Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Lion Irons

"Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
news:[hidden email]...

> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>>
>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>> news:[hidden email]...
>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>> I have access to many web site stats, I have been looking into browser
>>>> market share and I find that over and over again Firefox has about 15%
>>>> market share.
>>>>
>>>> I once posted this a long time ago when it was about 5%, and all I got
>>>> back in replay was a load of abuse from Firefox zealots.
>>>
>>> Rather than give you abuse, here is a URL or properly compiled stats
>>>
>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>
>>> You decide which is more accurate, your finger-in-the-air "I have access
>>> to many web site stats" approach, or the stats above.
>>>
>>
>> I never said I put a finger in the air, that just some abuse you made up
>> isn't it?
>>
>> my stats were from sources that I can see have not been tampered with,
>> you have sent me stats from a site where you have no idea how they were
>> compiled, True or False? but then dishonestly claim that they are
>> properly compiled? the site is a where Firefox programmer go for
>> information, true or false, of cause this will show high stats for
>> Firefox.
>>
>> How are these stats compiled? is the site unualy popular with FF usres?
>> do you know or were you lying when you said they were properly compiled?
>>
>>>
>>> <rest deleted>
>>
>
> Moot argument unless you can provide how "your" stats were compiled.

simple all useragents were counted

> This exercise in "mine is better than yours" is counter productive and

who said they were better then anyones else?
you seem to be making up your own arguments


> perceived by many as "trolling". This is a "support" group, not a soapbox
> for either product. And with that in mind ...
>
> Setting to OT simply because this is not a support dialog.
>
> followup set to m.general
>
> --
> Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
> www.ufaq.org
> Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Robert Blair-2
On 9/2/2009 10:58 AM, Lion Irons wrote:

> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
> news:[hidden email]...
>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>> I have access to many web site stats, I have been looking into browser
>>>>> market share and I find that over and over again Firefox has about 15%
>>>>> market share.
>>>>>
>>>>> I once posted this a long time ago when it was about 5%, and all I got
>>>>> back in replay was a load of abuse from Firefox zealots.
>>>> Rather than give you abuse, here is a URL or properly compiled stats
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>>
>>>> You decide which is more accurate, your finger-in-the-air "I have access
>>>> to many web site stats" approach, or the stats above.
>>>>
>>> I never said I put a finger in the air, that just some abuse you made up
>>> isn't it?
>>>
>>> my stats were from sources that I can see have not been tampered with,
>>> you have sent me stats from a site where you have no idea how they were
>>> compiled, True or False? but then dishonestly claim that they are
>>> properly compiled? the site is a where Firefox programmer go for
>>> information, true or false, of cause this will show high stats for
>>> Firefox.
>>>
>>> How are these stats compiled? is the site unualy popular with FF usres?
>>> do you know or were you lying when you said they were properly compiled?
>>>
>>>> <rest deleted>
>> Moot argument unless you can provide how "your" stats were compiled.
>
> simple all useragents were counted
>
>> This exercise in "mine is better than yours" is counter productive and
>
> who said they were better then anyones else?
> you seem to be making up your own arguments
>
>
>> perceived by many as "trolling". This is a "support" group, not a soapbox
>> for either product. And with that in mind ...
>>
>> Setting to OT simply because this is not a support dialog.
>>
>> followup set to m.general
>>

I discuss the shortfalls in browser usage statistics at my
<http://www.rossde.com/internet/browsers.html>.  (I use the phrase
"browser usage" in place of "browser market" because the logging involve
actually reports usage, skewed by those who are more avid Web surfers.)

One thing that distorts these statistics is logging for a specialized
Web site that attracts a special audience.  My own logging last April
over a set of eclectic Web pages -- and thus not distorted by
specialization -- showed that IE had 50.4% of the hits and Gecko-based
browsers had 40.1%.  Of course, my statistic for Safari (6.5%) is
distorted by the fact that my own daughter uses that browser.

