BROWSER popularity ~ ?

[Gary]

can anyone suggest a link to find out browser usage demographics, like what
percentage use IE, FF, etc?

thanks

 

[The Old Bugger]

can anyone suggest a link to find out browser usage demographics, like what
percentage use IE, FF, etc?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=browser+popularity

 

[C A Upsdell]

can anyone suggest a link to find out browser usage demographics, like what
percentage use IE, FF, etc?

http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm

 

[Nik Coughlin]

can anyone suggest a link to find out browser usage demographics, like
what percentage use IE, FF, etc?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per C A Upsdell:

http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm

I came away thinking that one didn't even *mention* FireFox.

Was I missing something?

 

[SAZ]

Per C A Upsdell:

I came away thinking that one didn't even *mention* FireFox.

Was I missing something?

Gecko is Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape, etc.

 

[C A Upsdell]

Per C A Upsdell:

I came away thinking that one didn't even *mention* FireFox.

Was I missing something?

From a designer's point of view, it is the browser engine which is
important, not the browser, so the stats focus on the browser engines.

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

From a designer's point of view, it is the browser engine which is
important, not the browser, so the stats focus on the browser
engines.

...except that the novice, thinking that a Gecko is an advertising
lizard, might think "hmmm, no Firefox? It must not be very good." How
hard would it be for you to change that to:

Firefox
SeaMonkey
Netscape

But as you say, browser stats are generally worthless. ;-)

 

[dorayme]

..except that the novice, thinking that a Gecko is an advertising
lizard,

From the backyard here:

<http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/pics/skink1.jpg>

 

[GTalbot]

can anyone suggest a link to find out browser usage demographics, like what
percentage use IE, FF, etc?

thanks

Gary,

Every mainstream browser manufacturers (Microsoft, Mozilla, Apple,
Google, Opera, KDE) and secondary browser manufacturers (e.g. Hv3
TKHTML) have been striving to support mature W3C web standards (HTML
4, CSS 2.1, DOM 1, DOM 2, ECMAScript 3.1). So your question is not
entirely relevant here.

Code your webpage according to W3C web standards (valid markup code,
valid CSS code) and all these browsers and future browser versions
will support, render your webpages accordingly.

If you still need (world) web stats, I suggest to consult these links:

http://www.gtalbot.org/Varia/BrowserStats.html#OtherReferences

but again, what is the most important for any web author is to code
according to mature specifications: the wide majority of web browsers
will do the rest.

regards, Gérard

 

[Neredbojias]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=browser+popularity

How old are you? Do your friends call you "Buggy"?

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Beauregard T. Shagnasty:

..except that the novice, thinking that a Gecko is an advertising
lizard, might think "hmmm, no Firefox? It must not be very good." How
hard would it be for you to change that to:

Thanks for the clarification Beau and CA.

I didn't even know there was a distinction between "Browser" and
"Browser Engine"... So the "Browser" column on CA's page is
really "Browser Engine".

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Per Beauregard T. Shagnasty:

Thanks for the clarification Beau and CA.

I didn't even know there was a distinction between "Browser" and
"Browser Engine"... So the "Browser" column on CA's page is really
"Browser Engine".

In some cases.

Actually, if they were "engines" all those Internet Explorer rows would
be shown as just one "Trident" line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trident_(layout_engine)

 

[C A Upsdell]

In some cases.

Actually, if they were "engines" all those Internet Explorer rows would
be shown as just one "Trident" line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trident_(layout_engine)

Yes and no.

Yes, all versions of IE for Windows use Trident, though the numbering is
perverse.

No, because a designer must very often be concerned with the version of
IE when coding pages for IE, and often must resort to version dependent
code (e.g. using conditional comments). This is basically not necessary
with standards-compliant browsers like the Gecko browsers, so knowing
the stats for different versions of IE is arguably much more useful than
knowing the stats for different versions of Gecko.

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

[snippage]
Actually, if they were "engines" all those Internet Explorer rows would
be shown as just one "Trident" line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trident_(layout_engine)

Yes and no.

Yes, all versions of IE for Windows use Trident, though the numbering
is perverse.

No, because a designer must very often be concerned with the version
of IE when coding pages for IE, and often must resort to version
dependent code (e.g. using conditional comments). This is basically
not necessary with standards-compliant browsers like the Gecko
browsers, so knowing the stats for different versions of IE is
arguably much more useful than knowing the stats for different
versions of Gecko.

Since you're separating the IEs because of possible need for conditional
comments, I'd then suggest you might do the same for the Geckos, where
other various differences occur, most likely with the Netscapes.

Though if there was only one line for all Netscapes, I wouldn't mind.

How about lines for:
Acid3-compliant
Acid2-compliant

 

[GTalbot]

[snippage]
Actually, if they were "engines" all those Internet Explorer rows would
be shown as just one "Trident" line.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trident_(layout_engine)

Yes and no.

Yes, all versions of IE for Windows use Trident, though the numbering
is perverse.

No, because a designer must very often be concerned with the version
of IE when coding pages for IE, and often must resort to version
dependent code (e.g. using conditional comments). This is basically
not necessary with standards-compliant browsers like the Gecko
browsers, so knowing the stats for different versions of IE is
arguably much more useful than knowing the stats for different
versions of Gecko.

Since you're separating the IEs because of possible need for conditional
comments, I'd then suggest you might do the same for the Geckos, where
other various differences occur, most likely with the Netscapes.

Though if there was only one line for all Netscapes, I wouldn't mind.

How about lines for:
   Acid3-compliant
   Acid2-compliant

When Microsoft queried about how to make their IE.next easier to
detect, I really thought that they would go ahead and add
"CSS21Compat" as a compatMode property constant and that would have
been accepted by other browser manufacturers.

Personally, I believe that checking, querying for
document.compatMode == CSS21Compat
would be (and will be) much more useful, helpful, meaningful than a
property for Acid*-compliant.

What would be required to use, to implement the CSS21Compat value?
Passing the CSS 2.1 test suite with a perfect score. This idea is not
far fetched. In 2001, when IE 6 was released, triggering standards
compliant rendering mode was first introduced and document.compatMode
with CSS1Complat was implemented, it was because Microsoft thought
their IE 6 was passing the CSS1 test suite perfectly.

regards, Gérard

 

[C A Upsdell]

[snippage]
Actually, if they were "engines" all those Internet Explorer rows would
be shown as just one "Trident" line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trident_(layout_engine)

Yes and no.

Yes, all versions of IE for Windows use Trident, though the numbering
is perverse.

No, because a designer must very often be concerned with the version
of IE when coding pages for IE, and often must resort to version
dependent code (e.g. using conditional comments). This is basically
not necessary with standards-compliant browsers like the Gecko
browsers, so knowing the stats for different versions of IE is
arguably much more useful than knowing the stats for different
versions of Gecko.

Since you're separating the IEs because of possible need for conditional
comments, I'd then suggest you might do the same for the Geckos, where
other various differences occur, most likely with the Netscapes.

I simply have not found the need to worry a lot about different versions
of Gecko. I routinely make sites which work well with the latest
version of Firefox, and when I check for problems with other browsers, I
typically find that my sites also work just fine with Mozilla 1.4.1,
which has a very old version of Gecko: 1.4.1 may not render pages quite
the same, but the differences are typically negligible, and when they
are not neglible I can fix the differences without resorting to a
browser sniffer. IE is a horse of a whole different colour.