Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday May 18 2016, @01:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the Firefox-has-the-Edge? dept.

Firefox has gingerly pulled ahead of Microsoft's Internet Explorer and Edge browsers for the first time across the globe.

Mozilla's Firefox grabbed 15.6 percent of worldwide desktop browser usage in April, according to the latest numbers from Web analytics outfit StatCounter.

However, neither browser threatens the market leader—Google's Chrome continues to command two thirds of the market.

StatCounter, which analysed data from three million websites, found that Firefox's worldwide desktop browser usage last month was 0.1 percent ahead of the combined share of Internet Explorer and Edge at 15.5 percent.

Although it does often seem that Firefox has pulled ahead of MS in memory usage...


Original Submission

Related Stories

Firefox Browser Use Drops as Mozilla's Worst Microsoft Edge Fears Come True 133 comments

Firefox Browser Use Drops As Mozilla's Worst Microsoft Edge Fears Come True

Back in April, we reported that the Edge browser is quickly gaining market share now that Microsoft has transitioned from the EdgeHTML engine to the more widely used Chromium engine (which also underpins Google's Chrome browser). At the time, Edge slipped into the second-place slot for desktop web browsers, with a 7.59 percent share of the market. This dropped Mozilla's Firefox – which has long been the second-place browser behind Chrome – into third place.

Now, at the start of August, we're getting some fresh numbers in for the desktop browser market, and things aren't looking good for Mozilla. Microsoft increased its share of the browser market from 8.07 percent in June to 8.46 percent in July. Likewise, Firefox fell from 7.58 percent to 7.27 percent according to NetMarketShare.

[...] As for Mozilla, the company wasn't too happy when Microsoft first announced that it was going to use Chromium for Edge way back in December 2018. Mozilla's Chris Beard at the time accused Microsoft of "giving up" by abandoning EdgeHTML in favor of Chromium. "Microsoft's decision gives Google more ability to single-handedly decide what possibilities are available to each one of us," said Beard at the time. "We compete with Google because the health of the internet and online life depend on competition and choice."

[...] Microsoft developer Kenneth Auchenberg fought back the following January, writing, "Thought: It's time for Mozilla to get down from their philosophical ivory tower. The web is dominated by Chromium, if they really *cared* about the web they would be contributing instead of building a parallel universe that's used by less than 5 percent."

Is the browser monoculture inevitable or will Firefox hang in there?

Previously:


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by b0ru on Wednesday May 18 2016, @01:43PM

    by b0ru (6054) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @01:43PM (#347810)

    It could just be that Edge is _that_ bad, and people are ditching it more quickly. Firefox, if anything, has gotten worse and worse; it's been enough to drive me, and other long time MIS/Seamonkey/Firefox users, off to find other browsers -- in my case, Pale Moon (when `links -g` doesn't suffice). It's a fork of Firefox when it was far less obnoxious and slow. Plugins are, for the most part, compatible, where no alternatives exist: I use pendactyl, ublock origin, umatrix, user agent switcher, foxy proxy and noscript in various configurations, all without issue.

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by AndyTheAbsurd on Wednesday May 18 2016, @01:55PM

      by AndyTheAbsurd (3958) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @01:55PM (#347815) Journal

      Pale Moon began as a fork of Firefox; it's diverged far enough that it's effectively it's own thing now (unlike several other "alternative" browsers that are essentially just rebrands of Firefox). And the Pale Moon devs have committed to continuing to support XUL-based extensions, which Mozilla will be deprecating, so existing extensions that work today should continue to work for the foreseeable future.

      For those interested in checking it out: Main website [palemoon.org], 64-bit Windows version [palemoon.org], 32-bit Windows version [palemoon.org], special build for people still on XP [palemoon.org] (although if you're still on XP, you're probably crazy IMO), and Pale Moon for Linux site [palemoon.org].

