Those stats that say Firefox has supposedly lost a tiny bit of it's market share, but it
ought to be noted that those stats are based upon a survey of just 40,000 people.

And how many times has Firefox been downloaded now? Over 80,000,000 times
when I last looked. And that figure continues to grow and grow and grow . . . etc.

80,000,000 vs 40,000. Hmmm, there really is no comparison. You do the math.

In reality, Firefox has lost NO market share, nor has IE regained any.

So stick that in yer pipe 'n' smoke it . . . !

As for the subject of web standards, they are officially set out by the W3C, and
these are standards that all web developers must follow. There are NO web
standards set by Microsoft. There never have been, nor will there ever be.

Internet Explorer takes recommended web standards, then breaks them!

Why Microsoft even bother being a member of the W3C, god only knows!

lol... Let me see if I have your logic right:

The sample size isn't the entire population, so the exact opposite of what the sample shows must be true?

There's no way anyone could conduct a study that found EVERY single user. That would take 20 years, and by then the information would be useless. Statisticians have to work with the numbers they have, and this time, they have numbers that show a slight loss for FF and a slight gain for IE.

It's funny seeing people freak out over a .64% loss.

dude...read what you just wrote...you have no life man, thats sad , worrying about the rendering engine of an internet browser....go find a girl(?)friend...

I however do understand part of what he is trying to say. Look at it like this. Exp. redhat.com reposts a growth in Linux users to it's site. Does that me Windows is on the downfall? I wouldn't think that. But you know most of the time I agree with you Wincement. I think a lot of the studies are bias and are based on a site that the "smarter" people that use other browsers have no need to visit. I am not sure if this is th case here. I was just giving another side to the argument. I have not real opinion on this one way or the other. I just like to see both sides of it.

I really don't care what browser is king. They can be 50-50 if they want. What I really want is a browser that displays webpages exactly the same as the other browser. Web developers such as my self spend lots of extra time comparing css code in both browsers getting it to a point that it's nearly identical in both.

Ive told you people all along that FireFlack was a pan flash. Remember if ya hate microsoft...BUY A MAC and STFU about web browsers, good grief.

To me: Maxthon > Firefox > IE6

So, in essence, your saying IE6 > firefox > IE6. Surprised no one else picked up on this one. Maxthon IS INTERNET EXPLORER 6 (or whatever version you have) since it wraps IE in a new GUI. Thats ALL!

Well, not quite. I have no problem with IE6's rendering engine. Neither do I have problem with Firefox's rendering engine. All that matters to me is the features that a browser has.

Maxthon != IE6. Sure, it uses IE6's control. But it is so much more.

The reason why I prefer it to FF is bcos Maxthon takes up less RAM and is faster, although it does not have as many plug-ins as FF has. But Maxthon's built-in features are already more than many can ask for.

And to those who think that using IE6 engine increases your risk of getting spywares, you are right... if you are a noob, that is. I've used IE for many years and I have not had a single spyware infection in the last 3 years or so. Vigilance is the key. FF has its own share of security holes too.

While I agree with your final paragraph, uneducated users are the sole reason that spyware is the problem it is today, I still disagree with you on the IE6 not being maxthon issue.

Yes, Maxthon adds a nice new shell to IE with several additional features, but regardless of what you do to IE, it is still IE. So by saying "Maxthon != IE6", you are lying to yourself. You can put a turd in a dress, but it is still a turd. Dont get me wrong, Maxthon is a great product, as is avant browser, but regardless, it is still IE, and no matter what they do to it, still subjected to the same issues IE has. So, I'll admit its a good product, but you cant honestly say that it is not IE6.

FF is king of the Gecko.

Have you guys ever tried running Netscape 5, or Netscape 6, on a 3.4ghz processor, 1gb memory, and a nice HD?

It STILL takes like 6 seconds to start up, while FF takes a third of that, or less.

I really wonder why browsers start so slow. I mean, they don't have to do THAT much, do they?

Umm, there was no Netscape 5...

That's why IE won the race, pure and simple. It started faster. That is why I started using IE instead of NS, I got my work done faster.

