Bad news for Microsoft

[N1LAF]

Internet Explorer is not what it used to be. Firefox, but also additional rival browser such as Safari and Google Chrome, have eroded Microsoft’s dominance on the browser market. IE is left struggling even after the release of Internet Explorer 8 this year and with no end in sight to its downward trajectory. The Redmond company’s proprietary browser has continually bled audience to competitors, and it looks like on certain markets, Internet Explorer no longer occupies the dominant position. And it is only Mozilla’s Firefox to blame for IE being forced to give up the lion’s share of the browser market. According to statistics made available by Gemius Ranking, Firefox has overtaken Internet Explorer in terms of market share in Central and Eastern Europe.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/With-IE9 ... 7580.shtml (http://news.softpedia.com/news/With-IE9-in-Sight-Firefox-Jumping-over-50-Market-Share-127580.shtml)

There are hundreds of different versions or distributions of Linux, some pitched for general use and others for specific needs or tasks such as high security, older machines or multimedia. In the five years since its launch, Ubuntu has risen to become one of the most popular.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/bl ... ws7-review (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/27/ubuntu-koala-windows7-review)

-----

My take is if Linux/Ubuntu becomes that much easier to install and operate for all users and not just the technical crowd, it could start to give Microsoft real competition.

[KC2UGV]

If M$ released a version of IE for linux (A real version, not some crippled crap), it would sink Firefox within 6 months.

Of course, it would never happen.

[N1LAF]

Why would it sink Firefox? I use Firefox exclusively on a windows system, so does my friends and family (once it is installed on their computer - and they never looked back)

[ad4mg]

Internet Explorer is not what it used to be. Firefox, but also additional rival browser such as Safari and Google Chrome, have eroded Microsoft’s dominance on the browser market. IE is left struggling even after the release of Internet Explorer 8 this year and with no end in sight to its downward trajectory. The Redmond company’s proprietary browser has continually bled audience to competitors, and it looks like on certain markets, Internet Explorer no longer occupies the dominant position. And it is only Mozilla’s Firefox to blame for IE being forced to give up the lion’s share of the browser market. According to statistics made available by Gemius Ranking, Firefox has overtaken Internet Explorer in terms of market share in Central and Eastern Europe.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/With-IE9 ... 7580.shtml (http://news.softpedia.com/news/With-IE9-in-Sight-Firefox-Jumping-over-50-Market-Share-127580.shtml)

There are hundreds of different versions or distributions of Linux, some pitched for general use and others for specific needs or tasks such as high security, older machines or multimedia. In the five years since its launch, Ubuntu has risen to become one of the most popular.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/bl ... ws7-review (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/27/ubuntu-koala-windows7-review)

-----

My take is if Linux/Ubuntu becomes that much easier to install and operate for all users and not just the technical crowd, it could start to give Microsoft real competition.

That's a real possibility! Ubuntu 9.10 installed flawlessly on two different machines here, and I didn't have to use terminal to make any adjustments! I recall starting with Ubuntu 6, which required a bit of tinkering to get right. I'm still running 9.04 on this machine, but it runs so well, I have no reason to change it. On every machine I've installed Ubuntu on, it has consistently outperformed Windows in terms of boot-up times, and general "look and feel". I understand some of this is because there is no bloated anti-virus/malware/scareware suite running all the time.

Certainly, some of Mozilla's success with the Firefox browser was due to backlash against Microsoft. Earlier versions of Firefox left a bit to be desired, but it is much improved, and it's the only browser I use these days on Windows or Linux. i think the latest version of IE I have on any of my machines is 7, but I only have 2 machines with Windows anymore, and one of them is running Windows 2000, the other, XP Pro.

Fedora 11, with the KDE desktop, is pretty impressive as well, but isn't apparently as "mainstream" as Ubuntu. I think some of that is the perception that, since it's Red Hat (or a spinoff), that it's the "harder" Linux to use.

I've kept records on this, and to date, I've added Ubuntu to 14 different machines (for other people) in a dual boot configuration, and I've yet to receive a single complaint. I do fully pre-configure them to what I anticipate the user will do with the machines. At least 3 of these folks have dropped Windows entirely!