When reporting usage statistics, the following methodology items should
be disclosed:
        the topics of the Web pages logged
        the time-period over which the log was generated
        the total number of hits
        the hits attributed to search engine bots and other non-browsers
        any steps taken to reduce counting repeat hits from one source

--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Go to Mozdev at <http://www.mozdev.org/> for quick access to
extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other
Mozilla-related applications.  You can access Mozdev much
more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Ron Hunter
David E. Ross wrote:

> On 9/2/2009 10:58 AM, Lion Irons wrote:
>> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>> news:[hidden email]...
>>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>
>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>> I have access to many web site stats, I have been looking into browser
>>>>>> market share and I find that over and over again Firefox has about 15%
>>>>>> market share.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I once posted this a long time ago when it was about 5%, and all I got
>>>>>> back in replay was a load of abuse from Firefox zealots.
>>>>> Rather than give you abuse, here is a URL or properly compiled stats
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>>>
>>>>> You decide which is more accurate, your finger-in-the-air "I have access
>>>>> to many web site stats" approach, or the stats above.
>>>>>
>>>> I never said I put a finger in the air, that just some abuse you made up
>>>> isn't it?
>>>>
>>>> my stats were from sources that I can see have not been tampered with,
>>>> you have sent me stats from a site where you have no idea how they were
>>>> compiled, True or False? but then dishonestly claim that they are
>>>> properly compiled? the site is a where Firefox programmer go for
>>>> information, true or false, of cause this will show high stats for
>>>> Firefox.
>>>>
>>>> How are these stats compiled? is the site unualy popular with FF usres?
>>>> do you know or were you lying when you said they were properly compiled?
>>>>
>>>>> <rest deleted>
>>> Moot argument unless you can provide how "your" stats were compiled.
>> simple all useragents were counted
>>
>>> This exercise in "mine is better than yours" is counter productive and
>> who said they were better then anyones else?
>> you seem to be making up your own arguments
>>
>>
>>> perceived by many as "trolling". This is a "support" group, not a soapbox
>>> for either product. And with that in mind ...
>>>
>>> Setting to OT simply because this is not a support dialog.
>>>
>>> followup set to m.general
>>>
>
> I discuss the shortfalls in browser usage statistics at my
> <http://www.rossde.com/internet/browsers.html>.  (I use the phrase
> "browser usage" in place of "browser market" because the logging involve
> actually reports usage, skewed by those who are more avid Web surfers.)
>
> One thing that distorts these statistics is logging for a specialized
> Web site that attracts a special audience.  My own logging last April
> over a set of eclectic Web pages -- and thus not distorted by
> specialization -- showed that IE had 50.4% of the hits and Gecko-based
> browsers had 40.1%.  Of course, my statistic for Safari (6.5%) is
> distorted by the fact that my own daughter uses that browser.
>
> When reporting usage statistics, the following methodology items should
> be disclosed:
> the topics of the Web pages logged
> the time-period over which the log was generated
> the total number of hits
> the hits attributed to search engine bots and other non-browsers
> any steps taken to reduce counting repeat hits from one source
>
I am sure that anyone could easily bring up statistics to prove just
about ANY browser was the most popular.  If you checked the server
records for this newsgroup server, I would expect that IE users are a
rather small percentage.  The same would apply to a website that
specialized in helping IE users with their problems.
Statistics don't lie, but liars sure like to use statistics.

Another factor is the technical expertise of the user.  More
knowledgeable users are more likely to gravitate to a browser other than
IE.  If for not other reason than to separate them from the masses.

I find that the ability to customize Firefox is vastly superior to ANY
other browser, and the ability to add extensions which modify the way
the program works, rather than just providing a different way to display
data, and the vast number of those extensions that are available,
represents an advantage for Firefox over anything available.
That does it for me, and while the program isn't perfect, and the
developers seem to live in their own world, it is still the best for my
purposes, and needs.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Jay Garcia
In reply to this post by Lion Irons
On 02.09.2009 12:58, Lion Irons wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

