Open source browsers put pressure on IE in 2009
Summary: Microsoft's ability to hold off open source rivals is weakening.Even as its proprietary browser market share is dropping hard, execs agreed to offer support for competitive browsers with its Windows operating system in exchange for an end to its legal nightmares in Europe.
Microsoft's ability to hold off open source rivals is weakening.
Even as its proprietary browser market share is dropping hard, execs agreed to offer support for competitive browsers with its Windows operating system in exchange for an end to its legal nightmares in Europe.
It's a win for the community in Europe but I'm not sure the open source rivals need the help. According to Net Applications' statistics, Microsoft's Internet Explorer market share has dropped more than 5 percent to 64 percent since January of 2009. Its share was roughly 70 percent at the start of the year, and it was at 75 percent in mid 2008.
Its share has fallen mostly to the two leading open source browsers, Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome. Google's Chrome has increased to 4 percent market share from 1.5 percent at the start of 2009. Google's browser -- whose use will no doubt increase after the release of the complementary Google operating system late next year -- was first released in September of 2008. Not bad for 14 months on the market.
Meanwhile, market share of the leading open source browser, Mozilla Firefox, climbed to roughly 25 percent over the past year, also up 3 percentage points to 24.72 percent in November. Its share was 22 percent at the beginning of this year.
Opera stayed roughly the same with two percent market share, according to Net Applications. [Correction: Opera is not an open source browser, as this story claimed earlier and as one reader pointed out as incorrect. My regrets for the error.]
The days of Internet Explorer's dominance appear to be waning. Of course, Microsoft's Windows operating system monopoly still owns the market, but we're not sure how long that will matter, especially as software-as-a-service models take off and Google's web-focused operating system is prepped for release.
As Microsoft's grip on the browser market loosens, opportunities for open source rivals are blossoming. It will be interesting to see which of the two top open source browsers benefits most in 2009.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Opera is NOT open source
I agree
RE: Open source browsers put pressure on IE in 2009
RE: Open source browsers put pressure on IE in 2009
RE: Open source browsers put pressure on IE in 2009
<a href="http://www.riseuniversity.com/schools-majors/business-and-management/">Business management school</a> <a href="http://www.riseuniversity.com/schools-majors/computer-science/">online computer school</a>
Sorry Paula, software-as-a-service
Agreed, it will serve a niche but beyond that, nothing more.
SaaS not taking off
Interesting to learn
I just returned from a breakfast panel representing NASA, DISA, DOE and DHS. All are pushing ahead with S-A-A-S as an imperative to meet responsiveness, affordability, scalability, security and sustainability demands, as the public and Congressional overseers demand ever more from public systems. These guys are closely attuned to their industry counterparts; industry is more close-mouthed in public for competitive reasons, but shares one-on-one, so we get a good read on their thinking. Over 300, including the usual curmudgeons, in the audience, and not one questioned the overall direction. Plenty of questions about the how's but none of whether's.
But you now offer us the definitive pronouncement that time's arrow will not move forward.
How fortunate we are!
Now where did I put that punched card deck?
When companies start having problems
I've used SaaS in the past three years and I can tell you this. It's a major joke so far. Half the time, the software works ONLY in IE (And I detest using IE because of the security hazards). When the data is time critical, it's delayed because you need a password to get into the site. Not to mention the SaaS I've been forced to use is so inflexible, it wants to reject any data that isn't within a very narrow range or will not allow blank fields - especially on data that cannot or should not be filled.
Other problems; you need some sort of proprietary plug in, or some sort of proprietary software that needs installed first. (Which runs the risk of malware - think Sony's root-kit). All this could be solved, if the web site/programmers listened to their clients. But do they?
Bah. Give me even MS Office over SaaS. (Although I'd use OpenOffice myself.)
- Kc
I notice you qualified your statement
The challenges you've pointed out in your experience - requiring IE, the password implementation, slow and inflexible, requiring proprietary plug in - are manifestations of implementation decisions made by a particular vendor. I agree; avoid that vendor.