      --
      Please note my username before responding. You may have been trolled.
      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by tangomargarine on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:12PM

        by tangomargarine (667) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:12PM (#347824)

        It'll be interesting to see what happens when they switch over the extension system. I mean, Mozilla is the one hosting the database, so at least some rehosting will need to be done.

        And to see how many extension developers are okay with completely rewriting their stuff, assuming it's even possible with the Chromification.

        --
        "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
        • (Score: 4, Informative) by AndyTheAbsurd on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:32PM

          by AndyTheAbsurd (3958) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:32PM (#347834) Journal

          The developers of Pale Moon have been working on a mirror of addons.mozilla.org (codename Project Looking Glass), so there's at least some work that's been done for that already; plus they've already got their own addons.palemoon.org [palemoon.org]. I don't think that Project Looking Glass has been mentioned publicly by anyone working on the project outside of their IRC channel, though, as it's not complete and I don't see any mention of it on their forum.

          --
          Please note my username before responding. You may have been trolled.
          • (Score: 2) by BananaPhone on Wednesday May 18 2016, @03:41PM

            by BananaPhone (2488) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @03:41PM (#347864)

            They better start squawking about it or else 50+% will just go to Chrome when the kill the extension support.
            And that's even if Moz blinks and bring it back.

            Pale moon could double it's user-base when Moz aims higher than their feet.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:10PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:10PM (#347822)

      > It could just be that Edge is _that_ bad, and people are ditching it more quickly.

      From the chart, the rate of ditching is decreasing, not increasing.

      Something missing from these reports is the total size of the market. Telling us the percentage breakdown is only half the story. If the total number of users is growing even a diminishing marketshare could still mean an increasing number of users.

    • (Score: 1, Redundant) by Gravis on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:21PM

      by Gravis (4596) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:21PM (#347829)

      It could just be that Edge is _that_ bad, and people are ditching it more quickly.

      if you had bothered to even look at the big ol' graph in the article, you would have seen that both Firefox and IE/Edge shares are shrinking and that the one for IE/Edge is just shrinking faster. so yeah, the data is backing up what you presumed.

  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:10PM

    by VLM (445) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:10PM (#347823)

    Is NPAPI dead across all browsers yet? Or is that still a "Chrome Thing"?

    Nothing says real world enterprise software like being years behind the times.

    • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:56PM

      by Nerdfest (80) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @02:56PM (#347840)

      I think the definition of "enterprise" also includes "slow", and "expensive".

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @03:23PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @03:23PM (#347855)

    More attention from the world's hackers!

  • (Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday May 18 2016, @04:01PM

    by bzipitidoo (4388) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday May 18 2016, @04:01PM (#347872) Journal

    I recall an article a few months ago about Firefox's share dropping below the magic double digit line, 10%. What's going on, is browser usage really fluctuating that much, or do we have a case of biased application and reporting of statistics?

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @05:04PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @05:04PM (#347894)

      Web browser statistics vary wildly depending on what web sites are measured and whether the measurements depend on allowing JavaScript or 3rd party web bugs. More proficient users are much more likely to block those. Also, IE users are among the least technical and least likely to change or spoof user agent which is used to make some of the figures.

      It's a mess. Lies, damned lies, and statistics!

  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @04:17PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @04:17PM (#347882)

    i think  firefox user share as been constant since day one.
    there were less internet users but 100000 firefox users.
    15 years later there are wayyy more internet "users" but there are still 100000 firefox users.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @08:19PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @08:19PM (#347994)

      Not to mention that most new additions to the Internet's population are normies browsing on Android phones--which is often their only "computer". Hell, they probably don't know you can even install alternative browsers. They just use what comes preinstalled; for most of them that's Google Chrome.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @08:56PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @08:56PM (#348015)

        actually my original comment was a bit "tongue in cheek".
        Not everything should be about market-share.
        firefox/mozilla "sold itself" as a thing from users for users and not "say "AHHHH!" and we are going to stuff it down your throat, like it or not, we are $oft
        and we are like a bad tooth-ache on each and every new computer straight out of the box".