>
> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
> news:[hidden email]...
>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>>
>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>> I have access to many web site stats, I have been looking into
>>>>> browser market share and I find that over and over again Firefox
>>>>> has about 15% market share.
>>>>>
>>>>> I once posted this a long time ago when it was about 5%, and all I
>>>>> got back in replay was a load of abuse from Firefox zealots.
>>>>
>>>> Rather than give you abuse, here is a URL or properly compiled stats
>>>>
>>>> http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
>>>>
>>>> You decide which is more accurate, your finger-in-the-air "I have
>>>> access to many web site stats" approach, or the stats above.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I never said I put a finger in the air, that just some abuse you made
>>> up isn't it?
>>>
>>> my stats were from sources that I can see have not been tampered
>>> with, you have sent me stats from a site where you have no idea how
>>> they were compiled, True or False? but then dishonestly claim that
>>> they are properly compiled? the site is a where Firefox programmer go
>>> for information, true or false, of cause this will show high stats
>>> for Firefox.
>>>
>>> How are these stats compiled? is the site unualy popular with FF
>>> usres? do you know or were you lying when you said they were properly
>>> compiled?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <rest deleted>
>>>
>>
>> Moot argument unless you can provide how "your" stats were compiled.
>
> simple all useragents were counted

Really .. how .. where are your figures supporting your claim?

>> This exercise in "mine is better than yours" is counter productive and
>
> who said they were better then anyones else?

You did, I was speaking of browsers as in "mine is better ...." and so on.

> you seem to be making up your own arguments

Nope, just following up on your claim(s).

Now, you insinuated that one of our posters was lying when claiming that
stats can be manipulated to suit one's own favorite. So, how about the
stats listed below. I manage several dozen forums for Compuserve as a
paid employee. The stats listed are from one of our "Religion" forums
and NOT from any browser or OS affiliated venue:

  MSIE:        Internet Explorer 14.01% (677483)
  FireFox: FireFox 5.508 % (266295)
  Netscape: Netscape 53.56 % (2589576)
  Chrome: Chrome 0.047 % (2320)
  Safari: Safari 0.105 % (5089)
  Opera: Opera 0.373 % (18071)
  Konqueror: Konqueror (KDE)Konqueror 0.015 % (762)
  Lynx:          Lynx 0.071 % (3436)
  Search Engines: Robots/Spiders 24.41 % (1180219)
  Unknown: Unknown 1.880 % (90897)

The figures in ( ) are hits recorded last week - 7 days.

--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Alex K.-4
In reply to this post by Ron Hunter
Ron Hunter wrote:
<snip>
> I am sure that anyone could easily bring up statistics to prove just
> about ANY browser was the most popular.
 >
I'm sure you've heard the phrase: "There are three kinds of lies: lies,
damned lies, and statistics."  :-)

--
Alex K.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

squaredancer
On 03.09.2009 12:17, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Alex K. to
generate the following:? :

> Ron Hunter wrote:
> <snip>
>  
>> I am sure that anyone could easily bring up statistics to prove just
>> about ANY browser was the most popular.
>>    
>  >
> I'm sure you've heard the phrase: "There are three kinds of lies: lies,
> damned lies, and statistics."  :-)
>
>  
Did you know that, according to statistics, 50% of cigarette-smokers
/die/ ??
you may now say "but the others die too" - which is true, but that fact
has not been statistically analysed!

The only "truth" to be seen here is the fact that some version of IE is
INSTALLED on all Windows OS computers, due to the M$ marketing strategy
- the fact that IE is /installed/  does not prove the USE of IE by the user!
Similarly, I have FF3,0 /installed/  - but I don't /use/  it, except for
testing some cases that are questioned in the Moz groups!

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Daniel-257
squaredancer wrote:
> On 03.09.2009 12:17, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Alex K. to
> generate the following:? :
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> <snip>

<snip>

> The only "truth" to be seen here is the fact that some version of IE is
> INSTALLED on all Windows OS computers, due to the M$ marketing strategy
> - the fact that IE is /installed/  does not prove the USE of IE by the
> user!

I dispute this claim of "truth" of yours, reg, as I am, at this time,
using Windows 98 (SE maybe!!) but do not have any version of IE installed.

I have used 98lite (http://www.litepc.com/index.html) on this PC, many
moons ago, and am very happy with its operation, even thought I am
switching, more and more, to Mandriva Linux.

