorer has dropped 16% in market share since May of 2006, which has left the door open for other browsers to gain what Internet Explorer has lost. In the month of December 2008, Apple's Safari hit a all-time high closing with 7.93% of the market share. Internet Explorer closed the year with 68.15% of the total market share. The data collected by researchers was collected from 40,000 corporate and e-commerce websites. While Internet Explorer still holds the biggest majority of the market, if this steep decline continues who will take over the majority of the market? Can Internet Explorer 8 bring back some of the 16% it has lost over the past 2 years? Analysts are skeptical, but only time will tell.
Net Applications' December 2008 Web Browser Stats:
Microsoft Internet Explorer: 68.15% (vs. MAY 2006: 84.20%)
Mozilla Firefox: 21.34% (vs. MAY 2006: 10.55%)
Apple Safari: 7.93% (vs. MAY 2006: 3.26%)
- iPhone: 0.44%
- iPod: 0.08%
Google Chrome: 1.04%
Opera: 0.71%
Netscape: 0.57%
Mozilla: 0.08%
Opera Mini: 0.07%
Playstation: 0.04%
ACCESS NetFront: 0.02%
Blazer: 0.01%
Microsoft Pocket Internet Explorer: 0.01%
BlackBerry: 0.00%
Awww yeah! Apple's movin on up. To the East side.
Well, would you rather have 9x the user base, or gain almost 5% of total market share?
To me, it's like... who the hell would vote for Bush? Oh wait, I knew he was going to be elected. Right now, why the hell is IE so popular? Wait, I don't have any explanation, but I know it's still a lot popular. It just doesn't make sense, but it's the truth!
To me, it's like... who the hell would vote for Bush? Oh wait, I knew he was going to be elected. Right now, why the hell is IE so popular? Wait, I don't have any explanation, but I know it's still a lot popular. It just doesn't make sense, but it's the truth!
Did you really just bring Bush into this?
Chrome has the most potential, though its lack of even basic privacy / browsing features is disappointing - with the proposed extension support and further development I can easily see it taking off. Firefox is still my default browser, though only thanks to the extension support - the development process has been very slow recently and security flaws more frequent. Opera has made some tremendous progress but still needs extension support.
I think the browser can hold its own for quite some time with a very modest amount of success. That's something Apple has dealt with for quite some time, quite comfortably at that.
Not so different from MS marrying the perennially buggy and virus-ridden IE (not so much now, though) to Windows so closely that you couldn't remove it without serious consequences to system stability.
Of course, you always have the option of using another browser. And you can always remove Safari.
Of course, you always have the option of using another browser. And you can always remove Safari.
Not true. Independent research proved that IE could be removed with a few tweaks here and there and everything would work, and this was way back in the beginning of the Anti-trust trial.
Of course, you always have the option of using another browser. And you can always remove Safari.
But you can't remove Webkit, which is quite similar to Windows' dependency on IE.
Of course, you always have the option of using another browser. And you can always remove Safari.
But you can't remove Webkit, which is quite similar to Windows' dependency on IE.
Webkit isn't a virus magnet, nor is it tied into OS X the way IE is into Windows (horrible idea.) And you would just put Safari in the Trash and empty it. Or get rid of it however you want. That's it. No more Safari or Webkit, and OS X keeps on running smoothly without issues. Anyone can do it, and you don't need any kind of independent research to prove that you can.
Last edited by LTD on 03 Jan 2009 - 03:01
That doesn't remove webkit itself from OSX. You think every app out there that uses HTML content statically links the renderer? That would be beyond frightening. Removing your OS's primary HTML rendering engine, or even letting the user consider doing such a thing, would be utterly stupid: too much depends on it.
I do agree that Microsoft let IE and Explorer get too close, though. Fortunately, this was solved with Vista. You can't remove IE, but nothing depends on the IE shell. Apps will (obviously) depend on the mshtml renderer as things depend on webkit on OSX, but that's about it.
I do agree that Microsoft let IE and Explorer get too close, though. Fortunately, this was solved with Vista. You can't remove IE, but nothing depends on the IE shell. Apps will (obviously) depend on the mshtml renderer as things depend on webkit on OSX, but that's about it.
My mistake, I'm getting careless here. Right, you can remove Safari easily, but not Webkit. The point I was trying to make - that shouldn't have taken me more than one post to do, LOL, is that amost every file in Windows can run some sort of internal scripting engine. They embedded activex in Internet Explorer. They embedded vbscript in office files. They used the same html viewer that runs those vbscripts in their mail program, etc.. WMV files can have embedded links that run when you click on them. OS X isn't immune to exploits, but it doesn't put out the welcome mat, etc.
Google ads, can't beat it.
LOL, read any Apple forum and the hate for Safari is pretty wide spread.
But not necessarily for Webkit specifically.
KHTML and WebKit-based browsers
ABrowse
Web Browser for Android (mobile device platform)
Arora
Epiphany, GNOME's current default browser (2.26+)
Google Chrome
iCab (version 4 uses WebKit; earlier versions used its own rendering engine)
Konqueror
Midori
OmniWeb
Safari
Shiira
Skipstone
Sputnik for MorphOS (based on S60 WebCore)
Web Browser for S60 (for mobile)
Webkit is far faster than the current version of Gecko, although I think Firefox 3.1 will change that. But Webkit was far superior to any alternatives for a while. Only problem, and still the problem, is the lack of a good frontend for it (with the exception of Safari on the iPhone, all the Webkit browsers are really minimal and nothing to call home about).
