www.jpgimage.co.uk/full.php?image=474

A screenshot of a website i brought online a couple of hours ago .

I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear 
that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter 
uses to surf the net .

On 11/12/07 10:48 pm, in article
MPG.21c92407f4ce9a5298b072@news.newsreader.com, "Krustov" 
wrote:

> www.jpgimage.co.uk/full.php?image=474
> 
> A screenshot of a website i brought online a couple of hours ago .
> 
> I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear
> that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter
> uses to surf the net .
> 

No shit Sherlock!

Betamax was streets ahead of VHS too.  It's got nothing to do with nothing.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

<uk.net.web.authoring>
<Andy Jacobs>
<Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:15:28 +0000>
<C384CA90.EC25%nospam@redcatgroup.co.uk>

> > www.jpgimage.co.uk/full.php?image=474
> > 
> > A screenshot of a website i brought online a couple of hours ago .
> > 
> > I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear
> > that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter
> > uses to surf the net .
> > 
> 
> No shit Sherlock!
> 
> Betamax was streets ahead of VHS too.  It's got nothing to do with nothing
> 

Who is krusty to argue with somebody who earns a living on the net .

For its clear you do something that nobody else is capable of .

"Krustov"  wrote in message 
news:MPG.21c92407f4ce9a5298b072@news.newsreader.com...
> www.jpgimage.co.uk/full.php?image=474
>
> A screenshot of a website i brought online a couple of hours ago .
>
> I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear
> that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter
> uses to surf the net .

December stats for crackguitar show
66% IE
22.5% FF
6.7% Opera

On Dec 12, 10:15 am, Andy Jacobs  wrote:
> On 11/12/07 10:48 pm, in article
> MPG.21c92407f4ce9a5298b...@news.newsreader.com, "Krustov" 
> wrote:
>
> >www.jpgimage.co.uk/full.php?image=474
>
> > A screenshot of a website i brought online a couple of hours ago .
>
> > I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear
> > that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter
> > uses to surf the net .
>
> No shit Sherlock!
>
> Betamax was streets ahead of VHS too.  It's got nothing to do with nothing.
>
Hmmm yeah, it does not mean a lot. Considering that some users can
just spoof the user agent string anyway.
Another thing to think about is that most comercial screen readers
just use IE as the web browser.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org

Message-ID:  from
Krustov contained the following:

>I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear 
>that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter 
>uses to surf the net .

You mean the browser that comes with the OS has more users than the one
that users actually have to take trouble to download and install?

Who'd a thunk it?

Why not build a page to check if people think that rain is wet?

-- 
Geoff Berrow  0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011

On 12/12/07 12:17 am, in article jMF7j.4092$Hc3.1601@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net,
"dE|_"  wrote:

> 
> "Krustov"  wrote in message
> news:MPG.21c92407f4ce9a5298b072@news.newsreader.com...
>> www.jpgimage.co.uk/full.php?image=474
>> 
>> A screenshot of a website i brought online a couple of hours ago .
>> 
>> I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear
>> that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter
>> uses to surf the net .
> 
> December stats for crackguitar show
> 66% IE
> 22.5% FF
> 6.7% Opera 
> 
> 

I'm not convinced that's wholly accurate.  I bet IE actually accounts for
80-85%, FF 10-15% and the balance made up of others.  Opera is going to see
an increase as it's standard on a lot of mobile devices.  Compared with
Minimo which is horribly unstable, it's the only main stream one that I've
found to be useable.

-- 
Andy Jacobs
http://www.redcatmedia.co.uk

<uk.net.web.authoring>
<Geoff Berrow>
<Wed, 12 Dec 2007 07:31:32 +0000>


> >I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear 
> >that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter 
> >uses to surf the net .
> 
> You mean the browser that comes with the OS has more users than the one
> that users actually have to take trouble to download and install?
> 
> Who'd a thunk it?
> 
> Why not build a page to check if people think that rain is wet?
> 

Haw obi wan - wot do you think of the actual guestbook in general and 
the 'browse entrys' option instead of the usual pagnation stuff ? .
 

www.thedarwins.co.uk

"Andy Jacobs" wrote in reply...
>>> A screenshot of a website i brought online a couple of hours ago .
>>>
>>> I've been monitoring the website for a couple of hours and its clear
>>> that ie whups fartfox in terms of what mr and mrs average joe punter
>>> uses to surf the net .
>>
>> December stats for crackguitar show
>> 66% IE
>> 22.5% FF
>> 6.7% Opera
>>
>>
>
> I'm not convinced that's wholly accurate.  I bet IE actually accounts for
> 80-85%, FF 10-15% and the balance made up of others.  Opera is going to 
> see
> an increase as it's standard on a lot of mobile devices.  Compared with
> Minimo which is horribly unstable, it's the only main stream one that I've
> found to be useable.

