Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Subscribe to our e-mail newsletters
For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Computerworld Daily News (First Look and Wrap-Up)
Computerworld Blogs Newsletter
The Weekly Top 10
More E-Mail Newsletters 

We're number two: Firefox grabs more market share

Mozilla's successful attempt to set a world record for downloads of a single program, Firefox 3 was dumb. It was also incredibly successful.

Does anyone really care about how many copies of a program are downloaded in a day? In 2008? When a program can be downloaded from hundreds of different sites? When BitTorrent and other P2P (peer-to-peer) networks makes measuring file 'downloads' more of an exercise in speculative fiction than a science?

I guess so because, not even counting the fuzzy downloads of P2P networks and the like, Firefox was downloaded 8.3-million times in one day. This is spiffy. Meaningless in and of itself, but spiffy.

Having said that, I will say Mozilla's pounding the drum for downloading Firefox did do one good thing. It did a great job of marketing Firefox.

There was a time when Firefox was new and exciting. Lately, though, Firefox's coat was looking more dusty than lustrous. Firefox, with a security problem here and another one there, was becoming 'yawn' just another program.

Mind you, it wasn't. I believe Firefox 3 has set a new standard for Web browsers. It's certainly the best browser I've ever seen, and I've seen almost all of them.

Other reviewers, like Paul Thurrott, Paul Venezia, and Michael Muchmore all agreed that Firefox 3 was great. Someone somewhere may have given it a negative review, but I looked, and I honestly couldn't find a single significant bad review.

You know what though? Even with a whole chorus of reviewers singing Firefox's praises, I think that silly download day stunt may have done more for Firefox. Why? Because it got people excited about Firefox again. It wasn't just that Firefox really was shiny and re-newed, it was that people really wanted to check out this exciting new Firefox.

And, that's important, not because of the 8.3-million downloads, it's because of another number. Firefox's marketshare number hit a new high: 19%. In early June, before Firefox 3's release, Net Applications Inc.'s executive vice president of marketing, Vince Vizzaccaro, said that "Firefox is trending to hit 20% market share sometime in July."

Of course, that still means Firefox is a distant number two to Internet Explorer. But, is it really and even if it is, so what? The old Avis car slogan, was "We're number two. We try harder." Avis went from single-digit market shares in the early 60s to about a 33% market share in a year. Can Firefox, with its greatly improved browser and a new wave of excitement do the same? I don't see why not.

For that matter, I'm not sure that Firefox hasn't already done so.

The articles you read about how Firefox's market share numbers have improved are all based on what average users are doing on average Web sites. Let's take a closer look. While Internet Explorer is number one, do you know what version of IE is the most popular? According to most of the studies I've seen it's still that old stinker IE 6. In case you've forgotten, IE 7 was introduced in October 2006 and Microsoft has been doing its darnest to get everyone switched over ever since.

What that tells me is that the real reason IE is still the dominant Web browser is because most users are too dumb and lazy to upgrade their systems. As technical support staffers everywhere knows many PC problems come down to a bad case of PEBKAC (Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair).

Another reason why I think PEBKAC is what really keeps IE so far ahead in the Web browser market share race is that while most companies won't tell you what their sites reveal about their readership, I run my own small technology news and opinion site, Practical Technology and I will tell you what my numbers say.

My audience tends to be tech savvy. They sure aren't coming to my site for the Paris Hilton gossip, gambling tips, or stock market predictions. Of my technology fans and IT staffers and executives, 68.2% were already using Firefox in June. That, let me point out, was 68.2% of the Windows users. Only 11.8% of Window users were using any version of IE. My readers who were using IE, were, I'm pleased to report, almost all using IE 7. I'm willing to bet that if your Web site is meant for people who know anything about what's what with the Web, the majority of your audience are also Firefox users.

So, what does all this mean? It means that Firefox has gotten back some of its excitement mojo. It means that to the general public, Firefox 3 may be number two but it is trying harder. To people with two clues to rub together, it means that Firefox has re-ignited and become the number one Web browser. At this rate, maybe Firefox will be everyone's number one Web browser sometime soon.

What People Are Saying

Another incentive for IE...