Over the last few years Opera's share has dropped.
What accounts for IE then? I really don't think the general computing public really cares about extensions, or even know what they are. Firefox has become very popular through word of mouth mostly. I know I've told many people about it who now use it who otherwise would still be using IE.
I've tried Opera many times over the years, even back when it cost money but I never quite liked it as much as Firefox. Until now anyway, I recently installed Opera 9.6 and I was really impressed with how much it has improved. Didn't take much tweaking at all to get it the way I want, and the Opera IBIS theme from the Chinese version is beautiful. Not sure why the default theme for the US version has such ugly buttons. Anyway it's now my main browser and Firefox is no longer even installed.
The fact that it's bundled with Windows, which has the vast majority of the OS market. Firefox is popular largely because of AdBlock Plus, Mouse Gestures (something that Opera pioneered) and FlashGot (for downloading multiple files / Flash videos in just a few clicks). There are many others as well. Firefox also has the best bookmark system and download manager currently.
Opera's great but it's just not enough to make me move from Firefox. I've tried using it recently as my default browser and lasted several weeks (a record) but it just wasn't quite right.
Nice way to spin the title towards Apple btw. Noticed FireFox was mentioned in stats only.
Last edited by McDave on 02 Jan 2009 - 23:01
Right. Because when there is something positive in the news about Apple (and there has been plenty for quite a while now), it must be "fanboyism."
I dont even like apple that much but your right.
Anyhow, we're already aware of Firefox and how far it's come. It's like saying long cat is long or something. We already know.
I have to be honest here, when I see your name next to any post in an Apple discussion, I just assume it's fanboyism, your bias knows no limits.
Oh, well that's because I AM an Apple fanboy. That's just how good their stuff is. I don't hide it.
I don't try to feign some sort of mock objectivity in order to win approval with lukewarm and meaningless generalized statements that can apply to everything, such as "it has its advantages and disadvantages." I come out in clear favour of things and I tell you why.
Fences aren't for sitting on.
I don't try to feign some sort of mock objectivity in order to win approval with lukewarm and meaningless generalized statements that can apply to everything, such as "it has its advantages and disadvantages." I come out in clear favour of things and I tell you why.
Fences aren't for sitting on.
And I thank you for that.
I don't try to feign some sort of mock objectivity in order to win approval with lukewarm and meaningless generalized statements that can apply to everything, such as "it has its advantages and disadvantages." I come out in clear favour of things and I tell you why.
Fences aren't for sitting on.
Fixed that for ya...
In order for me to say the kinds of things I'm saying, I'd have to believe them.
when mozilla gains 10.55% but the article's author is dry humping apple's leg over safari's amazing 3.26% gain then yes it's fanboyism.
We already know FF is popular. Safari, however, has been somewhat of an anomaly on PCs, therefore any news of its increase in popularity/share is noteworthy.
And the overall trends suggested by this article are also very telling. It's a very different tech world from just a few years ago.
And leads to total ignorance amongst many others!
Fanboyism? Hardly. I'm very fair when it comes to reporting news. If you'd like to know the truth, I don't own anything made by Apple. Being fair and non-biased =! fanboy.
Let's say Safari had a market share of 2% or lets say 3,000 users. Now if 6,000 users downloaded it (even if they didn't use it), Apple could say their market share is up 50% over the last year. All companies spin stats to make them look good.
Let's say Safari had a market share of 2% or lets say 3,000 users. Now if 6,000 users downloaded it (even if they didn't use it), Apple could say their market share is up 50% over the last year. All companies spin stats to make them look good.
You really don't know what your talking about to you. These stats are taken by lots of different websites and look at what the visitors used. These stats are nothing to do with downloads and are independent of any browser company.
In future read article before opening your mouth, you won't look so foolish then.
The whole iTunes/QuickTime updates "offering" to install Safari doesn't look like it's playing a significant role in Safari's uptake because damn near all of the Safari users are on Mac OS X (96%). I read that as "Apple is gaining a whole whack of new Mac users but still can't make software for Windows that people want to use."
Also interesting was that Linux users out number iPhone users by only 2:1. That's an amazing statistic for any number of reasons: Linux has > 10 years of development slowly pushing it toward the desktop and the iPhone made huge strides in only 2 years. People are actually browsing the web in significant numbers on their iPhone (see blackberry and windows mobile at ~1/100%)
Last edited by bradsday on 03 Jan 2009 - 14:06
You my sir, are an ignorant fool. IE is a hole-ridden, ugly-looking monster. Haven't you read about all the vulnerabilities and exploits within IE?
And if IE 6 was available for Mac, would you actually install it?
One thing that I did notice however, is that Google Chrome is beating Opera and in comparison to how long Opera has been out, that's sad. I guess Chrome just builds in more originality and being Google does pretty much help regardless...
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.