Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

IE Not Faring Well In the EU Ballot

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the who-is-surprised-by-that dept.

Internet Explorer 325

unixcrab writes "Most PC users hit the web using Internet Explorer by default, simply because that's what came along with Windows. Now, after antitrust investigations, European users get a choice of browser to install via ballot screen, and initial reports are not good for 'ol IE. According to Statcounter, IE use in France has dropped 2.5 percent since last month's implementation of the ballot, 1.3 percent in Italy, and 1 percent in Britain. It's still early days, and it'll take more than this to chip away from IE's 62 percent lead in the browser war, but it's certainly not a good trend for Microsoft. With that in mind, we're going to have to ask you to place your bets now."

cancel ×

325 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

My money is on Chrome (3, Interesting)

twoshortplanks (124523) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567668)

The summary says:

Most PC users hit the web using Internet Explorer by default, simply because that's what came along with Windows.

But the way most people think is

Most PC users hit google using Internet Explorer by default, simply because that's what came along with Windows.

Re:My money is on Chrome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567774)

Google: I'd hit that.

Oh the humanity...

Re:My money is on Chrome (1, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567976)

Well Firefox is getting some heat in Europe too, as Germany is warning users not to use Firefox [theregister.co.uk] .

Of course Opera is the true European browser as it's being developed in Norway.

Re:My money is on Chrome (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568164)

Why is Mozilla waiting until 30th before releasing the patch? FOSS advocates always say that with open source software critical exploits can be patched and roll-out in a few hours and criticize Microsoft update cycle.

Re:My money is on Chrome (1)

LinuxAndLube (1526389) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568284)

You, Anonymous Coward, are now officially banned from the Slashdot forum.

The beta patch is out now. (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568506)

Why is Mozilla waiting until 30th before releasing the patch?

The beta patch is out now. Mozilla is waiting to upgrade the general public in order to make sure the patch doesn't introduce worse problems.

Re:My money is on Chrome (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567872)

I'd like to meet a white guy born in South Africa who moves to the USA. That guy would be a REAL African-American but I don't think anybody would believe him. Unlike the darkies he'd have actually been to Africa. What if they called him a nigger?

Re:My money is on Chrome (-1, Offtopic)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568596)

Dave Matthews. Charlize Theron.

MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (0, Troll)

SgtChaireBourne (457691) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567892)

So far, MSIE still is getting on 100% despite the 'browser ballot' Yep. Even though the antitrust complaint [opera.com] found that Microsoft was hurting Europe by using it monopoly on desktop OEMs and illegal tying to establish and maintain a monopoly on web browsers.

The illegal tying [opera.com] is still happening, and each and every instance of MS Windows makes the problem worse. Firefox ran a campaign a few years ago, "take back the web". To do that, MSIE has to go. To get rid of MSIE, Windows has to go. Germany [computing.co.uk] , France and others have advocated dropping the problem. If every country made a push to get Windows off their networks, both public and private, billions would be save each quarter by avoiding the malware that is part and parcel of the Windows experience.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (3, Informative)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568370)

You're linking to old articles, other one from 2007 and other one from beginning of 2009. Things have changed since then, like this ballot screen shows now.

The later article didn't explain what illegal tying, but did you know Google also pays people to tie their products in - almost all of Firefox revenue is coming from Google and in turn they set Google as the default search engine. Same thing for Opera and other browsers and even some manufacturers (I think HP)

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (4, Informative)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568944)

what google's doing is not tying. What MS does, is indeed tying. I think you might want to try to understand legally what that means before you make such an incorrect statement.

It's one thing to pay someone to bundle, it's another to refuse someone from being able to unbundle (essentially the issue of illegal tying).

Ever tried to remove internet explorer from windows? Yeah, just a little bit of tying there. /sarcasm.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569128)

You can remove IE in every Windows version after XP. mshtml.dll is usually left in the system because thousands of applications use its rendering engine and it would break all those programs. If you wish, you can delete that yourself too.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (1)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568388)

That seems like an overly simple solution. Wouldn't whatever OS that takes its place present the same issues after people decide to try exploiting it? I know windows is far from being the perfect OS, but what would happen if say Ubuntu got 80% market share? Or are you advocating that nobody gets a majority share (which i suppose is the ideal way do to things)? But then you run into issues of compatibility between systems yadda yadda.

okay, beginning to get off topic. cutting myself off now.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (3, Insightful)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568606)

Canonical doesn't have it's own browser, how can they do the same? And the default browser, Firefox, is available in all major desktop OSes.