I'm delighted that Ubuntu is growing more popular, as that insures it will be around for some time, and popularity will grow quite a bit with their introduction of "cloud computing" into their latest version. I also worry that the growing popularity of the OS will attract the attention of those who wish to ruin the experience, just as they have with Windows, and the OS will become bloated like Windows, and with the associated security issues.

[KC2UGV]

Why would it sink Firefox? I use Firefox exclusively on a windows system, so does my friends and family (once it is installed on their computer - and they never looked back)

It would sink it due to the "idiot factor". How many developers write for Firefox just not to eliminate their "other users"? If IE just worked on Firefox, wouldn't it be easier to convince people to "just use IE"?

I mean, it's not technically better, but imagine a Linux experience where you could use ActiveX plugins, full IE compatibility? One thing I can't do in Firefox+Linux is Netflix streaming movies.

If M$ made that work on Linux, it would sink Firefox. Thankfully, they'll never realize it until it too late (ie they only have a 25% market share).

[N1LAF]

I don't think that analysis would be right, because I think most of Firefox users are fed up with Microsoft and Internet Explorer. Quite frankly, Linux doesn't have the user base for M$ to get into the mix. With that fact, if M$ did, it wouldn't put that much of a dent into Firefox numbers for reasons stated before.

If the Linux consumer user base was large enough, Netflix would make it work for Linux.

[N1LAF]

Case in point. Just as I posted my last above, we have 6 users logged in.

5 running Windows OS, one running Linux (Luke)
4 are running Firefox, one running Opera, one running IE

3 of 5 Windows OS users are running Firefox
1 Windows OS user is running Opera
1 Windows OS user is running IE8

So lets ask our Linux user, Luke, if IE was available on Linux, what browser would you use?

[ad4mg]

Case in point. Just as I posted my last above, we have 6 users logged in.

5 running Windows OS, one running Linux (Luke)
4 are running Firefox, one running Opera, one running IE

3 of 5 Windows OS users are running Firefox
1 Windows OS user is running Opera
1 Windows OS user is running IE8

So lets ask our Linux user, Luke, if IE was available on Linux, what browser would you use?
Firefox, as I have no real need for IE. FF had tabbed browsing before IE did, and that's what really sold me on FF when I first started using it.

I don't have an issue with MS or IE, no ax to grind. It's strictly a matter of preference.

I'm also amused by these Linux "wars" ... like which is the best flavor of Linux. Some do not like that Ubuntu disables the root account by default (it's very easy to activate). I think that's one of it's greatest strengths. I hosed several Slackware installations running as root when I first started looking at Linux.

I think the ad-block plus add-on for Firefox contributes a lot to its popularity, as well as all the other add-ons available. It's considerably more difficult to customize IE!

[KC2UGV]

Case in point. Just as I posted my last above, we have 6 users logged in.

5 running Windows OS, one running Linux (Luke)
4 are running Firefox, one running Opera, one running IE

3 of 5 Windows OS users are running Firefox
1 Windows OS user is running Opera
1 Windows OS user is running IE8

So lets ask our Linux user, Luke, if IE was available on Linux, what browser would you use?

Ok, I might be wrong. It's academic, at best. M$ would never do that.

But who in the fuck is running Opera?!?!

[kb2crk]

not me... i have switched to chrome unless i have to print a shipping label through paypal.

[AF6LJ]

Everything including web browsers has a life cycle.
I'm suprised IE was the browser of choice for so many for as long as it did.

[n2ize]

Case in point. Just as I posted my last above, we have 6 users logged in.

5 running Windows OS, one running Linux (Luke)
4 are running Firefox, one running Opera, one running IE

3 of 5 Windows OS users are running Firefox
1 Windows OS user is running Opera
1 Windows OS user is running IE8

So lets ask our Linux user, Luke, if IE was available on Linux, what browser would you use?

Ok, I might be wrong. It's academic, at best. M$ would never do that.

But who in the fuck is running Opera?!?!

Fuck yeah... I'm running it. Not all the time but in many ways I prefer Opera to Firefox. The only reason I'm running FF is because some facebook apps run better on FF than Opera. But, when i am sure that I am not going to be using FB I generally prefer to start Opera over FF. It's also written in C++ with Qt which I am familiar with.

I also use Konqueror, emacs, lynx, etc.

