8 ms·
IE10 falls below IE9 in market share
- joshma 13y agoPretty misleading title, since IE10 isn't the latest version. IE11 is the latest and went from 11.51% to 12.80% (big jump compared to Chrome, 16.28% to 16.84%). Interesting (and slightly sad) that Firefox isn't gaining - in light of these stats, I'd say things don't look too shabby for IE. I'm not too familiar with IE (heh), but is the upgrade mechanism better in IE10? That might explain the higher drop.
- commandar 13y ago>I'm not too familiar with IE (heh), but is the upgrade mechanism better in IE10? That might explain the higher drop. I think that's the point. Users are actually upgrading from 10 to 11.
- Kerrick 13y agoYes, IE10 is the first IE that'll auto-upgrade to the next version, an evergreen browser.
- AshleysBrain 13y agoIE is hardly evergreen. IE11 is curiously not available on Windows 8.0, although it is available on Windows 7 and Windows 8.1. They also publish update blockers [1]. Maybe this is why StatCounter still shows a huge IE10 presence [2]. The point of an evergreen browser is to make older browser version shares negligable as quickly as possible, and it doesn't seem that's really happening. [1] http://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/download/details.aspx?id=40722 http://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/download/details.aspx?id=4072... [2] http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-browser_version_partially_combined-ww-daily-20140131-20140301 http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-browser_version_partially...
- sequence7 13y ago> IE is hardly evergreen. IE11 is curiously not available on Windows 8.0, although it is available on Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 Windows 8.0 will automatically update to Windows 8.1 so IE10 on Windows 8 will get automatically updated to IE11. > They also publish update blockers [1] You say this like it's a bad thing, some users don't want an evergreen browser. The point of the update blocker is to help those users.
- ch0wn 13y agoWhat about corporate installations? Is 8.0 -> 8.1 seemless enough or will there be a substantial delay in a standard enterprisey environment and thus creating a new browser isle?
- Encosia 13y ago8.0 should (hopefully) be a very short lived release in the wild. There's no reason at all not to upgrade to 8.1, even in a corporate setting, 8.1 is free, and the upgrade process is very smooth.
- richardw 13y agoAt one point CheckPoint VPN didn't support 8.1, now it does. One of my customers uses it so I held off upgrading. There could well be other apps with similar issues and big corporates would prefer others discover them.
- rlu 13y agoHmm, I think 8.0->8.1 actually isn't an auto update. Windows will continue to upsell you to 8.1 but it won't auto update.
- magicalist 13y agoIt's free, but, yeah, I had to open the Windows Store or whatever and actually make it update. It did not show up in the Windows Update list (not even in the "Suggested Updates").
- magic_haze 13y agoIE11 was bundled with windows 8.1, which fixed a bunch of idiotic features/annoyances in win8, so people had more incentive to upgrade.
- mutagen 13y agoThat was my immediate thought, the IE9 population reflects the non-upgraders that kept IE6 relevant long past the point it should have been.
- derefr 13y ago> Interesting (and slightly sad) that Firefox isn't gaining I'm guessing this has more to do with Chrome being easier to integrate into enterprise/group-policy-based deployment than anything to do with the choices of individual users, though. The only place I see Firefox on a PC in a "computer lab" or "thin-client" setting any more is when those PCs are also running Linux.
- sheetjs 13y agoI wonder if any of the gain can be attributed to the bundling deals. Had to install adobe acrobat reader recently and noticed they try to install chrome and the google bar for IE
- babuskov 13y agoAlso, if you're using an older browser on any Google web service they promote Chrome heavily.
- fauigerzigerk 13y agoThey promote it heavily regardless of whether or not your browser is older. But that's to be expected.
- moron4hire 13y agoI thought Chrome deployed on Windows as a ClickOnce app. ClickOnce is actually pretty awful for Group Policy deployments.
- eitally 13y agoGoogle publishes an .msi that can be pushed to pc's.
- broodbucket 13y agoSurely nothing to do with the fact that there's television commercials for Chrome, ads every time you go to the most visited website on the Internet, etc...
- sliverstorm 13y agoI don't think IE10 has a better mechanism. If memory serves you can't upgrade past IE9 on... what, XP? Vista? I forget which. But point being, IE9 is the end of the line for some of the Windows versions.
- oneeyedpigeon 13y agoIt's IE8 that is the last supported version under XP, hence the big share for that version. I wonder how that looks over time ...
- bztzt 13y agoIE8: XP/Vista/7 IE9: Vista/7 IE10: 7/8.0 IE11: 7/8.1
- yuhong 13y agoI think it is Vista.
- ben336 13y agoAnyone who can run IE9 can run IE10 or IE11 at this point. IE9 is only supported on Windows 7, which now supports 10 & 11.