I'm pleased to see that Firefox use is growing - and I'm one in the crowd. However, when you accuse users of being too lazy to switch over to Firefox, I must confess that I am an intermittent IE user too... for home banking. Try measuring the Firefox audience on these sites and you will see a drastically different figure: almost 100% IE because the site does not support anything else. If I were lazy as some of my colleagues are, I would say that FF is just rubbish and switch over to IE for ever. Firefox is part of an ecosystem and must survive in it as long as the web sites support it. Microsoft knows it perfectly and pushes IIS at all cost for this same reason. Apache and the other WWW-compliant server projects are the survival guarantee for Firefox.

So I find calling for a word record was a great PR campaign and not dumb by any mean.

Home Banking with Firefox

When's the last time you tried your bank's web site using Firefox? You might be surprised to find that they support it. I use Firefox for my banks and a major credit card without problems.

Problem Exists Between IT and Change

IE 7 would save tons of paper alone, from the improvements in printing, not to mention end-user time from many other improvements, if IT troops had the "right stuff" to make the change. IE 7 is so superior to IE 6 it's hard to believe it's the "same" app, but the anti-different, anti-progress minions of IT keep their end-users away from the app.

SJVN, as usual, presents a collection of well-accepted facts, then draws the wrong conclusion. New venue here, same tired old problems. Let's examine his babbling thesis below:

FF3 with a dozen extensions wouldn't startup for me w/o screwing with the user profile, so I couldn't immediately sample its already broken security model. I had to uninstall it, reinstall 2.0.0.14, then immediately upgrade to 2.0.0.15. As usual a bunch of add-ins and extensions were broken by the "upgrade" process.

So how is this FF model (a bunch of add-ins and extensions are broken with great regularity) ever going to work in IT-haunted businesses, when they won't even TRY to deploy IE 7, which was craftily -- albeit clunkily in spots -- architected to avoid breaking things?

And if businesses with IT staff won't deploy apps that don't actually break things (IE 7), how will the lofty %ages predicted above for FF ever happen?

Write for IE, Web-builders -- it's here to stay.

IT Not Always the Problem

My IT group permits using Firefox, but it isn't the company standard. Therefore, they don't need to support it; I do. That's not entirely like what you described, but it also isn't a company-wide shift away from IE.

Web site authors should not write for IE. They should write to the standards. That maximizes their customer base which includes a wide variety of platforms such as Linux, Mac, the new mini-notebooks, smartphones, etc.

IE7 is better, but not everyone can or does use it. Writing web sites exclusively for IE would be stupid.

Firefox 3 not ready yet

I installed it on one machine. It crashes every few minutes on cnn.com and weather.com.

Crashes

I've never had such a problem with Firefox and I've used many versions on may different computers for years. I know many others using Firefox, too. They have had great results, too. Your problem is atypical in my experience.

I suppose the customer is never right.

It's been clear for some time now that IT folks are the new engineers. And here we have Exhibit A. Browser users aren't modifying their behavior in a manner that Steven Vaughn-Nichols believes is appropriate. Ergo, something must be *wrong* with them!

Maybe these individuals aren't stupid and lazy, Mr. Big Shot. Maybe, just maybe, they have a different set of values and interests than you do. So much for condescending little acronyms. Perhaps your time might be better spent in examining those strange creatures who actually use computers. I know it must seem strange to an über geek like yourself, but there are actually entire academic fields devoted to the study of... PEOPLE!

Go ahead, take a look. Individual variation is a fascinating topic. You might learn, for example, that some computer illiterate people are quite smart in other ways. Like using proper punctuation. I wouldn't recommend that any of them go out and form a Society for the Education of the Comma Challenged (SECC), but I wouldn't blame them, either.

I think that Firefox (which I happen to use) will continue to catch on with the general public. But that assumes, of course, that the Mozilla Corp. realizes the world is not divided solely between geeks and nincompoops.

Different Values and Interests

People do have differing values and interests, but none of those values and interests should include using an ancient, insecure Web browser. The point being made is that *if* one is going to get a computer and browse the Web, one ought to get enough information to realize the inherent dangers to take appropriate preventative measures. Surely there's been enough noise in the media -- and not just the technical media -- to alert would-be browsers to the problems to preclude excusing such people due to ignorance. Therefore, the only conclusion is that those that use IE6 are not smart enough to own or maintain a computer or they are simply lazy. Am I being too harsh?

Engineers

@psychostats

>"It's been clear for some time now that IT folks are the new engineers".

Great, thanks for the compliment!

I have a lot of respect for engineers, I am surprised that you don't...

Note:
bonus points for using the word "nincompoops" - it doesn't make you sound condescending or out of touch at all - really :)