[ki4itv]

My kids grew up on apple machines, having been given laptops throughout their school years here in Henrico.
They use Safari almost exclusively, even on our windows machines in the home.

I'm currently using Opera, which is where I started in the early years...way back when.
But, I'll do anything twice, and I use all of them given the opportunity. :snicker:

One of these days, somebody is going to walk me into linux. I just have that feeling.

[ki4itv]

yea...I'm the Opera hold out.
:rofl:
didn't get that far down the thread before I posted the first thought.
and I was probably using Opera before you hit puberty.
(but in my defense, not this version)
So...beat me up you heathens! :bbh:

[ki4itv]

Fuck yeah... I'm running it. Not all the time but in many ways I prefer Opera to Firefox. The only reason I'm running FF is because some facebook apps run better on FF than Opera. But, when i am sure that I am not going to be using FB I generally prefer to start Opera over FF. It's also written in C++ with Qt which I am familiar with.

I also use Konqueror, emacs, lynx, etc.
See, it's an enlightenment thing.
You guys just haven't been there, done that.

Hi(gh) five John!

...damn, I'm gonna start reading the entire thread so I don't have to repeat myself so much. :-?

[KG4CGC]

I'm still waiting of that check, from Bill Gates and Microsoft for forwarding that email to all those people.

[kf0rt]

But, nobody PAYS for any of these. I'd think that Microsoft might be about to the point where they'd concede the "browser war."

[W2NAP]

Welp im another 100% Linux user

Tower has Ubuntu 9.10 (Gnome) (* did a reinstall tonight, i may have something on the tower failing but want to make sure it wasnt just the os)

On the Laptop i just installed Mint 7

as far as IE for *nix all i can say is LOL worst idea ever it would not fly.

Now as far as the browser i use.. it depend what im doing.

Mainly use FFox, but if im grabbing downloads to add to my site i use opera (which im kinda impressed with op-10.10 seems a bit slimmer and faster)

[KJ3N]

M$ doesn't make IE for OS/2. :snicker:

Not that I would use it if they did. :sick

[n0iu]

Everything including web browsers has a life cycle.
I'm suprised IE was the browser of choice for so many for as long as it did.I am not surprised since M$ includes IE with their operating systems and most "consumers" (the folks that buy their PC packages from Wal-Mart and BestBuy) probably never bothered looking for another browser or were even aware they had a choice. Fortunately now they are catching on! If M$ had not included a browser with their operating systems, it is doubtful that IE would have made it anywhere near the top.

Personally, I use Apple Safari on my PC's that run Windoze.

[W1GUH]

FireFox exclusively. Primarily because downloads come much more quickly than with IE. Also, it had tabs before IE. But somehow the expression "market share" seems a little ridiculous when it comes to something that's free. Guess it must be in the advertising rates but even that would seem diluted because it's more about individual sites than it is about browsers. ???

Gotta mention Netscape. Now defunct, but kinda the browser that started it all.

And then there's Linux. Sure, Ubuntu in a lot of cases is effortless. But there are situations where a novice (like I still am) can burn through whole days with problems, whether it's the skills of the user or just plain buggy code. My lastest hassle was well documented here. And then there's the issues around playing media in Linux -- that definitely seems, to this user's viewpoint , to be way behind MS. A lot of things work well, but those that don't (Flash... .asx files as two examples) result in copious researching on the 'net and experimentation, and both are very time-consuming. So the "free" OS is free in the money domain, but it can be very, very expensive in the time domain. I'm a geek, so usually I consider that time enjoyable (at least while the frustration stays at a "reasonable" level)...but it's defniitely "not ready for prime time."

Parting comment...I'm running IE7 at work (because I have to), and it's remarkable how it looks just like Firefox!

[KC2UGV]

FireFox exclusively. Primarily because downloads come much more quickly than with IE. Also, it had tabs before IE. But somehow the expression "market share" seems a little ridiculous when it comes to something that's free. Guess it must be in the advertising rates but even that would seem diluted because it's more about individual sites than it is about browsers. ???

Gotta mention Netscape. Now defunct, but kinda the browser that started it all.

