# Chrome UP - IE Down Again



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

http://mashable.com/2010/05/04/chrome-firefox-ie-stats/

_Google Chrome was the fastest growing web browser for the fifth month in a row in analytics company Net Applications's April market report, while Microsoft Internet Explorer again lost market share._

Death to IE!
Death to Flash!


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

Marlin Guy said:


> Death to IE!
> Death to Flash!


+1!


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

Hmmmm... It is going to be interesting as the browser market gets more fragmented. Just a few short years ago, you only brought up websites using your computer. Now, you can bring 'em up on your phone or your portable tablet. And some of those devices just can't handle Internet Exploder. 

I am rebuilding an internal site at work. The primary testing is on Firefox 3.6, but I've also tested it on iPad, and it works great. It is also going to be interesting as I believe that more of your work will be handled through the browser rather than through an installed application. One key element will be JavaScript, and almost every modern browser has faster Javascript implementations than Internet Explorer.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

They say that IE is below 60% now. I think this has more to do with mobile browsers than it does with desktop browsers. If Winmo 7 can become a major player in the smart phone world I wouldn't be surprised to see it's market share go up again. Yes the EU dealt a major blow to MS but overall I highly doubt that many people went out of their way to use another browser over the one they can choose default.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

soon everyone will need 3 browsers installed to surf web due to incompatabilities...


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

There's a couple of other interesting numbers in this report:

Firefox has completely stalled, seemingly unable to penetrate the 25% barrier, a milestone anticipated now for many months.

Opera has achieved exactly nothing as a benefit of the EU's actions on their behalf.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

-Opera is a nightmare to code for, it just plain is stupid with code that it will sometimes accept and sometimes go wacko with depending on the exact context.
-IE7/8 are actually not bad to code for at all, I have no need for them to go away.
-Firefox is very compliant these days, most sites work with it
-Chrome still has a lot of issues with custom web apps, for example a lot of bank sites do not work properly on Chrome (work fine on Firefox and IE7/8). Luckily IETab solves that for the most part, though that is more of a geeky solution.

In summary, I think it is fine if either IE7/8 or Firefox do well, but at this point the others need some work to be a mainstream browser I install on clients machines. I don't really get why people want IE7/8 to go away, at this point there is no benefit. They are secure, they are relatively fast, they work well/predictably with code, and they do not get bloated like Firefox does with memory still sometimes (randomly). Not saying you have to use it, but people don't need to go out of their way to bash it either. IE6 should and needs to die. But IE6 is not IE7/8.

I use Chrome, Firefox, and IE8 daily on my machine, with most of my browsing in Chrome.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

How do I get counted?

5 systems... all with multiple browsers

2 of them are Safari and Firefox
1 of them has all 4, with IE being v6 because of compatibility reasons with legacy items
1 has three (no chrome), but I only use Firefox, to stream audio (so clicking links don't mess up the audio), and I only use Safari when I have to go to Apple's sites, as they purposely give IE headaches (IMHO)

The netbook, has IE, Chrome, and Firefox.. but I use chrome on it pretty much because it is light weight, and works for the netbook... but I lose a lot at times too.

The iPhones/iPods/iPad that I casusally browse with, those are obviously Safari... but not by choice. The Blackberry is it's default one, with Opera on it case I have compatibility issues.

At this point, given that fact that "browsers" are free, and don't really generate money... does it really matter which one is dominate? The fact that one ISN"T dominate is a bigger problem, as the standard doesn't move fast enough to keep up with innovation, and thus we are in the mess we are in now.


----------



## Mustang Dave (Oct 13, 2006)

Just the other day got a call from sale person out in the field that couldn't get the Blackberry Webdesktop app to load on his laptop. 

I remote connected to his screen to check it out, Chrome? What's this?

Tried the app in IE, worked great. Chrome was immediately add/removed from his laptop.

I would use Chrome....why?


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

Mustang Dave said:


> I would use Chrome....why?


Faster, safer....


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Marlin Guy said:


> Faster, safer....


Faster.

Don't keep using the safer thing, I have noticed barely any difference now with Firefox 3.6, Chrome, IE8.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> (...)
> 
> The netbook, has IE, Chrome, and Firefox.. but I use chrome on it pretty much because it is light weight, and works for the netbook... but I lose a lot at times too.