In fact, Ubuntu (like any other distro) is basically a collection of software from other organizations, so they have almost zero software tied to them. You can use almost any other distro and get the same software, only packaged in a different way.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (1)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569022)

What you say makes sense, but I think my point is still valid. If Firefox, Opera, Chrome, etc, get a huge majority share, they will become the primary targets for malware.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (1)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569044)

That was poorly worded. I meant if one of them get majority share.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (1)

Chrisje (471362) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568422)

> billions would be save each quarter by avoiding the malware that is part and parcel of the Windows experience.

A somewhat ludicrous prediction. Firstly you have no idea if the malware would not become commonplace on the New Default Platform, whatever it may be. Second of all, I don't think anyone has an accurate idea of the actual costs of Malware right now, let alone in a highly hypothetical future. You can have opinions based on facts and figures, but this type of "koffiedik kijken" isn't exactly science, is it?

Quite frankly I don't see the issue. I got sick of the Windows experience, and bought two macs for the house. A lot of people still buy Windows because they don't want to shell out the cash for a mac and they don't know diddley about Linux/Unix. Let them. It keeps people like ourselves off the streets, and if it ever will change, it'll change. Nuffsaid.

Percentages...? (5, Informative)

capnkr (1153623) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568516)

FTFS:

{snip}it'll take more than this to chip away from IE's 62 percent lead in the browser war,{/snip}

Before we work on getting rid of the whole OS (good idea BTW ;) ), we should start by getting the effin' journalists to check [w3counter.com] their numbers [statcounter.com] and do some decent reporting - IE isn't even at 62%, much less @ a 62% lead over *any* other browser... The *only* thing IE leads in is, as you have pointed out, default installs.

Re:MSIE still on 100% of Windows machines (1)

linebackn (131821) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568518)

> So far, MSIE still is getting on 100% despite the 'browser ballot'

The technically correct solution to this problem would have been to go forward with the release of Windows 7e and add some kind of protection (keep an eye on the number of legs broken) to make sure OEMs were in no way influenced by Microsoft as to which browser the OEM choses to bundle. This way the OEMs choice of bundle would hopefully be related directly to what users actually want, and as a result selling more units for the OEM.

I'm not sure why this deal fell through. Up until the last minute it seemed like they were going to ship Windows 7e instead.

Re:My money is on Chrome (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568880)

not really. bing is default. People have to switch it to google (or go to google.com) if they want google to be the default search.

Re:My money is on Chrome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568950)

Couldn't be more wrong. MSN is the default for windows and bing is the default search engine in the search bar. That's the whole problem that started this fight.

Choice?! (3, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567690)

Hmm...so when given a choice, people sometimes choose different browsers? This is news? This sounds like the argument Netscape made back when they were suing Microsoft here in the USA...

DOJ v MS (1, Informative)

SgtChaireBourne (457691) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568096)

...so when given a choice, people sometimes choose different browsers? This is news? This sounds like the argument

Actually, the case was "United States v. Microsoft [justice.gov] ", which means that it was the government of the United States of America coming down on his Billness for actively and maliciously going out of his way to screw up the market.

Again, the browser ballot does not make any kind of remedy, not even a little, against the original complaint in the EU. MSIE is still bundled on Windows and even if you install Chromium or Firefox, MSIE is still there making botnets. Many regions have good environmental regulations and are able to prevent pollution. Windows can be treated the same way.

Re:DOJ v MS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568282)

Yes, IE is still there, and is used for a small number of things such as rendering help file content in the help viewer.

This does not assist botnets.

This is not anti-competition, so the EU's complaint is answered.

What are you talking about?

Re:DOJ v MS (1)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568856)

. . .MSIE is still there making botnets.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought users had to actively be using IE, and visit a malicious website, in order for IE to be a botnet-infection vector? If the users are actually *using* a different browser (which, we'll assume for the sake of argument here isn't *also* vulnerable to the malicious web site), and IE is not being used to access those sites, how is IE, as you said, "still there making botnets"?