And then there's Linux. Sure, Ubuntu in a lot of cases is effortless. But there are situations where a novice (like I still am) can burn through whole days with problems, whether it's the skills of the user or just plain buggy code. My lastest hassle was well documented here. And then there's the issues around playing media in Linux -- that definitely seems, to this user's viewpoint , to be way behind MS. A lot of things work well, but those that don't (Flash... .asx files as two examples) result in copious researching on the 'net and experimentation, and both are very time-consuming. So the "free" OS is free in the money domain, but it can be very, very expensive in the time domain. I'm a geek, so usually I consider that time enjoyable (at least while the frustration stays at a "reasonable" level)...but it's defniitely "not ready for prime time."

Parting comment...I'm running IE7 at work (because I have to), and it's remarkable how it looks just like Firefox!


See, your experience is exactly why I think IE built to run on Linux would kill Firefox. If IE worked out of the box on Ubuntu, would you use Firefox? As a relative "newbie" to Ubuntu? Or would you spend the hours trouble-shooting Firefox?

I mean, me personally, I would keep on the troubleshooting, but I know most users are not like me.

[N1LAF]

Again, I have installed Firefox on friends & family computers, no trobleshooting needed, nor fancy setup. For them it's a no brainer. If you see those visiting this site, running Windows OS, almost all use Firefox. If Microsoft cannot hold majority for IE on their own OS, why would you think if IE applied to Linux would kill Firefox? Doesn't make sense.

[W1GUH]

FireFox exclusively. Primarily because downloads come much more quickly than with IE. Also, it had tabs before IE. But somehow the expression "market share" seems a little ridiculous when it comes to something that's free. Guess it must be in the advertising rates but even that would seem diluted because it's more about individual sites than it is about browsers. ???

Gotta mention Netscape. Now defunct, but kinda the browser that started it all.

And then there's Linux. Sure, Ubuntu in a lot of cases is effortless. But there are situations where a novice (like I still am) can burn through whole days with problems, whether it's the skills of the user or just plain buggy code. My lastest hassle was well documented here. And then there's the issues around playing media in Linux -- that definitely seems, to this user's viewpoint , to be way behind MS. A lot of things work well, but those that don't (Flash... .asx files as two examples) result in copious researching on the 'net and experimentation, and both are very time-consuming. So the "free" OS is free in the money domain, but it can be very, very expensive in the time domain. I'm a geek, so usually I consider that time enjoyable (at least while the frustration stays at a "reasonable" level)...but it's defniitely "not ready for prime time."

Parting comment...I'm running IE7 at work (because I have to), and it's remarkable how it looks just like Firefox!


See, your experience is exactly why I think IE built to run on Linux would kill Firefox. If IE worked out of the box on Ubuntu, would you use Firefox? As a relative "newbie" to Ubuntu? Or would you spend the hours trouble-shooting Firefox?

I mean, me personally, I would keep on the troubleshooting, but I know most users are not like me.


Fact is, the user need not do anything to get Firefox with Ubuntu. It's built-in and comes up with zero time spent ont it. The plugins to play media files are a hassle because it take time searching forums to find one that works well. Once found they install and work properly. I'm not sure that's a browser issue.

[KJ3N]

If IE worked out of the box on Ubuntu, would you use Firefox?
Yes.


As a relative "newbie" to Ubuntu?
Yes.


Or would you spend the hours trouble-shooting Firefox?
Firefox doesn't require troubleshooting. Some of the media plug-ins do. BFD. :roll:

Right now, the link given here (http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/episodes/?apl=true#vid=1178477) doesn't work for me on XP with FireFox and Flash Player 10.

"So, use IE 8", you say. OK, fine, but the Flash Player 10 plug-in isn't installed and several attempts to install it, lock IE 8 up solid. So, now IE 8 needs troubleshooting, doesn't it? :bs:

(edited because I'm an idiot)

[ka8ncr]

See, your experience is exactly why I think IE built to run on Linux would kill Firefox. If IE worked out of the box on Ubuntu, would you use Firefox? As a relative "newbie" to Ubuntu? Or would you spend the hours trouble-shooting Firefox?

I mean, me personally, I would keep on the troubleshooting, but I know most users are not like me.

Does IE for Linux come with Microsoft's ridiculously bad non-aliased fonts from IE8? And does it permit me no choice in having those ridiculously bad fonts used in reading HTML mail messages?