        On a side note: I can "sell" the firefox mobile version pretty good with the fact that you can open youtube in one tab
        browse to another tab (or even another progra... err app) and ... the sound continues : )
        so you can, for example, listen to a youtube video in firefox mobile (minimized) and use some pdf reader app to read something.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @05:15PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 18 2016, @05:15PM (#347901)

    Both are shrinking via market-share loss to Chrome. It's like bragging that your side of the Titanic is sinking slower than Microsoft's side.

    • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday May 18 2016, @06:27PM

      by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @06:27PM (#347933)

      It's not sinking, it's just downsizing to its own lifeboats.
      Fine by me, smaller profile means less chance of getting hit by the next attack.

      • (Score: 4, Funny) by NoMaster on Wednesday May 18 2016, @11:25PM

        by NoMaster (3543) on Wednesday May 18 2016, @11:25PM (#348072)

        Not "downsizing".

        "Incentivizing the use of outsourced floatation functions by strategic divestiture of in-house assets and functions, creating a vibrant and diversified culture of in-lifeboat groups and out-of-lifeboat individual opportunities..."

        --
        Live free or fuck off and take your naïve Libertarian fantasies with you...
    • (Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Thursday May 19 2016, @02:29AM

      by Capt. Obvious (6089) on Thursday May 19 2016, @02:29AM (#348116)

      I always wonder whether Chrome is a really buggy browser, or if its because it runs all the JS it comes across. But FF and even IE work fine. Chrome is constantly locking up.

      Chrome has now been downgraded to just running Google-hosted websites. And, frankly, even then, it crashes daily.

      • (Score: 1) by toddestan on Saturday May 21 2016, @05:10PM

        by toddestan (4982) on Saturday May 21 2016, @05:10PM (#349138)

        Chrome is pretty buggy. The only reason it's not more obvious is because it's impossible to ignore so everyone makes sure that their website works with the latest Chrome. But try an a version that's a few old and you'll find a lot of stuff is broken. Browse with a version of Firefox that's a few versions back and the experience really isn't any different because Firefox stays a lot closer to the standards (whereas Webkit/Blink like to make up their own standards).

        If you ask me, Google is trying really hard to turn Chrome into what Internet Explorer was 15 years ago.

        • (Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Saturday May 21 2016, @10:09PM

          by Capt. Obvious (6089) on Saturday May 21 2016, @10:09PM (#349282)

          Which I would understand (but hate) as a strategic decision. But, as I said, even Google's own site/services are buggy in Chrome. (Although on the computer with an outdated version of Chrome, it seems to still work, and only on the computer with auto-updating Chrome is there a problem).

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by stormwyrm on Thursday May 19 2016, @02:26AM

    by stormwyrm (717) on Thursday May 19 2016, @02:26AM (#348114) Journal
    I wonder what browser user agents are seen by SoylentNews itself. That might be interesting, and I imagine it should have a larger proportion of Firefox and Pale Moon, though Chrome and Chromium might still be high, and I doubt Edge or IE would have a large proportion, despite all of that "surfing at work" that we used to hear about at the old site.
    --
    Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
  • (Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Thursday May 19 2016, @02:27AM

    by MichaelDavidCrawford (2339) Subscriber Badge <mdcrawford@gmail.com> on Thursday May 19 2016, @02:27AM (#348115) Homepage Journal

    Somewhere I found a demographic chart of who visits my website with Bing. It may have been in Bing Webmaster Tools but I don't recall.

    Those who find my site with Bing are overwhelmingly either low- or high-income. Those in the middle class use Google.

    I expect this is because cheap computers come with Windows, and because business users overwhelmingly use Windows. Most people use the browser that's built in.

    The middle class uses Macintoshes, or at least knows how to find a search engine all by their lonesomes.

    --
    Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]