Let's see - you're going to run enterprise applications with MS Office? I would be interested in that architectural model.
SaaS ... in my opinion has a long way to go
Not a niche ...
Look at Facebook and Twitter. People want to be out there - reading, chatting, sharing. I believe it will the other way round - sophisticated and specialized software installed locally in computers will serve special needs of the minority of users in the future.
SAAS will dominate in the long run but not atop a Google OS style OS.
This embryonic cloud based noosphere we all call the internet is just a
single instance of a general class of processes that have been called
COMPLEX LIVING SYSTEMS. After millions of years of statistical trial an
error nature has blazed the trail to demonstrate the recurring themes
that appear to be mandatory for successful homeostasis in such
systems. With out going into a long song and dance about these
recurring mandatory attributes, I will simple beg that you temporarily
humor me by accepting the following as one of these mandatory
attributes. COMPLEX LIVING SYSTEMS utilize distributed redundancy of
function as their key defense against the inevitable errors that arise out
of massive complexity. Every LIVING CELL carries the complete DNA
methods blueprint plus historical fall back DNA. Every INDIVIDUAL
ORGANISM in a species carries the complete repertoire of
environmental interactive attributes and abilities(methods). Even at the
simpler atomic level every atom contain, internal to itself, all the
methods required to behave and recombine repeatably as a member of
its class should. None of the above individual members of a class must
check back with the mother ship to access its behavioral methods. They
are all locally redundant.
Back to Googles flawed Cloud Network Model.
Sooner or lated the evolution of network computing models will return
to this time tested strategic necessity. This means in the context of
cloud computing that each user node must keep all its methods and
data structures locally self contained so as to support independent,
organic, recombinant, evolutionary possibilities separate from those
enforced by a central mother ship repository of acceptable methods.
The user nodes can self operate when not connected. The user nodes
can move their complete methods & data set realities to another
mother ship server at will. The user nodes can reassemble a mother
ship's data and methods central repository as an ultimate backup to
catastrophe. This in no way precludes the user nodes from choosing to
update and synchronize their methods and/or local data sets with the
central cloud mother ship either automatically or manually. Local
autonomy of methods and data sets also offer the choice to keep local
versioning of methods and data sets as a fall back autonomy insurance
strategy. I could go on but I am sure you tire! I know I do.
Anyway - here is where both Apple and Microsoft have a long term
serious advantage over Google OS. They have deep and wide OS tools
that can support this necessity to maintain a strategy of distributed
autonomous methods and data sets. A strategy nature historically
seems to indicate is the proven path to creating STABLE COMPLEX
LIVING SYSTEMS. No non-compliant systems get out alive.
Oh - One last thing!
I am not particularly a Microsoft fan but we should not count them out.
With new more visionary leadership they could be a serious contender.
They have a large talented team and a very valuable store of intellectual
capital. A serious three way race would be the Holy Trinity of
competitive innovation.
Net Applicationds doesn't measure...
It doesn't measure web browser usage on companies internal networks. In that sector, it's a safe bet that IE will continue to dominate.
Disagree
Microsoft is not offering support for competing browsers ...
Its about choice
I would like to see a survey of internet user 16-30 years of age and what browsers they use the most.
It's all about stupidity and FUD
I can use a browser installed with my global OS (let's ignore the fringe players) that was developed by the people who wrote the OS and have the best software engineers, quality systems and lots of development money. It's also by design more secure than most of the other browsers.
OR
I can go through the extra effort to download another browser from either people developing in a garage or other proprietary companies that have less experience than MS and clouded motives (want my demographic data do you Google?).
The only reason for the growth of FF is just uninformed FUD from bloggers and ABMers. Ask anyone who's using FF why they are doing it and 9 times out of 10 it will be because an uninformed mate told them (incorrectly) that it was more secure than IE.
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain...
Really?
There are 0 unpatched security holes in Firefox 3.5
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/25800/
Which one is more secure?
There are 0 unpatched security holes in Opera 10.x
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/26745/?task=statistics_2009