IE during the rise of Firefox had claimed victory and given up, so it was stagnant and no longer good enough. You have to be the default and be "good enough." It doesn't have to be better but it can't be a lot worse. > It doesn't explain the rise of Firefox at all. Otherwise Coca Cola has been wasting a lot of money on advertising. The equivalent of a billion dollar marketing campaign will raise usage of something independent of whether it's really any better than the competition. > Google pushing Chrome from is nowhere near the same thing as "being the default browser". Netscape was disbanded in 2003, so apparently pretty effective. > Furthermore, IE was the default on OSX from 1998-2003. #Microsoft edge browser overtakes as second windows#Windows Phone no longer has a meaningful user base, so this is from much the same population who use Windows on the desktop. A mobile version exists, but so few people use it that it ends up inside "Other" in most charts, behind such well-respected alternatives as the house-brand browsers of various phone OEMs that bundle them by default. #Microsoft edge browser overtakes as second mac#> I worked among people that used Mac and Unix back then and most of them were anti-Microsoft zealots or brainwashed by the anti-Microsoft zealots.Įxplain Edge on non-Windows platforms today then. It's a worse browser by just about every metric. > Look at Firefox - it's not doing anything like that, it's a better browser by a lot of metrics, and it's losing market share. Once we like something, we push our families, friends and businesses to use it. As well, Chrome got popular in tech circles before they even started doing that. It doesn't explain the rise of Firefox at all. And it goes against your idea that "users not doing something" is what gets you a higher market share. Google pushing Chrome from is nowhere near the same thing as "being the default browser". Furthermore, IE was the default on OSX from 1998-2003. Aside from that - they were in the vast minority, but more importantly: They weren't getting the same product as on Windows. I worked among people that used Mac and Unix back then and most of them were anti-Microsoft zealots or brainwashed by the anti-Microsoft zealots. #Microsoft edge browser overtakes as second for mac#> We can actually measure how much was "choice" and how much was "defaults" because at that time there were versions of IE for Mac and Unix. Look at Firefox - it's not doing anything like that, it's a better browser by a lot of metrics, and it's losing market share. "Good enough" and "gets installed by the user not doing something" consistently beats higher quality options for popularity. #Microsoft edge browser overtakes as second android#For a long time you couldn't go to in a non-Chrome browser without seeing a banner pushing Chrome, and it was bundled as a "you must notice and uncheck this box or Chrome will be installed as your default browser" option in a wide variety of popular third party software installers, and it's the default on most Android devices. Heck, you can still get Edge for macos/iOS and Android, how popular are they compared to on Windows?Īnd Chrome got popular in much the same way. Even when there were a lot of websites that only worked in IE. They were, shall we say, not as popular as the Windows version. We can actually measure how much was "choice" and how much was "defaults" because at that time there were versions of IE for Mac and Unix. But this particular article is really poor. Maybe Edge really will continue to claw a few points of market share, let's follow up in a few months. The real story should be, some Firefox/ IE users decided to try out the new Edge in the month of March, after a flashy new version was released. Come on man.įinally, it is just not that interesting. Also making points such as "While some expect Microsoft Edge to become the world’s top desktop browser.". The poster used the subtitle here, but the real title of the article is 'History in the Making: Microsoft Edge Overtakes Mozilla Firefox'. Other commenters have also pointed out data that conflicts this premise. Here is another data source that says otherwise. He is trying to hype it up as some sort of 'grand' milestone. The 'evidence' is in the form of a single screenshot, from his lone data source NetMarketShare. It it misleading, the writer is only considering desktop usage, and then constraining the data the the month of March. If you already clicked through, I'm sorry :) For anyone who comes straight to the comments, I recommend passing on this article.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |