David finally took down Goliath | The Coffeehouse

May28th2018
May 28th, 2018

May I say holy crap. When most people experience HTML5 SVG/video/audio DOM, worker threads, and DOM 3D scripting that should finish IE off for good.

IE will look, feel and essentially be depricated for web browsing.

Next up to bat Android is about to hit a home run. I think it's pretty cool how Mozilla and Google tag teamed to wipe out their competition.

And it actually worked. Most of the really good MS employees now work there anyway so it's no surprise.

As a web developer and DBA, I must say good riddance. The only browser that ever ate up $60/hour customer time was IE. IE has wasted billions of dollars in developer hours for what amounts to bad design and programming obscurities and probably contributed to the economic disaster this past year by wasting resources.

GOOD RIDDANCE!

BitFlipper

I guess you missed the other IE lines in the chart? You keep talking about "IE", but it seems you are referring to "IE7" in particular (the top line).

A clue: You need to add all the "IE" versions together if you want to talk about just "IE". Once you do that (IE6 + IE7 + IE8), your argument falls flat on its face.

figuerres
???

"The only browser that ever at up $60/hour customer time was IE." perhaps you mean "ate up?

but "probably contributed to the economic disaster this past year by wasting resources." LOL, ROFTL that's just pure crapp ... at least stick with reality.

yes, IE6 should be retired that i agree with. but the rest of your rant seems rather lame.

figuerres
???

In reply to figuerres

#Jul 5th @ 12:11 PM

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-yearly-2008-2009

that page is more interesting and more usefull...

i see that opera, safari,chrome and all the rest are very flat. ok firefox is climbing a few points and ie has dropped a few ok so? not like it went from 70% to 10% ... and not like firefox has "crossed over" ... now if that trend keeps up perhaps next year they might have a meeting point.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

When most people experience HTML5 SVG/video/audio DOM, worker threads, and DOM 3D scripting that should finish IE off for good.

Most people won't care. Video is so fragmented each browser needs a different codec and so video will remain served by Flash and to a less extent Firefox. SVG is a niche format. Worker threads are a developer feature and 3D DOM scripting is, err, is what exactly? <canvas /> is 2D. What is this mysterious 3d you're going on about? (Oh and dear god but it's slow under Firefox.)

May28th2018
May 28th, 2018

In reply to figuerres

#Jul 5th @ 12:24 PM

I'm not going to argue, but consider that your graph is using data that is over a year and a half old while the one I posted is current.

"Video is so fragmented each browser needs a different codec"

http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/video.html#attr-source-type

Mozilla and Google have agreed on default support for ogg. I don't believe that the video DOM object has a tag for changing the encoding type, only a canPlay filter for js and a source type filter.

"so video will remain served by Flash"

Flash only plays flv encoded video and audio frames.

DCMonkey
Monkey see, monkey do, monkey will destroy you!

In reply to figuerres

#Jul 5th @ 12:24 PM

They would cross over in 2012. IE would still have 12% in 2018 (what's with that date anyways?). Firefox wouldn't pass IE's current number till 2019.

Sorry OP, you're going to be stuck supporting IE for a while.

May28th2018
May 28th, 2018

In reply to DCMonkey

#Jul 5th @ 1:05 PM

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-US-daily-20080701-20090705

I can't wait for the day when we don't have to support IE at all any more. There is no bigger waste of time.

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 12:59 PM

The W3C has given up trying to get them to agree.

Apple refuse to implement Ogg and went with H.264. Opera refuse to use H.264 because of the licensing costs. Google use H.264 and Ogg but can't redistribute H.264 in an open source way and say Ogg just isn't ready for sites like YouTube. Mozilla refuses H.264 because of patent problems.

So you have two browsers not supporting the prefered format for the web's main video site YouTube. And there's no way to nominate a codec in the spec. So how exactly is this going to work?

(And again users don't care what format their video is in as long as it gets shown. And Flash supported H.264 in Flash 9 in December 2007. Flash works right now. Users see the piano playing kitten. That's all they care about)

blowdart
Peek-a-boo

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 1:14 PM

Why not stop now? I'm sure IE users will weep at the loss of access to your blog.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 1:14 PM

Are you sure you want to stick to those figures?

On 7/1/2008 - FireFox: 26.69%

On 7/5/2009 - FireFox: 29.32%

More than a year, for not even a 3% gain? David indeed... Expressionless

BitFlipper

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 1:14 PM

I don't think it is going to happen in your lifetime, though. I hope you believe in reincarnation.

Once again, you seem to keep ignoring the fact that you need to add IE6 + IE7 + IE8 in those graphs. It looks "good" when you put on blinders and only look at IE7 by itself in that graph, while showing all FF versions together. Not sure why the graph shows it like that. Is there only one version of FF? I guess it makes anti-MS fanboys happy.

Interestingly enough, when you switch to OS share on that same site, once again it gives Win 2000, XP and Vista (Win7?) each in it's own curve, yet shows OS X as one version. I guess there is only one version of OS X then. Weird. Or maybe putting all MS OSes into the same curve will be too painful for anti-MS fanboys? Not sure.

http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-daily-20080701-20090705

BTW, what is that RED thing flat-lining at the bottom?

AndyC

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 1:14 PM

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-daily-20080701-20090705

You know there is a world outside of the US right? And on a global scale, Firefox is only marginally ahead of IE6.

What is very apparent from those graphs (in so much as such things can be accurate) is that adoption of newer versions of Firefox is much quicker than adoption of newer versions of IE. Which probably fits in with the general consensus that Firefox is mostly used by early adopter types and doesn't have much take up in enterprises, where a version change isn't something that happens lightly.

littleguru
<3 Seattle

In reply to AndyC

#Jul 5th @ 1:30 PM

From these charts it seems that Chrome completely died out... strange... I wonder how valid the data is. Is Chrome really no longer used?

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to littleguru

#Jul 5th @ 2:52 PM

Chrome just doesn't really have a market that truely wants it: the trendies/hipsters and techies are more likely to use Firefox which is significantly more customizable (e.g. Adblock) and already has a massive ecosystem surrounding it. Then there's Chrome's massive memory usage to contend with: the situation with plugins is not bad enough to warrant process-per-tab design.

Ultimately had Google introduced Chrome in 2004 it would have stopped Firefox from getting anywhere, but it's just a product that nobody feels they need. It's like Metacafe and Vimeo trying to take on YouTube.

CreamFilling512

IE 7 and 8 made huge leaps in standards support, why are you assuming they're going to stop now?

CreamFilling512

In reply to AndyC

#Jul 5th @ 1:30 PM

Also because Firefox completely drops support for older versions.

May28th2018
May 28th, 2018

In reply to CreamFilling512

#Jul 5th @ 4:36 PM

Where is Microsoft's roadmap on HTML5 implementation ?
Where are the IE HTML5 milestones?

(birds chirping...)

fknight

I'm sure all the people this month saying that IE has been decimated by Firefox/Chrome/Opera will, by next month, be saying that Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer makes everyone in the world too stupid to know that Firefox/Chrome/Opera exist.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 5:41 PM

HTML5 is nowhere near finalisation, you know that MS doesn't implement non-final specifications so why raise the point?

May28th2018
May 28th, 2018

In reply to W3bbo

#Jul 5th @ 6:24 PM

Somebody needs to relocate to Excuseville, WA.

PaoloM
Hypermediocrity

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 6:27 PM

Where is Mozilla full support for HTML5? Are they doing their usual half-assed support thinghie?

Pathetic.

MasterPie
I'm white because I smelt an onion

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 6:27 PM

What's your obession with W3bbo? He's one of the most vocal MS cynics on this board Smiley

littleguru
<3 Seattle

In reply to May28th2018

#Jul 5th @ 5:41 PM

What you are saying doesn't make any sense. Why should someone implement something that might change from one day to the other?

joechung

Internet Explorer isn't dead, not by a long shot.

The Open Web platform (HTML/CSS/JS) has to compete against Flash, not Internet Explorer or Silverlight. It's interesting that Internet Explorer's lack of adoption of HTML 5/CSS 3 strengthens Adobe's position, not Microsoft's.