Assuming IE on Linux is all that with a bag of chips, sunshine, rainbows and puppy dogs without a security risk ever; it still comes with Microsoft. This is a company that, at a whim, may decide that they want to push me toward Bing yet again and make the choice to keep my existing search provider a little harder to find. Among other games.

As great as IE might been in Linux, it's still Microsoft.

[n2ize]

FireFox exclusively. Primarily because downloads come much more quickly than with IE. Also, it had tabs before IE. But somehow the expression "market share" seems a little ridiculous when it comes to something that's free. Guess it must be in the advertising rates but even that would seem diluted because it's more about individual sites than it is about browsers. ???

Gotta mention Netscape. Now defunct, but kinda the browser that started it all.

And then there's Linux. Sure, Ubuntu in a lot of cases is effortless. But there are situations where a novice (like I still am) can burn through whole days with problems, whether it's the skills of the user or just plain buggy code. My lastest hassle was well documented here. And then there's the issues around playing media in Linux -- that definitely seems, to this user's viewpoint , to be way behind MS. A lot of things work well, but those that don't (Flash... .asx files as two examples) result in copious researching on the 'net and experimentation, and both are very time-consuming. So the "free" OS is free in the money domain, but it can be very, very expensive in the time domain. I'm a geek, so usually I consider that time enjoyable (at least while the frustration stays at a "reasonable" level)...but it's defniitely "not ready for prime time."

Parting comment...I'm running IE7 at work (because I have to), and it's remarkable how it looks just like Firefox!


See, your experience is exactly why I think IE built to run on Linux would kill Firefox. If IE worked out of the box on Ubuntu, would you use Firefox? As a relative "newbie" to Ubuntu? Or would you spend the hours trouble-shooting Firefox?

I mean, me personally, I would keep on the troubleshooting, but I know most users are not like me.

Why would they have to spend hours troubleshooting ? Most people I know who used FF haven't spend 5 minutes troubleshooting.

The difficult part is the vast number of partial differential equations you have to solve just to install Firefox properly.

[W1GUH]

FireFox exclusively. Primarily because downloads come much more quickly than with IE. Also, it had tabs before IE. But somehow the expression "market share" seems a little ridiculous when it comes to something that's free. Guess it must be in the advertising rates but even that would seem diluted because it's more about individual sites than it is about browsers. ???

Gotta mention Netscape. Now defunct, but kinda the browser that started it all.

And then there's Linux. Sure, Ubuntu in a lot of cases is effortless. But there are situations where a novice (like I still am) can burn through whole days with problems, whether it's the skills of the user or just plain buggy code. My lastest hassle was well documented here. And then there's the issues around playing media in Linux -- that definitely seems, to this user's viewpoint , to be way behind MS. A lot of things work well, but those that don't (Flash... .asx files as two examples) result in copious researching on the 'net and experimentation, and both are very time-consuming. So the "free" OS is free in the money domain, but it can be very, very expensive in the time domain. I'm a geek, so usually I consider that time enjoyable (at least while the frustration stays at a "reasonable" level)...but it's defniitely "not ready for prime time."

Parting comment...I'm running IE7 at work (because I have to), and it's remarkable how it looks just like Firefox!


See, your experience is exactly why I think IE built to run on Linux would kill Firefox. If IE worked out of the box on Ubuntu, would you use Firefox? As a relative "newbie" to Ubuntu? Or would you spend the hours trouble-shooting Firefox?

I mean, me personally, I would keep on the troubleshooting, but I know most users are not like me.

Why would they have to spend hours troubleshooting ? Most people I know who used FF haven't spend 5 minutes troubleshooting.

The difficult part is the vast number of partial differential equations you have to solve just to install Firefox properly.

But...but...shouldn't everybody be able to solve partial differential equations? You can, I can, therefore, EVERYBODY should. Right?

[n2ize]

FireFox exclusively. Primarily because downloads come much more quickly than with IE. Also, it had tabs before IE. But somehow the expression "market share" seems a little ridiculous when it comes to something that's free. Guess it must be in the advertising rates but even that would seem diluted because it's more about individual sites than it is about browsers. ???

Gotta mention Netscape. Now defunct, but kinda the browser that started it all.