Well I kept it brief, there was the full list with all the others;

IE 66%
FF 22.5%
Saf 6.7%
Op 2.2%
Moz 0.9%
Kon 0.8%
Cam 0.2%
? 0.1%
Nets 0% (4 hits)

That's worked on 4028 'hits'* so it's a pretty good source of averaging.

*62% US, but November got 21 pages viewed from Hong Kong :)

---dE|_---

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:48:45 GMT, dE|_ wrote:
> [snip discussion of browser market share]
> IE 66%
> FF 22.5%
> Saf 6.7%
> Op 2.2%
> Moz 0.9%
> Kon 0.8%
> Cam 0.2%
> ? 0.1%
> Nets 0% (4 hits)
> 
> That's worked on 4028 'hits'* so it's a pretty good source of averaging.
> 
> *62% US, but November got 21 pages viewed from Hong Kong :)


There's very little point in quoting statistics for our own sites, as
there's no reason to think our own sites are at all representative. My
site, for instance, has a fair quantity of technical material, and receives
most of its visits from Europe (where Firefox is much more popular). The
last 300,246 hits gave this distribution (once apparent crawlers are
removed), which I've no doubt is not what most sites see:


46%      Gecko based
46%      Internet Explorer based
6.4%     KHTML based
2.4%     Opera
0.017%   Nokia (embedded)
0.014%   NetFront
0.0066%  IBrowse
0.0045%  Sony Ericsson (embedded)
0.0017%  AWeb
0.0017%  Blackberry (embedded)
0.0014%  Lynx
0.0014%  NTTDoCoMo (embedded)
0.0010%  KDDI (embedded)
0.00069% Dillo


-- 
Safalra (Stephen Morley)

Web Browser Market Share:
http://www.safalra.com/website/web-browser-market-share/

"Safalra (Stephen Morley)"  wrote...
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:48:45 GMT, dE|_ wrote:
>> [snip discussion of browser market share]
>> IE 66%
>> FF 22.5%
>> Saf 6.7%
>> Op 2.2%
>> Moz 0.9%
>> Kon 0.8%
>> Cam 0.2%
>> ? 0.1%
>> Nets 0% (4 hits)
>>
>> That's worked on 4028 'hits'* so it's a pretty good source of averaging.
>>
>> *62% US, but November got 21 pages viewed from Hong Kong :)
>
>
> There's very little point in quoting statistics for our own sites, as
> there's no reason to think our own sites are at all representative. My
> site, for instance, has a fair quantity of technical material, and 
> receives
> most of its visits from Europe (where Firefox is much more popular). The
> last 300,246 hits gave this distribution (once apparent crawlers are
> removed), which I've no doubt is not what most sites see:

Stats provider on my new server does eliminate spiders from the figures, old 
one didn't. There's 3 generators actualy.

I am aware of your international issue, that's why I informed of the 
majority US.

> 46%      Gecko based
> 46%      Internet Explorer based
> 6.4%     KHTML based
> 2.4%     Opera
> 0.017%   Nokia (embedded)
> 0.014%   NetFront
> 0.0066%  IBrowse
> 0.0045%  Sony Ericsson (embedded)
> 0.0017%  AWeb
> 0.0017%  Blackberry (embedded)
> 0.0014%  Lynx
> 0.0014%  NTTDoCoMo (embedded)
> 0.0010%  KDDI (embedded)
> 0.00069% Dillo

Have a nice day.

---dE|_---

Safalra (Stephen Morley) wrote:

> There's very little point in quoting statistics for our own sites, as
> there's no reason to think our own sites are at all representative.

Similarly though, there's also no reason to assume that they're not 
representative.

-- 
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
[Geek of HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python/Apache/Linux]
[OS: Linux 2.6.17.14-mm-desktop-9mdvsmp, up 5 days, 22:05.]

                      Sharing Music with Apple iTunes
          http://tobyinkster.co.uk/blog/2007/11/28/itunes-sharing/

Geoff Berrow wrote:
>
> You mean the browser that comes with the OS has more users than the one
> that users actually have to take trouble to download and install?

IE has improved a great deal in its most recent version. Would this have
happened if not for competitors, mainly FF?
(I do continue to use Firefox, mainly for the NoScript extension - but that
is too much of a nuisance for the average user to be bothered.)
-- 
Tony W
My e-mail address has no hyphen
- but please don't use it, reply to the group.

"Tony"  wrote
>>
>> You mean the browser that comes with the OS has more users than the one
>> that users actually have to take trouble to download and install?
>
> IE has improved a great deal in its most recent version. Would this have
> happened if not for competitors, mainly FF?
> (I do continue to use Firefox, mainly for the NoScript extension - but 
> that
> is too much of a nuisance for the average user to be bothered.)

I prefer IE because the smooth text is more comfortable to read. Frankly 
I've not used FF enough to come across major differences.

Now that I get my images for sites from istockphoto rather than Google I 
have to use FF there, it crashes IE in seconds.

---dE|_---