Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Firefox > Firefox numbers les then 10%

Reply
Thread Tools

Firefox numbers les then 10%

 
 
NetX
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2007
Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.

seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.


http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-fir.asp/3457/



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RichCI
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2007
On Feb 6, 10:06 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
> Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.
>
> seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
>
> http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-redux--micros...



The way I see it, if you're writing valid, well structured HTML, it
doesn't matter which browser your visitors are using. Your pages
should display well in both or, if you really feel you need you have
to use something specific to IE, then your pages should fail
gracefully in other browsers.

Finally, if you decide to code for only IE and let the chips fall
where they may for other browsers, you need to decide how many users
5% includes depending on your site traffic. If your site gets
1,000,000 hits per month, are you willing to turn away 50,000
potential visitors or customers?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2007
On 2007-02-06, NetX <no@one> wrote:

> Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.
>
> seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
>
>
> http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-fir.asp/3457/


I've gotta laugh, NetX. The article you cited above really doesn't
support your case at all. After going through all the browser statistics
and showing that FireFox is the only browser showing any degree of
voluntary uptake by users, it concludes with this paragraph:

Most pressingly: will Firefox ever overtake Internet Explorer after
starting the chase on April 3rd 2003? Well, ask us in another three
years time and it's not inconceivable that you would get an
affirmative.

Did you actually read the article, or just look at the pretty graphs?

--

John ((E-Mail Removed))
 
Reply With Quote
 
Captain Infinity
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-06-2007
Once Upon A Time NetX wrote:

>Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.
>
>seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
>
>
>http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-fir.asp/3457/


"Perhaps this is a true example of Christmas cheer, as bubbly frothing
tech-geeks over the world open their new iMacs with joy and play with
them for the first time?"

Bubbly frothing tech-geeks? Who does this writer think his audience is?


**
Captain Infinity
 
Reply With Quote
 
NetX
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2007

"RichCI" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> On Feb 6, 10:06 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
>> Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.
>>
>> seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
>>
>> http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-redux--micros...

>
>
> The way I see it, if you're writing valid, well structured HTML, it
> doesn't matter which browser your visitors are using. Your pages
> should display well in both or, if you really feel you need you have
> to use something specific to IE, then your pages should fail
> gracefully in other browsers.



yes correct, but there is a lot more you can do with IE than FF



>
> Finally, if you decide to code for only IE and let the chips fall
> where they may for other browsers, you need to decide how many users
> 5% includes depending on your site traffic.



where did you get the idea someone had codded only for IE?


If your site gets
> 1,000,000 hits per month, are you willing to turn away 50,000
> potential visitors or customers?
>


I don't think you read the post correctly


 
Reply With Quote
 
NetX
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2007

"John Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)2.dhs.org> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)2.dhs.org...
> On 2007-02-06, NetX <no@one> wrote:
>
>> Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.
>>
>> seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.
>>
>>
>> http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-fir.asp/3457/

>
> I've gotta laugh, NetX. The article you cited above really doesn't
> support your case at all. After going through all the browser statistics
> and showing that FireFox is the only browser showing any degree of
> voluntary uptake by users, it concludes with this paragraph:
>
> Most pressingly: will Firefox ever overtake Internet Explorer after
> starting the chase on April 3rd 2003? Well, ask us in another three
> years time and it's not inconceivable that you would get an
> affirmative.
>
> Did you actually read the article, or just look at the pretty graphs?
>



you seem to be getting upset


> John ((E-Mail Removed))



 
Reply With Quote
 
RichCI
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2007
On Feb 7, 5:36 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
> "RichCI" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>
> > On Feb 6, 10:06 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
> >> Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.

>
> >> seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.

>
> >>http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-redux--micros...

>
> > The way I see it, if you're writing valid, well structured HTML, it
> > doesn't matter which browser your visitors are using. Your pages
> > should display well in both or, if you really feel you need you have
> > to use something specific to IE, then your pages should fail
> > gracefully in other browsers.

>
> yes correct, but there is a lot more you can do with IE than FF
>
>
>
> > Finally, if you decide to code for only IE and let the chips fall
> > where they may for other browsers, you need to decide how many users
> > 5% includes depending on your site traffic.

>
> where did you get the idea someone had codded only for IE?
>
> If your site gets
>
> > 1,000,000 hits per month, are you willing to turn away 50,000
> > potential visitors or customers?

>
> I don't think you read the post correctly



I should have been more clear, but the point I was attempting to make
is that browser stats aren't very useful. Personally, I don't care
which browser a user has as I code my commercial web sites so that
they should work equally well no matter what a person is viewing it
with.

With commercial sites, I can't get hung up on cool little stylistic
elements just for the sake of style if it messes up how the page looks
in other browsers and budget and/or time constraints don't always
allow for doing browser detection to display the page two different
ways depending on the agent (for the most part, I think that's a waste
of time for style elements anyway unless it's Flash where the software
generates that code for you anyway).

If it's an corporate intranet site where the company has a standard
web browser all employees must use then sure, have at it and code
using browser-specific elements as you know what your audience *will*
be using. Otherwise, I recommend validating all code using W3C
standards.

 
Reply With Quote
 
NetX
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2007

"RichCI" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> On Feb 7, 5:36 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
>> "RichCI" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>
>> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>>
>> > On Feb 6, 10:06 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
>> >> Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.

>>
>> >> seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.

>>
>> >>http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-redux--micros...

>>
>> > The way I see it, if you're writing valid, well structured HTML, it
>> > doesn't matter which browser your visitors are using. Your pages
>> > should display well in both or, if you really feel you need you have
>> > to use something specific to IE, then your pages should fail
>> > gracefully in other browsers.

>>
>> yes correct, but there is a lot more you can do with IE than FF
>>
>>
>>
>> > Finally, if you decide to code for only IE and let the chips fall
>> > where they may for other browsers, you need to decide how many users
>> > 5% includes depending on your site traffic.

>>
>> where did you get the idea someone had codded only for IE?
>>
>> If your site gets
>>
>> > 1,000,000 hits per month, are you willing to turn away 50,000
>> > potential visitors or customers?

>>
>> I don't think you read the post correctly

>
>
> I should have been more clear, but the point I was attempting to make
> is that browser stats aren't very useful. Personally, I don't care
> which browser a user has as I code my commercial web sites so that
> they should work equally well no matter what a person is viewing it
> with.
>
> With commercial sites, I can't get hung up on cool little stylistic
> elements just for the sake of style if it messes up how the page looks
> in other browsers and budget and/or time constraints don't always
> allow for doing browser detection to display the page two different
> ways depending on the agent (for the most part, I think that's a waste
> of time for style elements anyway unless it's Flash where the software
> generates that code for you anyway).
>
> If it's an corporate intranet site where the company has a standard
> web browser all employees must use then sure, have at it and code
> using browser-specific elements as you know what your audience *will*
> be using. Otherwise, I recommend validating all code using W3C
> standards.
>



For the most part I agree, but the use of flash I don't agree, as many
people do not install flash. But many clients want features that may not
work on all browsers. One such feature that comes to mind is filters, and
this leads to annoying work arounds. I tend to use object detection rather
than browser detection, as browsers in the future may employ the object and
the page can then render the object without having to rewrite the page. I
don't believe in lowing the feature set to the lowest common denominator.


 
Reply With Quote
 
RichCI
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-07-2007
On Feb 7, 10:12 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
> "RichCI" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Feb 7, 5:36 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
> >> "RichCI" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

>
> >>news:(E-Mail Removed) roups.com...

>
> >> > On Feb 6, 10:06 am, "NetX" <no@one> wrote:
> >> >> Figures from my web sites show firefox about 5% of hits.

>
> >> >> seems I'm not the only one that sees it that way.

>
> >> >>http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/ar...-redux--micros...