My netbook has all three as well but I tend to stick with Firefox as it's the easiest to configure for private browsing 100% of the time. Also Chrome is a little hinky with some of the stuff I do here at this site.


----------



## naijai (Aug 19, 2006)

I use IE & Firefox on all my machines, tried using chrome for while it might be fast but i don't see any other benefit from using it


----------



## wilbur_the_goose (Aug 16, 2006)

Unscientific results.

I open my company's intranet site with IE8 - takes about 2 seconds from the time I hit return till it's done loading.

Chrome takes about .8 seconds.

The intranet was written with Domino (IBM) tools, and works perfectly in Chrome, even though it wasn't ever tested in Chrome.

But, alas, Chrome doesn't wok with Wells Fargo. But it does with the site of the company WF bought. Wachovia.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Cool concept:

[youtubehd]nCgQDjiotG0[/youtubehd]


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

I want some french fries! 

:lol:


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

They used a local file that was more than likely cached in Chrome.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Shades228 said:


> If Winmo 7 can become a major player in the smart phone world I wouldn't be surprised to see it's market share go up again.


Winmo 7 is almost certainly a non-starter given the momentum that Android is gaining.

The problem with Winmo 7 is that it will likely push Silverlight which is philosophically in the same boat as Flash.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Grentz said:


> I don't really get why people want IE7/8 to go away, at this point there is no benefit.


At some point, end users understand that Microsoft wants IE7 to go away ASAP and IE9 will likely bring the same fate to IE8 in due course.

The people just want a browser that they don't have to "upgrade" all the time and I'm sure that would ultimately appeal to content developers as well.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Marlin Guy said:


> They used a local file that was more than likely cached in Chrome.


Even so it is being rendered, which is where a lot of the speed differences come from between the browsers.



harsh said:


> Winmo 7 is almost certainly a non-starter given the momentum that Android is gaining.
> 
> The problem with Winmo 7 is that it will likely push Silverlight which is philosophically in the same boat as Flash.


Android does not interest me that much, Win Phone 7 highly interests me and looks like a killer interface (much more modern than the others out there right now). We will have to see.

Silverlight is also similar in its target audience and fact that it uses plugins, but different in that it is extremely lightweight and fast in comparison to flash. Silverlight is actually very nice, I notice no difference or lag on pages with Silverlight where in comparison you can usually tell when a page has a flash element.

A lot of devs would rather go from flash -> silverlight than flash -> HTML5 as it is honestly more similar in how it is developed for and thus more familiar. The problem so far is that there is no reason for most devs to jump ship from flash. But if a major platform gets silverlight and not flash I bet more will make that move.



harsh said:


> At some point, end users understand that Microsoft wants IE7 to go away ASAP and IE9 will likely bring the same fate to IE8 in due course.
> 
> The people just want a browser that they don't have to "upgrade" all the time and I'm sure that would ultimately appeal to content developers as well.


Browsers are always going to be upgraded and the old always abandoned. Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari, IE, all have upgrades that are continually being worked on and coming out replacing old versions.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

Haha a computer at my university has Netscape Navigator on it


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

matt1124 said:


> Haha a computer at my university has Netscape Navigator on it


I can remember when that was the shizzle.
HTML editor, layers, e-mail, and they even had a pre-cursor to Skype that worked pretty cool.
I remember my daughter and I messing with it on Sunday morning and talking with a guy in Greece.
We thought that was astonishing! :lol:


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

matt1124 said:


> Haha a computer at my university has Netscape Navigator on it


I have some old computers stored around here with it. It's why I use Firefox. I just feel the need to support the Mozilla history in some way, although I never followed SeaMonkey.

Unfortunately, I still have to use IE on some sites. But I can't imagine how I could justify committing to one dominant mega-corporation (Google) or another (Microsoft) rather than trying to keep pushing for open source coding.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

so how fast is it on dialup?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Grentz said:


> Browsers are always going to be upgraded and the old always abandoned.