- einhverfr 13y agoIt is still interesting though. It shows what I think we all know that Microsoft's most vicious competitor is Microsoft and it means that you have a few users who upgrade everything and many many more who never do.
- joshma 13y agoIn my opinion it's focusing on the wrong part. Between the two trends (IE11 growing or IE10 vs IE9) the former is more likely to continue and the latter is likely to end as more machines reach end of life.
- ZeroGravitas 13y agoYes, this is a good thing for everyone. You can see the same pattern when Firefox shifted to faster upgrades, the people on the old regime decayed slowly, while people on the new regime transitioned quickly. Its not even a new phenomenon, IE 9 plunged quickly (well, for an IE version) when IE10 started getting uptake, falling below IE 8: http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop+tablet-browser_version_partially_combined-ww-monthly-201302-201402 http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop+tablet-browser_version_pa... If you want bad news for Microsoft, it's not in the rankings of their previous two versions, but the fact that their decreasing market share is spread across so many versions, each of which is a bit pitiful when compared with a single version of Firefox, with even the last version of Chrome and iPad Safari showing up Microsoft's efforts: http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop+tablet-browser_version-ww-daily-20140223-20140301-bar http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop+tablet-browser_version-ww...
- cpncrunch 13y agoI'm a little surprised that their stats show IE having >50% market share. Most stats show IE having between 18% and 25% market share. My own sites show between 10% (for a tech site) and 15% (for a health site). I guess Net Applications is only sampling corporate users, who still tend to use old IE. My own stats show that IE11 has a higher number of visitors than any other version of IE.
- jeswin 13y agoI'd be surprised if more than 50% of computer users (55% IE * 90% Windows) changed their default browser. The vast majority of computer users are non-technical people, and they use the default browser unless someone changes it for them. But they also browse (far) less compared to people who use alternate browsers. So statistically, your sites have a much higher chance of registering Chrome and Firefox users than IE users. Add: OTOH, I think StatsCounter, Clicky and Wikimedia stats are more useful. They represent the "active" Internet population better. The ones who are more likely to come to your/any website.
- Encosia 13y ago+1 for Clicky's stats (https://clicky.com/marketshare/global/web-browsers/ https://clicky.com/marketshare/global/web-browsers/). It's also so important to filter down to geographic regions you care most about when looking at these stats. It's common to see developers/companies making browser support decisions based on global stats, even when they often derive most of their profits from a much smaller region (with different browser usage stats).
- taylorbuley 13y agoTo me this just means that on more modern version of Windows more people than not have enabled auto-updates. I'd guess corporations make up a good chunk of the staid browsers.
- drcoopster 13y agoNot a shock, corporate users are still catching up. Most that I've seen are thankfully off IE6 but only up to 8 or 9.
- xcrunner529 13y agoMost here are forced on IE 8 because PeopleSoft doesn't work on anything greater. It sucks. Luckily, we installed Chrome as a secondary choice for those who want it. And I work in IT so I install whatever I want :P
- Theodores 13y agoThese figures make no sense to me. The fact that we do not have meaningful browser statistics makes no sense either. Why is it so hard to get meaningful figures and why do the figures from the 'experts' vary so much? In some ways 'what browser do people use' is a bit like 'what language do people speak', except it should be easier to measure the statistics. Yet, unlike the situation with languages, we have a really hazy idea of what browsers are used. As a developer it is easy to get things working in developer preferred browsers to then be clueless about what percentage of your audience use IE and what versions. Does IE7 matter any more, or IE9? Do people with those browsers almost expect sites to look wrong?
- acdha 13y agoThe problem is that not all sites see the same kind of traffic. These figures are from NetMarketshare which gets most of their data from a modest number of large corporate sites[1] and uses their estimates to adjust traffic country by country. Their numbers skew heavily towards IE, so I'm assuming that their sites must see a lot of business users. If you run a site which was aimed at home users you'd see a much great representation for WebKit and I'm sure sites like HN, ArsTechnica, etc. have a higher percentage of the latest browsers. I have never worked on a site where the breakdown is close to NetMarketshare's figures. The ones from Akamai have been much closer, particularly internationally: http://www.akamai.com/html/io/io_dataset.html http://www.akamai.com/html/io/io_dataset.html 1. http://www.netmarketshare.com/faq.aspx#Methodology http://www.netmarketshare.com/faq.aspx#Methodology
- pbhjpbhj 13y ago>Yet, unlike the situation with languages, we have a really hazy idea of what browsers are used. // I use FF27 on Ubuntu, no wait I use FF28 on XP, no IE9 on Win7, no it's Safari, no Opera on Wii, no Opera Mobile, no ... it's all of them. But then I'm a special case, however I imagine that a lot of people use various browsers - home, work, mobile, etc.. As with language just having general stats is no use - what's it matter that Chinese is so popular across the world if I'm selling canoes to Amazonians? IE7 matters if your users use it and you want to make sure they have a good experience. It's not so relevant that most sites don't have high IE7 numbers, what does your site have; what will that support costs, what revenue will that support gain.