I suppose there is still a risk that some other app you use might be hard-coded to launch IE (instead of launching the 'default browser'), and once it does, the user might get infected via IE?

Re:Choice?! (5, Funny)

brian0918 (638904) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568536)

People always had a choice. Nobody is forced to buy Microsoft's products. But most people want a good deal, and so buy whatever is cheapest. To them, browser choice is not as important as having more money to spend on other pursuits. So it is voluntary trade to mutual benefit, and thus is win-win. Now that Microsoft is forced to advertise for its competitors, it is no longer win-win.

Re:Choice?! (2, Insightful)

Arkham (10779) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568588)

I'm pretty sure that the winner will be the one with the best icon. People are stupid.

Re:Choice?! (1)

oji-sama (1151023) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568800)

Having the word "Internet" in the browser name may help those people to choose as well. But that's ok, as long as they have the option to select something else if they are so inclined.

Maybe people choose randomly? (4, Insightful)

impaledsunset (1337701) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567706)

I guess most people don't care, and select one of the browser at random, or click the first one. Of course, given that IE has the biggest market share, it is going to drop.

For the statistics to mean anything, they should tell what percentage of the people choose which browser on the ballot, otherwise it's meaningless.

Even if most people are choosing IE, it is still likely for IE to fall. So where are the stats about what the users choose on the ballot itself?

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (4, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567762)

"I guess most people don't care, and select one of the browser at random"

Spot on. Most people do not even know what browser they are using or what a browser even is. They are given a choice, and they just choose without really knowing what it is that they are choosing from.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567894)

Because they are not sure what they are choosing, the process often goes like this: Oh? WTF? Well, I'm using MS Windows, don't I have to use MS Internet Explorer? Well, it's probably more compatible with other MS products, so I will just use IE.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568046)

"I guess most people don't care, and select one of the browser at random" Spot on. Most people do not even know what browser they are using or what a browser even is. They are given a choice, and they just choose without really knowing what it is that they are choosing from.

The good thing about that is that when you talk about Web browser choice, the people involved all have 'Net connections. So that's ok. There's a site they can use [justfuckinggoogleit.com] to learn all about the various browsers.

"Heavens no, someone might have to think! It might take them a whole few minutes too!"

The ignorance is probably a chicken-and-egg problem. Average users don't bother to learn anything because they hate learning and won't do it unless it solves some immediate problem they have, and even then they do it only begrudgingly after first trying to get someone else to do it for them. So give them an immediate problem like choosing a browser and they have an incentive. If they're confused and don't like being confused, they can use the link I gave above to sort out their confusion. What's wrong with that?

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (4, Funny)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568118)

My mum uses "The Internet." I had to rename the IE shortcut on the desktop so she'd stop asking me how to get onto the internet.

This box caused me no end of hassle with my grandfather thinking he had a virus, my mum asking what was on the other internets, and my dad passing all of these calls on to me because he's sick of explaining it.

It's a big F*** You to Europe. It'll irritate so many people that we'll hate Europe for making MS do it. I already do.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (1)

wilder_card (774631) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568836)

I hate to say this, but there is a set of people who should not be expected to use a computer. I don't know what we're going to do with them in 10 or 20 years, when absolutely everything is online.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (1)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568908)

Easy solution, even though it is outside the EU:
Take them on a nice vacation to a Swiss clinic.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (1)

c-reus (852386) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569008)

Do you expect the average person to know that Europe mandated the ballot? If they blame anyone, I'd expect Windows to get the most heat for it (mistakenly, but still). It does say "Windows Internet Explorer" in the titlebar...

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568348)

I would take that one step further. For them why do they even care? They go to facebook, youtube, etc. Probably about 10-15 sites per day (some do more and I am sure someone will show up here and say that they go to hundreds of sites per day and so do their friends). But to my point the sites they go to 'deal with it'. It really isnt their problem. A few clued in ones will make something else the default. Some, probably, as you say pick at random. But from the end users point of view the web still shows up and they can click on things.