>
> >> > The way I see it, if you're writing valid, well structured HTML, it
> >> > doesn't matter which browser your visitors are using. Your pages
> >> > should display well in both or, if you really feel you need you have
> >> > to use something specific to IE, then your pages should fail
> >> > gracefully in other browsers.

>
> >> yes correct, but there is a lot more you can do with IE than FF

>
> >> > Finally, if you decide to code for only IE and let the chips fall
> >> > where they may for other browsers, you need to decide how many users
> >> > 5% includes depending on your site traffic.

>
> >> where did you get the idea someone had codded only for IE?

>
> >> If your site gets

>
> >> > 1,000,000 hits per month, are you willing to turn away 50,000
> >> > potential visitors or customers?

>
> >> I don't think you read the post correctly

>
> > I should have been more clear, but the point I was attempting to make
> > is that browser stats aren't very useful. Personally, I don't care
> > which browser a user has as I code my commercial web sites so that
> > they should work equally well no matter what a person is viewing it
> > with.

>
> > With commercial sites, I can't get hung up on cool little stylistic
> > elements just for the sake of style if it messes up how the page looks
> > in other browsers and budget and/or time constraints don't always
> > allow for doing browser detection to display the page two different
> > ways depending on the agent (for the most part, I think that's a waste
> > of time for style elements anyway unless it's Flash where the software
> > generates that code for you anyway).

>
> > If it's an corporate intranet site where the company has a standard
> > web browser all employees must use then sure, have at it and code
> > using browser-specific elements as you know what your audience *will*
> > be using. Otherwise, I recommend validating all code using W3C
> > standards.

>
> For the most part I agree, but the use of flash I don't agree, as many
> people do not install flash. But many clients want features that may not
> work on all browsers.


I'm with you there and prefer to use Flash in only noncritical areas.
Actually, I'm not even a big fan of Flash to begin with unless it
serves some purpose that can't be accomplished through more standard
means but at least there's a prompt asking the user if they would like
to install the plug in.

> One such feature that comes to mind is filters, and
> this leads to annoying work arounds. I tend to use object detection rather
> than browser detection, as browsers in the future may employ the object and
> the page can then render the object without having to rewrite the page. I
> don't believe in lowing the feature set to the lowest common denominator.


Yeah, it's a judgment call. I still try to avoid having to having to
do any kind of detection in the first place though but you do what you
have to do as the business areas demand.

 
Reply With Quote
 
John Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2007
On 2007-02-07, NetX <no@one> wrote:

> "John Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)2.dhs.org> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)2.dhs.org...


>> I've gotta laugh, NetX. The article you cited above really doesn't
>> support your case at all. After going through all the browser statistics
>> and showing that FireFox is the only browser showing any degree of
>> voluntary uptake by users, it concludes with this paragraph:
>>
>> Most pressingly: will Firefox ever overtake Internet Explorer after
>> starting the chase on April 3rd 2003? Well, ask us in another three
>> years time and it's not inconceivable that you would get an
>> affirmative.
>>
>> Did you actually read the article, or just look at the pretty graphs?


> you seem to be getting upset


No; as I mentioned above, I was laughing. Now, please answer: did you
read the article? If so, how did you come to a conclusion diametrically
opposite to that of the authors?

--

John ((E-Mail Removed))
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Les Chinois, les chiens et les JO Le Patriote Digital Photography 1 07-24-2008 09:20 AM
Help. SessionID is x then y then x then y BodiKlamph@gmail.com ASP General 0 09-03-2005 03:02 PM
Re: Acceptez gratuitement les cartes de crédits sur votre site /* MCSBNGP+++ #270-290-291-293-294-298-299# */ MCSE 0 08-01-2005 03:18 PM
Re: Acceptez gratuitement les cartes de crédits sur votre site Frisbee® MCSE 0 08-01-2005 03:16 PM
somes photo (les mimosas) Srgetv Digital Photography 2 01-29-2004 12:21 AM



Advertisments