- sheetjs 13y agoCan someone explain why the Net Applications numbers are so different from the StatCounter numbers? I would expect some variation in counting "users" versus "page views" but the difference here is stark
- ianet-goog 13y agohttp://gs.statcounter.com/press/open-letter-ms http://gs.statcounter.com/press/open-letter-ms
- azakai 13y agoNetApps measures unique users. StatCounter measures page views. Those can be very very different, if some users browser more or if some users use more than one browser, both of which are probably true. So it is very possible both are accurate. Or that both are wrong.
- AshleysBrain 13y agoNet Applications apparently have a sample of 40,000 websites, whereas StatCounter have a sample of 3,000,000 [1]. StatCounter shows radically different numbers (e.g. Chrome by far the most used, whereas NA shows IE majority). IMO, StatCounter's numbers are more likely to be accurate. [1] http://gs.statcounter.com/press/open-letter-ms http://gs.statcounter.com/press/open-letter-ms
- filipedeschamps 13y agoNet Applications stats doesn't match at all my websites stats, not even close.
- Pacabel 13y agoDo the StatCounter stats match better?
- ricardobeat 13y agoExactly. Statcounter puts IE9 at 3.6% and IE10 at 4% which matches actual stats for most websites. It is true that in some countries IE has a much higher share than reported, but the aggregate is correct.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- azakai 13y agoThe size of the sample is irrelevant for its accuracy. That seems odd and statistics can be counterintuitive, but consider how a random sample of a few hundred people is enough to estimate who will win the elections within a few %. What matters - beyond a certain reasonable minimum size, which is a few hundred - is if the sample is random and unbiased. Both NetApps and StatCounter are far, far above the minimum size, so the only questions are the other factors. But more important to realize here is that they measure different things. StatCounter measures pages viewed, NetApps unique users. There is no reason to expect those to match up.
- 13y ago
- kijin 13y agoHow reliable are these numbers anyway? Other commenters have mentioned differences between NetApplications and StatCounter, but I suspect there are other factors that can heavily skew the apparent market share of different browsers. For example, it is already well known that programming-related websites get a higher than average share of non-IE visitors. I don't think this would affect the likes of NetApplications and StatCounter, because they're used by all sorts of websites. But ... ... it is also much easier to find and install an ad blocker in Chrome and Firefox than it is to do so in IE. Many of those ad blockers and similar extensions will also block the tracking beacons used by NetApplications and StatCounter. This probably has a negative effect on the apparent market shares of Chrome and Firefox. Especially the latter, I suspect, because lots of people who consciously choose Firefox nowdays do so for privacy reasons. (Can't trust Google anymore, etc.)
- ZenoArrow 13y agoIE9 is probably going to stick around for quite a while, it's the last version that Vista users have access to. IE8 should start dropping off at a faster rate after April, but will still be with us due to home owners who don't wish to upgrade past XP. What will be interesting to see is whether home users gravitate towards new PCs or tablets.
- stesch 13y agoI know of a bank which had just recently upgraded to IE9. :-( It's a pain in the ass to support this.
- kamjam 13y agoI know how you feel, please sign the petition: http://www.saveie6.com/ http://www.saveie6.com/
- jmnicolas 13y agoI don't understand IE7 : if you have it, it means you are able to upgrade from IE6, so why not IE8 ?
- kamjam 13y agoSometimes it is corporate policy, meaning if you are on a work computer you can't manually update it yourself. There are still some legacy applications that require a specific version of IE, or specific IE functionality, in order to work correctly. The cost of "fixing" the application to work correctly may cost too much or be too much effort. Of course, there may be others who may have no idea how to update, no doubt there is a whole group of (older) users where auto-update may be turned off and no idea the update process exists.
- hiphopyo 13y agoThe Android browser is the new IE: http://www.mobilexweb.com/blog/android-browser-eternal-dying http://www.mobilexweb.com/blog/android-browser-eternal-dying
- puppetmaster3 13y agoI think IE is covered, but: "Android is the new IE". Think of % of 2.x.
- djKianoosh 13y agoFWIW, several DHS department level IT shops are moving to IE11 in a few months. I'm at one where after they've been at IE8 for so many years, they jumped to IE10 last fall and IE11 is around the corner. Love it. It's been so nice not having to support IE < 10 the last several months. And IE11's dev tools, while still a little clunky to get around, are very comparable to Firefox/Chrome for most of the features. We also still have some users that haven't upgraded (also smaller resolution monitors) but all less than 10%.
- rbanffy 13y agoWhat's wrong with line (or area) charts to chart values that change over time?