Big deal. This is troll reporting by BetaNews. EVERY software app's usage is going to ebb and flow. I haven't used FireFox since 1.04, but will return when it's fixed. The last several updates have been so flaky it wasn't worth the trouble. In the meantime, Maxthon holds reign.

The big news is that this is the first time Firefox's gains have slowed, let alone reversed.

Sheesh... some people just look for something to complain about.

Recently I have been quite annoyed by FireFox. It is relatively unstable and leaks memory. I love it other than that, but it is getting annoying.

In the last 3 weeks, FireFox has crashed for me 7 times across several computers. Also, it was using over 500 megs memory after leaving it open for a week.

Curious...do you use tabs, or windows? I've never had any memory problems with massive numbers of windows even after long periods, and I use hibernation too, so it's not uncommon for my computer to go several weeks before a reboot(unless I'm into games).

Yes, it does have a memory black hole. I think it's due mostly to its Javascript implementation. Deer Park mostly fixes the problem of not releasing memory when closing tabs. But it's been that way for a long time, and it's a well-known issue.

I definitely recommend shutting it down when you're done with it for the day.

0.64% might not be a huge gain for IE, however it's a huge loss for Mozilla. I'm sure when Mozilla recieved that .64% before they were going crazy!

User preference. I use both for different things. I don't care about IE7 and what crap they are finally adding to it. I put my choice in security, and IE security sucks.

IE is within OS (ie. a part of your forced combo deal). Firefox is addon (ie. that you (pay) extra for it)(Firefox is free, just for example)
People throwing what they have (IE) and buying extra (Firefox) because they like it, itself is the sucess. I don't think that concluding by adding or subtracting 0.1% or so does make any difference; people are smart: they throw what is bad and buy(add) what is good!

Last time I checked the document said FF fell "from 8.71 percent to 8.07", a difference of 0.64%, not 0.1%. I know thats still very little but please quit undermining the actual statistics please. Oh you only read the part that said IE gained share...nm (lol)

I would agree with your statement. The "average" computer user goes into the "Computer Mega-Mart" and buys a computer. They use what the salesman shows them is installed..i.e. Internet Explorer. They don't know if they like it more or less than any other browser, they just know it's on their new computer, so they use it. These are the same people who don't remove all the time limited trial programs, comsuming their hard drive.

Christ! You yourself say that .64% is a small number and .1% is not far behind. Just give it up to a typo or anything. How is that "undermining" your precious FF. Give it and yourself a break.

LOL

point is .64% indicates at least that the statistics are showing FF is on decline, but 0.1% you could argue is too little of a difference to say FF lost market share. In that since, 0.1% compared to 0.64% does make a big difference...

I don't get it... as writer he pits one name against another name as if it's all about us voting for one brand or another, or as if both were on the same level. IE is clearly NOT on the same level, since MS does not make any standards for the web - the W3 does. Like a spoiled American child, "they" are allowed to go on without penalty, pre-packaging that monster for unsuspecting persons worldwide.
The trident rendering engine within IE has been quoted by MS programmers as having no future ability to do such things that the upcoming CSS2.1 requires...

I'll be clear here -
It's not about a brand name, it's about the future standards, ability and safety of something that keeps an ever more fragile thing together: A World Economy.

Might want to look up the history of Inline Frame.

Actually, the browser with the dominant marketshare would seem to be the creator of web standards. The W3 is just a toothless nag. Their standards are mere suggestions.

Well, Metshrine, this is a notable headline because it's the first time that Firefox has not gained market share, let alone lost market share. The likely reason for this was the release of IE7 Beta1. In addition, I would expect that Firefox's share will drop again when IE7 Beta2 is released, and then of course when IE7 final is released, with FF gains in between those events.

I would suppose that most user would prefer to use IE simply for its integration, and the main reason that people are jumping to Firefox is because of it's functionality and security. If IE is up to the level of Firefox is those two areas, with its integration, users would prefer it.

Nicely done.

True, but it seems that every single market movement that OCCURS for firefox is noted, slashdot hits everytime the downloads bypass 5 more million. I am not complaining, its nice that those numbers are occurring, but I just dont think it needs to be the featured story or headline every time its market share adjusts. And yes, this is a "significant (For lack of better words)" event, that it has lost some market share, I just hope this doesnt set a trend where every time it does this, it is reported as a news event.