IE is the only browser that I know of that updates itself if you're not paying attention. For whatever reason, the initial releases are always problematic. Other browsers have issues as well, but none of them are so intricately wired into the operating system to risk materially impacting the operation of Windows itself.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

harsh said:


> IE is the only browser that I know of that updates itself if you're not paying attention. For whatever reason, the initial releases are always problematic. Other browsers have issues as well, but none of them are so intricately wired into the operating system to risk materially impacting the operation of Windows itself.


Chrome updates itself silently. In fact Google received some bad PR about the silent pushes as you cannot opt out of them.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Shades228 said:


> In fact Google received some bad PR about the silent pushes as you cannot opt out of them.


The part I find incomprehensible about IE is that you can hide it and weeks later, it shows up again. I had two people install it the other day after I had already hidden it twice. I found out because IE8 seems to have some inexplicable interactions with the Crystal Reports runtime that our applications software uses (Crystal Reports is at least as evil as IE in my book; Access is more evil than either).


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

If there is one browser that I feel should die, quickly, now, it is the AOL Browser. Next on my list, Internet Exploder 6. 

My preferred browser is Firefox followed by Chrome.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

harsh said:


> IE is the only browser that I know of that updates itself if you're not paying attention. For whatever reason, the initial releases are always problematic. Other browsers have issues as well, but none of them are so intricately wired into the operating system to risk materially impacting the operation of Windows itself.


Sorry, totally not true.

Firefox and Chrome are MUCH more automatic at updating. Chrome does it completely silently without you even knowing. Firefox will all of a sudden just ask you to restart and update. IE major updates need special attention in the Windows Update queue and I have seen lots of people that have automatic updates on, all the other updates done, but IE sitting in the queue still. Frankly IE is the least automatic for the major updates, with the exception of Opera that requires you to do it pretty much manually.

IE is also no longer "wired" into the OS at all. Explorer is separate to the point now that you can uninstall IE. I have never seen major issues in IE that impact the OS at all and I run upgrades constantly.


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

Firefox seems to want to update itself about every week, that's way more often IE. When Firefox 3.6 released, that caused lots of issues for end users that access our Oracle Application Server(Java Apps). Firefox 3.6 totally changed their Java support, they expect Java to be up2date before the browser... come on Mozilla. If it was such a big deal, they should have checked java version before forcing a firefox upgrade prompt on end users.


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)

I see updates to IE in Windows Updates on an almost constant basis.
I guess it's a matter of what you want to call an update.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Marlin Guy said:


> I see updates to IE in Windows Updates on an almost constant basis.
> I guess it's a matter of what you want to call an update.


Patches are not the same as full updates IMO.

Patches are frequent for IE (they used to have one of the better response times actually), but still very frequent for the others as well. Lots of patches is actually a good thing as it means they are staying on top of holes that come up, and all the browsers have a lot of holes that are constantly being found. Microsoft overall tends to be quick at patching a lot of things which is very helpful and with a properly setup Update Server they can be deployed quickly and efficiently even in very large environments. They also have to be that way since a lot of their apps are the most targeted.

Firefox used to have one of the worst response rates to threats actually, probably has changed but I have not heard lately.


----------



## Marlin Guy (Apr 8, 2009)




----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

kevinwmsn said:


> Firefox seems to want to update itself about every week, that's way more often IE. When Firefox 3.6 released, that caused lots of issues for end users that access our Oracle Application Server(Java Apps). Firefox 3.6 totally changed their Java support, they expect Java to be up2date before the browser... come on Mozilla. If it was such a big deal, they should have checked java version before forcing a firefox upgrade prompt on end users.


Nope, not really. See release history from Wikipedia.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

harsh said:


> Winmo 7 is almost certainly a non-starter given the momentum that Android is gaining.
> 
> The problem with Winmo 7 is that it will likely push Silverlight which is philosophically in the same boat as Flash.


I missed this.

I don't think Winmo 7 will be a huge chunk of the smart phone pool but I do think if they can get some things done right it can take a chunk of RIM. If they can make it more "fun" but have the same security and exchange rules I think it has a shot of being a iphone of the approved coporate IT list. I personally enjoy the zune interface so I think if they really focus on certain aspects it will do much better than the current winmo market. I don't think it will get near android though.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Hey guys, I'm a little late to the party, but I'm now using Chrome and I must say I love it, its way faster then Firefox and IE.


----------