The only ones who really care are the ones making the pages or techies who are tired of cleaning up rooted boxes.

Back a few years ago I installed IE6 the first day it came out of beta. It was that much better than all the rest (at least way better than crashscape). These days I do not mess with it and use something else (as I was part of the second group). Would I dare surf the web with a 11 year old browser now? No way. IE8 is 'better' but needs tons of work. The web moved on and IE stayed put. That was MS's mistake. The top spot was theirs to loose and they are.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568498)

My guess is that they select the one with the prettiest logo.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (1)

Wooky_linuxer (685371) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569130)

That's correct, but now at least people will be aware that there is a choice. And perhaps that will lead to people realizing the other choices might provide a more secure web-browsing experience.... Ok, who am I deceiving here?

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (3, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567922)

For the average person it probably doesn't really matter.
FireFox and Chrome are my favorites because of the plugins and because Chrome feels faster.
IE I keep just in case nothing else will work. Thankfully IE only sites seem to be getting very rare. Thanks Firefox and Safari.
I keep Opera and Safari around for testing on my PC.
I know people love Opera but it just doesn't fit me well.
The thing is that even IE doesn't really suck and they all work. If you are not into tweaking then any of them will probably work just fine for you.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (2, Insightful)

Drethon (1445051) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568014)

People never choose randomly... Which icon is prettier or which name sounds the friendliest?

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568280)

People never choose randomly... Which icon is prettier or which name sounds the friendliest?

Or the coolest.

I don't think I'd even know Firefox had it been called Dulltuna or Slowduck.

Re:Maybe people choose randomly? (1)

hoggoth (414195) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569106)

>> People never choose randomly... Which icon is prettier or which name sounds the friendliest?
> Or the coolest.
> I don't think I'd even know Firefox had it been called Dulltuna or Slowduck.

Introducing my new browser, "Gates Of Eternity". (my thanks to the Heavy Metal band name generator http://b10m.swal.org/cgi-bin/bandname.cgi [swal.org] )

The numbers you need, and the danger of prediction (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568020)

For the statistics to mean anything, they should tell what percentage of the people choose which browser on the ballot, otherwise it's meaningless.

That'd certainly be an interesting number. Another interesting number might be the number of people exposed to the ballot screen---it tells you how much to trust the first number. Ask a statistician, or ask yourself this: if two people had been exposed, and both chose firefox, would you predict a 100% market share for firefox or would you think firefox got lucky and wait for more data to come in?

It might also be interesting to know how browser changes have happened historically---how do the switch rates develop over time? Should we expect to see more or less people leaving IE in the near and far future? How big are the gross and net switchovers? How big are they going to become?

"2.5 percent" is a really nice number. It sounds pleasant, like 2.4 children. But exactly, exactly what does it mean?

1% drop !? (1, Insightful)

AchiIIe (974900) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567716)

1% drop? That's all?

I'm sorry but this does not seem as 'good news' for fans of IEs demise. You are saying that out of 62 of the users who are getting the ballot box, in the past month 61 have chosen IE and one has chosen to switch?

Re:1% drop !? (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567822)

Indeed, what's this "early days" jibba jabba. If you're going to see the ballot screen, you've seen it by now, and chosen the "Just give me the damn Internets!" option. The polls are closed.

Re:1% drop !? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569150)

If you're going to see the ballot screen, you've seen it by now

As I understand it, new PCs and reinstallation of Windows on old PCs will trigger another ballot page view.

Re:1% drop !? (5, Informative)

Kufat (563166) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567874)

No, that's not what they're saying. They're saying that IE's TOTAL market share has dropped by 2.5%, 1.3%, and 1% in the above countries, in ONE MONTH, which would tend to suggest that a substantial portion of the installs from that month utilized an alternate browser. Remember, not every computer user in the EU installed Windows 7 this month!

Re:1% drop !? (2, Informative)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568354)

It does not just appear on new installs but also after Windows Update installs a patch.

Re:1% drop !? (4, Informative)

16Chapel (998683) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568378)

You don't have to install Win7 to see this - I got the ballot box on my WinXP box, after it auto-updated.

Ironically, I thought it was malware and closed it via the task manager.

