
IE10 below 1% market share, Firefox back under 20%, Chrome recovers from losses - iProject
http://thenextweb.com/apps/2013/01/01/ie10-below-1-market-share-firefox-back-under-20-chrome-recovers-from-three-months-of-losses/?fromcat=all
======
pixl97
What percentage of Firefox users use adblock or something similar to filter
themselves out of stats like this?

I know that just about everything stat is filtered out by noscript or adblock
on my installs.

~~~
eknkc
Adblock filters stat services? Like analytics? I did not know that.

~~~
pixl97
<http://easylist.adblockplus.org/en/>

Easylist+Easyprivacy cuts out the vast majority of analytics sites.

------
btipling
I've been working on SVG animations with d3.js and have to say that the
Firefox performance is very poor. I don't use Firefox so I don't know how
Firefox performs in everyday use, but I know when it comes to animating SVGs
Firefox crawls and chugs along. It is so bad I'm actually going to disable SVG
animation by default for Firefox users (there will be a big switch to turn it
back on for people who I guess have a better computer than my new 15" MBP
Retina).

But maybe the performance problems are why people are abandoning Firefox. It
certainly doesn't seem to eat memory anymore the way it used to, and that's
good.

~~~
pestaa
In a way I too feel Firefox being slower compared to light Webkit browsers,
but you must be writing a resource intensive animation if a modern laptop
fails to render it fluently.

Perhaps not only in terms of pixels and assets, but full page reflows instead.
Can you share some details of your work and requirements?

------
xpose2000
Another useful source for browser marketshare:
<http://clicky.com/marketshare/global/web-browsers/>

------
melling
Microsoft is suppose to push IE10 to consumers, thus replacing IE9 on Win7. I
would expect IE10 to shoot to at least 10% sometime in 2013, hopefully, closer
to 15%.

------
eknkc
When IE8 goes down like IE7 and 6, I'll light a fire on my living room and
jump over it to celebrate.

Other than that, I don't really care. All modern browsers have great
JavaScript engines, has decent standards compliance and if you can ignore IE8,
it's almost a unified platform to develop for.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
IE10 below 1%? I guess that will change when the Windows 7 upgrade comes
through. And then finally we will have reasonable support for CSS3, WebSocket
and ES5 Strict Mode for Windows 7 IE users.

~~~
mtgx
But all of those should've been available in IE9. IE seems to be at least one
development cycle (of their own) behind. I see Chrome 10 had better HTML5
support than IE10 has now, and it was released around the same time with IE9.

We probably won't see support for WebGL, WebRTC, Opus, Web Audio, WebM, and
other features that Chrome and Firefox have for another year and a half, until
IE11. I'm going to assume they won't support the web crypto API at least until
IE13.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
>But all of those should've been available in IE9. IE seems to be at least one
development cycle (of their own) behind. I see Chrome 10 had better HTML5
support than IE10 has now, and it was released around the same time with IE9.

You have to consider that WebKit has supported many of these things for years,
which have just been very recently written from scratch for IE9 and IE10. Come
on, give them some credit, they're making a good effort to catch up.

~~~
Drakim
I am still pretty confused as to why a company so big as Microsoft keeps
shipping a browser that scores a weak forth place in terms of these things.

It also doesn't boost my confidence that they aren't releasing the newer
Internet Explorer versions on older versions of Windows (where browsers such
as Firefox and Chrome run just fine) making it harder to get a larger part of
their userbase to upgrade to the newest (while it's rare to find people who
use old versions of Chrome).

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
They do release new versions on older versions, but only those which are still
supported. XP isn't, so that's how it is.

~~~
yuhong
More precisely, in _mainstream_ support.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Yes. Truth of course is that it is only backported to the previous version
though. Vista sadly won't see IE10.

~~~
yuhong
Again because Vista entered extended support in April 2012.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Oh. I didn't know that.

~~~
yuhong
AFAIK the standard is 5 years of mainstream support plus 5 years of extended
support. The 5 years of mainstream support will get extended if the next
version is not released in time (generally to two years after the next
version's release).

------
mtgx
How does Net Apps measure browser market share that they get such huge
difference for IE, which they put at 54%, compared to StatCounter who puts it
at around 30%? To me the StatCounter numbers seem more accurate.

~~~
azakai
> How does Net Apps measure browser market share that they get such huge
> difference for IE, which they put at 54%, compared to StatCounter who puts
> it at around 30%? To me the StatCounter numbers seem more accurate.

Apples and oranges. Net Applications measures __users __, while StatCounter
measures __usage __. It is entirely possible both are right, and the different
numbers are both accurate about what they measure.

It is also possible one or both is wrong, possibly by a large amount - we
don't have any good data against which to validate them (that data exists, but
it isn't public - Google and Facebook know the truth).

~~~
mddw
The numbers that matter are your websites' numbers and no others.

I had to make a website for a brand with strong sales in China. The client
asked for a full IE6 support "because chinese use IE6 according to X and Y."
IE6 support is expensive.

I was quite doubtful, the brand is a luxury one, kinda confidential, so the
user had to belong to the new rich class which can afford a real computer. But
they did not have any data and did not want me to gather data on their actual
website to confirm or infirm my hypothesis.

The IE6 friendly website lauched. The stats reports less than 4% IE7 and less
usage (including funny browser derived from IE.)

------
Toshio
It always leaves me dissatisfied to see the word "popular" in the context of
web browsers, when people actually mean to say "ubiquitous".

You know what would be a very interesting statistic?

Take all windows PCs, look at usage of non-IE browsers, then take all Macs,
look at usage of non-Safari browsers, then take all Ubuntu PCs, look at usage
of non-Firefox browsers. Tally it all up and you'll have a reasonable gauge of
popularity, where "popular" is defined as "people actively choosing this
browser over the default one".

I strongly suspect Chrome would utterly dominate that statistic.

~~~
glass-
> I strongly suspect Chrome would utterly dominate that statistic.

Of course it would, because you would be ignoring a chunk of the other
browser's users but counting each and every Chrome user.

~~~
Toshio
Interesting point, but I have to disagree. Notice I have counted windows, Mac
OS and Ubuntu but I left out Chromebooks since they are browser-locked. As
such there are instances of Chrome I'm excluding.

~~~
pcwalton
You're missing the point.

What you're really trying to do is statistically correct for "defaultness";
i.e. remove the users who would actually prefer browser X but use browser Y
because it's the default. Your methodology isn't a sound way of doing that,
because it also excludes users who use the default browser on their operating
system _because they prefer it to all others_. To be sound, your methodology
would need a way to not count the former users while leaving the latter users
intact.