A 0.64% gain/loss? This is probably due to inaccuracies in the method of measurement--it's hardly significant enough to draw any conclusions from.

You're probably right but if it is inaccurate then at least we can say FF growth is slowing at the least.

My question is, do we really need to hear about it every month when their share slips or gains? I mean, make an entry when it gets to 15% or 20%, then they will have something to boast about, or heck, even a 1% gain, that would be acceptable, but every month hearing that they gained a little or lost a little, please.

My two cents:

I think people are waking up and realizing that Firefox has security problems just like IE. I still use Firefox because of its functionality, but I'm just as careful with my browsing on FF as I am on IE.

And... firefox is slower. It just is. It's not their fault. I mean, IE is integrated with the system. It had BETTER be faster because it shares system resources and is already loaded before you even open it. Like I said though, I still use FF for its functionality. It's years ahead of IE.

IE is alot faster browsing wise in general, I mean, look at opera, opera is faster than IE, firefox is just slow (going back pages, auto-redirects, page refreshes, everything). I love firefox, dont get me wrong, but I just dont think its all that everyone has claimed it is. It is a great browser with huge potential, but my top 3, in order, are opera, with firefox and IE tied (ie for speed, firefox for functionality), followed by konqueror on linux

"konqueror on linux"

Oh yeah... I forgot about that. I use it too when I boot up into Ubuntu (my pc dual-boots between Win XP Pro and Ubuntu).

!!!

You should say Firefox is just as crappy as Trident

KHTML 3.x (Safari 2.x / Konqueror 3.x)
Opera 8.x
Windows Internet Explorer 7.x
Firefox 1.x + Gecko derivatives
Internet Explorer 6.x

The only reason I use FF is to block ads and less spy/adware. Opera is spy/adware so I don't use it. IE, well I will just leave that one alone. FF has some really nice Extensions and that is 90% of why I use it. I hate toolbars so that is why I don't use IE (to get some nice functions you need them). Netscape 4.02 maybe.

I completely agree, regarding the Firefox Extensions. That was my primary reason for switching to and using Firefox. I don't think IE will, any time in the near future, offer the customizable options one has with Firefox Extensions. You have the option of picking and choosing how and what you want in the browser. That's choice and I'll go with having choice, every time. Likewise, with the people who complain about Firefox being slow....if they'd Google a bit, they would find numerous simple tweaks for Firefox, which I've found to make dramatic increases in speed.

Tweaks? You mean like the firefox tweaker here on betanews? I've used it, and guess what, not matter how much you tweak it, it is still slow. Now please read what I wrote, I still LIKE FIREFOX. I use it as my primary, but only until the day opera opens its doors to 3rd party addons/extensions (such as roboform, which has become vital to me). Also, to the user above, you dont have to use firefox if you want ad blocking, ad muncher (yes it costs money, so if you can bypass that, you will see it truely is a spectacular product) works far better than adblock, has a list thats updated at least 5 times a week, has a development staff that is very professional and works on every suggestion put forth (unless it is a totally nonsense one, like one from their forums lately that suggested filtering images based on a persons skin color, which is utterly retarded and not possible). Yes, 24.95 is a small price to pay (especially for lifetime updates to the software), but guess what, it works with EVERY BROWSER on the windows platform, and it removes ad's from many programs like kazaa, aim, OPERA'S TOOLBAR, and various other programs which use http to display their ad's.

Anyways, Firefox is a great browser, it is just no where near as polished as I would like. Its browsing IS slower than ie, regardless of the number of tweaks I put into it, but I do use it as my primary as the benefits outweight that minor inconveinience (SP?). But as I said, as soon as opera supports 3rd parties, I will be using it as my primary browser.

Thank you for the information. I will check that out.

I did not make any reference as to whether you liked Firefox or not, or at least I didn't think I did. I don't know anything about BetaNews tweak stuff. I was referring to actually going into the Firefox configuration, directly and making a few tweaks. At least in my use of it, for the past year or so, I can't complain about it being slow. I realize that experience can vary between users.

Let the IE vs. FF ranting begin...