Margin of error? (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568474)

What's the margin of error on their data? How much does it fluctuate from month to month? Did any governments do any major new deployments, or change their firewall settings to mask what kind of browser their users were connecting with? Until several agencies start reporting consistent numbers I will remain skeptical of anything over 0.5%

Re:1% drop !? (2)

KritonK (949258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567880)

You are saying that out of 62 of the users who are getting the ballot box, in the past month 61 have chosen IE and one has chosen to switch?

No, he's saying that 0.62 have chosen to switch!

Re:1% drop !? (1)

voodoo cheesecake (1071228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568006)

It's a start! But I wonder how many of that 61% also choose to install additional browsers. I get konqueror and firefox right out of the box when I install fedora. When I have to use windows because of AutoCad, I only used IE in order to get firefox. IE is still there, but I never use it. I think the article needs more data!

Re:1% drop !? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568128)

That argument would make sense if every internet user reinstalled their operating system every month. But the 62% / 61% represents the percentage of overall browser share, not of new users.

Say 5% of computer users installed a new copy of WIndows and encountered the ballot screen last month (and that's a really high number). This would mean that 20% of those users selected a non-IE browser.

If 2% of all users encountered the ballot, the 1% drop in IE use would represent 50% of those users choosing non-IE browsers.

Get it?

Defacto (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567722)

Proof that IE's popularity only comes from it being the default.

Re:Defacto (1)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568510)

Who the hell was suggesting otherwise?

Allowed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567748)

They're still allowed to use the internet in Europe?

Re:Allowed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568992)

Of course, this is not the USA

why would I care? (3, Interesting)

js3 (319268) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567750)

why would I care which browser is the most popular?

Re:why would I care? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567824)

Individualthink is not allowed here. Report to your nearest behavior modification center, citizen!

Re:why would I care? (3, Insightful)

shish (588640) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568104)

Which is the most popular doesn't matter so much -- IE *not* being the most popular (or at least, being less popular) is important. When IE had pretty much all the market, the options were "spend 5 minutes coding to standards, have it work fine in most browsers but break for the 95% of people who use IE" or "spend 5 hours working around IE bugs; if making it work in IE breaks other browsers, don't bother trying to fix it in case IE breaks again". Now that it's less popular, coding for standards is becoming a plausible option, and the IE team either need to fix their bugs or get left out.

Re:why would I care? (3, Funny)

ClosedSource (238333) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569108)

Well, there's a lot of begging of the question in your historical summary, but you left out one obvious historical scenario:

PHB: Your web pages are late, what's the problem?

You: Well, everything works OK in IE but I'm still trying to get things to render correctly for standards-compliant browsers like Firefox.

PHB: Fire-what? Everybody uses IE. if you don't want it to be Fire-you, button this up and release it. Ha, Ha. Slaps you on the back and walks back to flirt with his secretary

Re:why would I care? (5, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568186)

Because a browser with a majority market share gets to define de-facto standards. If MS goes its own way with web standards (not that they would ever do such a thing) then, a few years ago, you have two options. Either support IE and 80% of your target market, or support standards-compliant browsers and 20% of your market. What do you do? Go with the MS solution. Now they have 61%, so it's not such an easy decision.

If IE, FireFox, Opera, Chrome, and Safari all had 15-30% of the market, then it would not be worth the investment for most people to support features specific to any single browser. Once two support the same feature, it starts to become worthwhile. Once four do, it definitely is and the one that doesn't support the feature is left out.

Having no single dominant player in the web browser market is good for web standards. You shouldn't care which browser is the most popular, you should care that none of them is too popular.

Re:why would I care? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568188)

It's nice to know that IE is losing ground, because right now, IE's lack of features is holding back the functionality of the web as a whole. Websites could be a lot nicer if it weren't for IE.

Re:why would I care? (5, Informative)

aldld (1663705) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568764)

Because if you ever do web development, you are required to hate Internet Explorer.

Re:why would I care? (1)

Enleth (947766) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568916)

Do you suggest that we withhold every single news item on the basis that someone, somewhere might not care?

Dont care? Don't read.

