4 ms·

This is an unfair comparison. No single version of Firefox has greater marketshare than any single version of Internet Explorer. If you take all version of Fi

This is an unfair comparison. No single version of Firefox has greater marketshare than any single version of Internet Explorer. If you take all version of Firefox together, yes they do beat the oldest version of Internet Explorer still in wide usage, IE6, but that's comparing apples and oranges. Web developers still have to target multiple versions of Firefox, and Firefox 2.x supports fewer things than Firefox 3.x. Likewise, developers still have to target IE6 (23.3% share), which supports even fewer web standards than pretty much every other version of every other major browser in wide usage. Nevertheless, it's hard to understand how this comparison is valid or significant.

tumult 17y ago
For the things Firefox supports between versions, it supports them infinitely more consistently than IE. That matters.
- Perceval 17y ago
  I agree. There is certainly far less hassle going between Firefox 2.0 and Firefox 3.5 than there is between IE6 and IE7 or IE8. That said, this is not really the substance of the article or the article's headline. The headline and the comparison don't really make much sense, unless you're basically trying to promote Firefox. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Firefox user and evangelist. But making flimsy comparisons isn't what got us here and it doesn't really help us think about the state of the web.
  - pbhjpbhj 17y ago
    Not a web developer by the sounds of it?
    - Perceval 17y ago
      I was an amateur web developer back when I was hand-coding my proto-blog in Notepad back in '99. Ah, those were the days of Netscape 4 and IE 4 & 5. Pretty much gave it up when my blogging withered away in '04. So I bowed out before the Browser Reconquista began and have missed all the excitement of IE6 versus IE7&8 versus Gecko versus Webkit. I can't imagine how thrilling it is...
unalone 17y ago
I just had a massive issue developing for Firefox. I spend the better part of yesterday fixing a handful of CSS bugs. It still doesn't work perfectly. I'm not very happy with Gecko at the moment. I asked a friend on Windows to test it and he showed me it on IE, crippled and appallingly broken. My advice was for him to find another web browser. I'm willing to make Firefox work but draw the line at IE.
- trafficlight 17y ago
  If you aren't developing for Firefox or IE, what are you developing for?
  - blasdel 17y ago
    WebKit, the least bullshit rendering engine available, and also the only one you can realistically target narrowly (iPhone/Android/Pre/etc.).
  - unalone 17y ago
    I develop initially for Webkit, in part because Coda offers a built-in Webkit preview that makes coding for it very fast and easy. Then I preview it in Opera and Firefox. I wish every web browser would switch to WebKit. It pains me how bad certain rendering engines are.
albemuth 17y ago
>>the oldest version of Internet Explorer still in wide usage, IE6, but that's comparing apples and oranges. Which is also the version with the most market share and the most problematic for web development, FF 2.x is only 1.14, I'm pretty sure most people focus only on the latest versions for FF/Safari.

tumult 17y ago

For the things Firefox supports between versions, it supports them infinitely more consistently than IE. That matters.

Perceval 17y ago
I agree. There is certainly far less hassle going between Firefox 2.0 and Firefox 3.5 than there is between IE6 and IE7 or IE8. That said, this is not really the substance of the article or the article's headline. The headline and the comparison don't really make much sense, unless you're basically trying to promote Firefox. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Firefox user and evangelist. But making flimsy comparisons isn't what got us here and it doesn't really help us think about the state of the web.
- pbhjpbhj 17y ago
  Not a web developer by the sounds of it?
  - Perceval 17y ago
    I was an amateur web developer back when I was hand-coding my proto-blog in Notepad back in '99. Ah, those were the days of Netscape 4 and IE 4 & 5. Pretty much gave it up when my blogging withered away in '04. So I bowed out before the Browser Reconquista began and have missed all the excitement of IE6 versus IE7&8 versus Gecko versus Webkit. I can't imagine how thrilling it is...

unalone 17y ago

I just had a massive issue developing for Firefox. I spend the better part of yesterday fixing a handful of CSS bugs. It still doesn't work perfectly. I'm not very happy with Gecko at the moment. I asked a friend on Windows to test it and he showed me it on IE, crippled and appallingly broken. My advice was for him to find another web browser. I'm willing to make Firefox work but draw the line at IE.

trafficlight 17y ago
If you aren't developing for Firefox or IE, what are you developing for?
- blasdel 17y ago
  WebKit, the least bullshit rendering engine available, and also the only one you can realistically target narrowly (iPhone/Android/Pre/etc.).
- unalone 17y ago
  I develop initially for Webkit, in part because Coda offers a built-in Webkit preview that makes coding for it very fast and easy. Then I preview it in Opera and Firefox. I wish every web browser would switch to WebKit. It pains me how bad certain rendering engines are.

albemuth 17y ago

>>the oldest version of Internet Explorer still in wide usage, IE6, but that's comparing apples and oranges. Which is also the version with the most market share and the most problematic for web development, FF 2.x is only 1.14, I'm pretty sure most people focus only on the latest versions for FF/Safari.