IE10 below 1% market share, Firefox back under 20%, Chrome recovers from losses
thenextweb.com
thenextweb.com
I know that just about everything stat is filtered out by noscript or adblock on my installs.
Easylist+Easyprivacy cuts out the vast majority of analytics sites.
Those stats are never meant to be taken to the %, or even 5%. It only gives a raw idea of who uses what. You don't know for sure if firefox/chrome is 15% or 25%, all you know is that it is massive but not overly dominant.
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.
Perhaps not only in terms of pixels and assets, but full page reflows instead. Can you share some details of your work and requirements?
Can you perhaps make a testcase and provide a link? We can file a bug on that.
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.
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.
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.
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).
"IE6 somehow managed to gain 0.06 percentage points", which may indicate the NetApps data isn't very reliable. (maybe?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers#Dif...
You can click around on each source, and they have an explanation of how each source get their numbers and adjust them. It's very insightful to understand the differences in measurement. For example:
> StatCounter statistics are directly derived from hits (not unique visitors) from 3 million sites using StatCounter totaling more than 15 billion hits per month.[17] No weightings are used.
> Net Applications bases its usage share on statistics from 40,000 websites having around 160 million unique visitors per month. The mean site has 1300 unique visitors per day. On 1 August 2009, Net Applications began weighting its raw data based on the number of internet users in the countries concerned, using data from the CIA ; the changes were applied retroactively to older data.
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).
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.)
Browser market share is so incredibly off. I know of 50000 IE7 users who don't even put their browser near the internet.
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.
Of course it would, because you would be ignoring a chunk of the other browser's users but counting each and every Chrome user.
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.