Re:why would I care? (2, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568970)

If you design or maintain websites, you might care a great deal. If IE's popularity drops low enough, you can justify dropping half of your workload. It's not at all uncommon for one thing to work great for Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari, etc, etc but not IE. So then you have to add a bunch of workarounds for IE. If you own a business, you might appreciate the reduced cost of having your web presence designed and maintained. If you are the customer of a business with a web presence, you might hope some of the savings will show up in the prices you pay.

Socialism (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567756)

This is what happens in a socialist paradise like Europe.

The "Evil Corporation's" web browser is forced to showcase it's rivals on an equal footing. The best product wins and free market capitalism dies a little.

Glenn Beck just urinated on his producer.

Re:Socialism (2, Funny)

CaptainZapp (182233) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568906)

Glenn Beck just urinated on his producer.

Was this televised? This sounds like a once in a lifetime chance to watch Fox News.

Need Basis for Comparison (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567768)

IE's share has been dropping for years. How much has it dropped in, say, North America during the same period, with no "ballot" to influence things? Wouldn't surprise me if it was about the same.

Re:Need Basis for Comparison (1)

jimbobborg (128330) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567882)

I'm wondering how much of the high IE value is from AOL users. The AOL client still uses IE. If they had switched to Netscape all those years ago, how would the balance of power be tipped now?

Re:Need Basis for Comparison (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568024)

AOL would be out of business, thats how.

Re:Need Basis for Comparison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568352)

Who in Europe use AOL? As far as I know the A stands for America..

the results are not clear (1, Interesting)

zakeria (1031430) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567780)

I installed the update but was never asked to choose a browser I guess this is because I already had firefox set as my default so the update never even started up on my PC to ask me the question!!

Re:the results are not clear (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568206)

Correct, you have to have IE as your default in order for it to ask if you want an alternate browser. (Which of course makes sense, since if you've already gotten an alternate browser then you've already made your choice and there's no need to ask.)

That sounds like a feature? (1)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568482)

I'm not exactly sure what you're complaining about? Seems to me that it would be reasonable that if you already have another browser installed, there's no reason for Windows to bother you with a ballot screen to select another browser? I think I'd be kind of annoyed, really, if it did.

David Murray (2, Interesting)

adric22 (413850) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567828)

In a way, this will probably HELP microsoft because this means less malware infections, which will make their O/S look more secure.

Probably good for Google. (3, Interesting)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567870)

  • Internet Explorer 8
  • Mozilla Firefox
  • Opera
  • Safari

Many people have no idea what any of these are.

  • Google Chrome.

"Oh. I search with Google. This must be what I use."

Not so much. (4, Insightful)

Rhaban (987410) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568136)

  • Internet Explorer 8
  • Mozilla Firefox
  • Opera
  • Safari

Many people have no idea what any of these are.

  • Google Chrome.

"Oh. I search with Google. This must be what I use."

There's "internet" in "Internet Explorer". And they recognize the icon.

Re:Not so much. (3, Interesting)

thijsh (910751) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568334)

There a lot of truth in the fact that users just click anything that says 'internet'. When I install Firefox next to Internet Explorer I can explain that Firefox is a great browser and all but they will never use it, but when I rename the shortcut to 'Internet (Firefox)' and hide Internet Explorer it's no big deal suddenly... People just don't give a shit, they just want to click the first Internet icon and have it work for them... :-)

Re:Probably good for Google. (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568256)

Well, most people will have heard of Apple - it's not like they skimp on advertising. A lot will have heard of FireFox (although a distressing number call it 'FoxFire') because it's been in the news quite a lot over the last few years. If they've ever watched or read the news, it's hard to miss. Opera is less well-known, but if they own a mobile phone with a browser then it probably runs Opera and they'll recognise the logo. And, of course, they'll recognise the big blue E, because that means 'teh intarweb'.

Next Step (5, Interesting)

psbrogna (611644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567884)

Now if there could just be a "Pick your OS" pull-down on first boot ...

ok (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567916)

With that in mind, we're going to have to ask you to place your bets now.