And then there's Linux. Sure, Ubuntu in a lot of cases is effortless. But there are situations where a novice (like I still am) can burn through whole days with problems, whether it's the skills of the user or just plain buggy code. My lastest hassle was well documented here. And then there's the issues around playing media in Linux -- that definitely seems, to this user's viewpoint , to be way behind MS. A lot of things work well, but those that don't (Flash... .asx files as two examples) result in copious researching on the 'net and experimentation, and both are very time-consuming. So the "free" OS is free in the money domain, but it can be very, very expensive in the time domain. I'm a geek, so usually I consider that time enjoyable (at least while the frustration stays at a "reasonable" level)...but it's defniitely "not ready for prime time."

Parting comment...I'm running IE7 at work (because I have to), and it's remarkable how it looks just like Firefox!


See, your experience is exactly why I think IE built to run on Linux would kill Firefox. If IE worked out of the box on Ubuntu, would you use Firefox? As a relative "newbie" to Ubuntu? Or would you spend the hours trouble-shooting Firefox?

I mean, me personally, I would keep on the troubleshooting, but I know most users are not like me.

Why would they have to spend hours troubleshooting ? Most people I know who used FF haven't spend 5 minutes troubleshooting.

The difficult part is the vast number of partial differential equations you have to solve just to install Firefox properly.

But...but...shouldn't everybody be able to solve partial differential equations? You can, I can, therefore, EVERYBODY should. Right?

If they expect to use Firefox they had better learn... fast !! :snicker: :snicker: :snicker:

[W3MIV]

I use FireFox for the flexibility and versatility that the add-ons give me, and for the fact that I can use the same browser on both Linux and Winnders. Aside from that, a browser is a browser is a browser is a browser is a browser is a... you get the point.

A computer is more than the internet, however.

My trouble with Linux is that the main programs I use are not available on that system. While it is true that Open Office gives me about 95 percent of the features of MS Word and MS Excel (including the new file formats), the OO version of PowerPoint sux. Worse, there is no functional equivalent of PhotoShop on Linux. The Gimp is well named in that respect. It can limp along capably for most of the average stuff that stirs the hearts of amateur photo buffs, but falls flat at the pro level.

[ad4mg]

I use FireFox for the flexibility and versatility that the add-ons give me, and for the fact that I can use the same browser on both Linux and Winnders. Aside from that, a browser is a browser is a browser is a browser is a browser is a... you get the point.

A computer is more than the internet, however.

My trouble with Linux is that the main programs I use are not available on that system. While it is true that Open Office gives me about 95 percent of the features of MS Word and MS Excel (including the new file formats), the OO version of PowerPoint sux. Worse, there is no functional equivalent of PhotoShop on Linux. The Gimp is well named in that respect. It can limp along capably for most of the average stuff that stirs the hearts of amateur photo buffs, but falls flat at the pro level.
Will Wine run Photoshop? I've found that the beta version of Wine will run PSP 7 pretty well, and that package does some interesting stuff (layers, animated gifs, etc).

There is always the option of running Windows in a VM, but that kinda defeats the intent, IMHO. May as well dual boot!

[n2ize]

Microsoft sucks but at the same time ya gotta love em. If there was any one thing that the world has a love/hate relationship with it's Microsoft. And lets face it, for all the put downs about Bill gates and Microsoft we cannot deny, Bill Gates and Microsoft revolutionized the world of computing. They changed the way we compute, think and live. Microsoft is probably the single paramount motivating force of the 20th and 21st centuries. Microsoft is not just the force behind Windows it's the force behind Linux, Mac OS, etc. Microsoft is probably one of the greatest companies in history.

[n2ize]

I use FireFox for the flexibility and versatility that the add-ons give me, and for the fact that I can use the same browser on both Linux and Winnders. Aside from that, a browser is a browser is a browser is a browser is a browser is a... you get the point.

A computer is more than the internet, however.

My trouble with Linux is that the main programs I use are not available on that system. While it is true that Open Office gives me about 95 percent of the features of MS Word and MS Excel (including the new file formats), the OO version of PowerPoint sux. Worse, there is no functional equivalent of PhotoShop on Linux. The Gimp is well named in that respect. It can limp along capably for most of the average stuff that stirs the hearts of amateur photo buffs, but falls flat at the pro level.

How did you manage to get Firefox installed ?