Ok, I bet on Microsoft.

endless stream of stuff that doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567918)

it's not entirely robbIE's fault, as he also must wear the party 'blinders' to stay in 'business'.

as far as what's really going on/stuff that matters; the lights are coming up all over now. never a better time to consult with/trust in your creators re; anything that really matters at all.

tubgi8l (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31567954)

are There? Oh, too much formality

My rule of thumb (4, Insightful)

Palestrina (715471) | more than 4 years ago | (#31567966)

If statistical results are quoted to tenths of a percent, e.g., "1.3 percent in Italy" and there is no backup data, including a statement on sample sizes or significance, then I dismiss it as the work of a marketing department hack.

Re:My rule of thumb (1)

valadaar (1667093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568478)

I would agree - for something as fuzzy as browser selection, I'd need to see something like 10-20% before making any type of pronouncement.

Link to Stats (5, Informative)

muxxa (729961) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568036)

IE has a natural downward trend anyway, so the cited percentage drops should be taken in context:

Germany showed a slight increase:

  • http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-DE-monthly-200902-201003

Re:Link to Stats (0, Offtopic)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568546)

You sir, win the conversation. Sadly I already replied to another comment upstream so I can nolonger upmod this.

Damn than all that taxpayer money was worth it. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568050)

All the bullshit from here in the US and over in Europe, and god only knows how much tax money went to suing M$ for its evil ways. All the effort and money and we get what? A story telling us how IE is on the ropes because it now only hold 65% of the market and not 68% or whatever the effective drop actually was. As for the competing browsers that are offered, they get the best deal of them all, they get to welcome the users who were too stupid and/or lazy to just download an alternative browser. I have my problems with M$ as much as anyone else, but good fucking god its not like they were preventing anyone from going out and downloading whatever the hell they wanted to use for a browser. Personally, my opinion is that if someone is too dense to realize thay they cannot download and use another browser, then just maybe the internet would be a better place without them on it (christ knows we would have less "social networking"). Ok rant over, but good lord this is not brain surgery.

Re:Damn than all that taxpayer money was worth it. (2, Insightful)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568254)

All the bullshit from here in the US and over in Europe, and god only knows how much tax money went to suing M$ for its evil ways

I think the two billion dollar in fines Microsoft has received so far covers those expenses nicely.

Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568052)

This article is a blatant troll. Shall we feed it? I'm thinking yes...

Re:Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568272)

No way, Internet Exploder will win! It is the bestest!

Place your bets? (1)

bcmm (768152) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568238)

I presume the summary means "bets on the winner".

I'm hoping for no winner: a heterogeneous market where people use one of a number of standards-compliant browsers, and I think it could actually be what happens.

Re:Place your bets? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568366)

a heterogeneous market where people use one of a number of standards-compliant browsers

This would be of course the best outcome possible. Nobody wants another monopolist to replace Microsoft. Competition is what drives technology forward.

The ballot order (2, Informative)

poor_boi (548340) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568414)

The ballot has 12 browsers organized into two groups. Each group is randomized amongst itself for purposes of display order. The first group is always displayed first and consists of: Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, Apple Safari, Firefox, and Opera The second group consists of: Maxthon, Avant Browser, AOL, K-Meleon, Flock, Sleipnir, and Slim

If IE... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31568564)

Starts to have a percentage or two tick UP, will we see a /. story about it?

Oh who am I kidding that will never happen. (The story that is)

I don't understand (1)

PPalmgren (1009823) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568684)

On one side, I understand how competition in the browser space is good for advancement, but the whole concept of why market share matters perplexes me. How do free browsers, which do nothing but display webpages, make ANY money whatsoever? They seem to be a gigantic money sink to me. The only thing I can think of is the default search bar generating ad revenue, but thats it. What the hell is the point of comparing "market share" of something like this? I don't see how this translates into anything benefiting the company in the lead.

Re:I don't understand (1)

robot256 (1635039) | more than 4 years ago | (#31568918)

See this earlier comment by TheRaven64 [slashdot.org] .

Opera clearly has the most to gain. (1)

Zoidbot (1194453) | more than 4 years ago | (#31569088)

It's not only the fastest, best looking and best performing browser, it's also the one with low marketshare with loads of room to grow.

I'm recommending anyone that asks me what to choose, to try that. Simply because it's more secure and better than Firefox and does not have the privacy problems of Chrome, and Safari, is well just rubbish and doing what Opera did 5 years back.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>