Daniel
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Daniel-257
In reply to this post by Jay Garcia
Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 02.09.2009 12:58, Lion Irons wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>>
>> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>> news:[hidden email]...
>>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>
>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>> Lion Irons wrote:

<snip>

>
>  MSIE:             Internet Explorer 14.01% (677483)
>  FireFox:     FireFox 5.508 % (266295)
>  Netscape:     Netscape 53.56 % (2589576)
>  Chrome:     Chrome 0.047 % (2320)
>  Safari:     Safari 0.105 % (5089)
>  Opera:     Opera 0.373 % (18071)
>  Konqueror:     Konqueror (KDE)Konqueror 0.015 % (762)
>  Lynx:          Lynx 0.071 % (3436)
>  Search Engines: Robots/Spiders 24.41 % (1180219)
>  Unknown:     Unknown 1.880 % (90897)
>
> The figures in ( ) are hits recorded last week - 7 days.
>

WHAT!!! No SeaMonkey??? What heathens these people are!!!

Interesting to note that search engines/robots/spiders make up about 24%
(i.e approx 1 in 4!!) of internet traffic, at least to this site!!

Daniel
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by squaredancer
squaredancer wrote:

> On 03.09.2009 12:17, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Alex K. to
> generate the following:? :
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> <snip>
>>  
>>> I am sure that anyone could easily bring up statistics to prove just
>>> about ANY browser was the most popular.
>>>    
>>  >
>> I'm sure you've heard the phrase: "There are three kinds of lies: lies,
>> damned lies, and statistics."  :-)
>>
>>  
> Did you know that, according to statistics, 50% of cigarette-smokers
> /die/ ??
> you may now say "but the others die too" - which is true, but that fact
> has not been statistically analysed!
>
> The only "truth" to be seen here is the fact that some version of IE is
> INSTALLED on all Windows OS computers, due to the M$ marketing strategy
> - the fact that IE is /installed/  does not prove the USE of IE by the user!
> Similarly, I have FF3,0 /installed/  - but I don't /use/  it, except for
> testing some cases that are questioned in the Moz groups!
>
> reg
I currently have IE8, Google Chrome, Safari, and Opera installed, as
well as Firefox 3.5.2.  I USE Firefox, and only start the others up for
testing purposes.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Robert Blair-2
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 9/3/2009 5:54 AM, Daniel wrote:

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 02.09.2009 12:58, Lion Irons wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>
>>>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>  MSIE:             Internet Explorer 14.01% (677483)
>>  FireFox:     FireFox 5.508 % (266295)
>>  Netscape:     Netscape 53.56 % (2589576)
>>  Chrome:     Chrome 0.047 % (2320)
>>  Safari:     Safari 0.105 % (5089)
>>  Opera:     Opera 0.373 % (18071)
>>  Konqueror:     Konqueror (KDE)Konqueror 0.015 % (762)
>>  Lynx:          Lynx 0.071 % (3436)
>>  Search Engines: Robots/Spiders 24.41 % (1180219)
>>  Unknown:     Unknown 1.880 % (90897)
>>
>> The figures in ( ) are hits recorded last week - 7 days.
>>
>
> WHAT!!! No SeaMonkey??? What heathens these people are!!!
>
> Interesting to note that search engines/robots/spiders make up about 24%
> (i.e approx 1 in 4!!) of internet traffic, at least to this site!!
>
> Daniel

My site is non-commercial, a personal site.  I get fewer visitors than
commercial sites.  My most visited page gets about 1,000 hits month.
Bots and spiders make up about 31.8% of my hits.

--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Go to Mozdev at <http://www.mozdev.org/> for quick access to
extensions for Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and other
Mozilla-related applications.  You can access Mozdev much
more quickly than you can Mozilla Add-Ons.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

squaredancer
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 03.09.2009 14:54, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Daniel to
generate the following:? :

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>  
>> On 02.09.2009 12:58, Lion Irons wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>    
>>> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>      
>>>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>>            
>
> <snip>
>
>  
>>  MSIE:             Internet Explorer 14.01% (677483)
>>  FireFox:     FireFox 5.508 % (266295)
>>  Netscape:     Netscape 53.56 % (2589576)
>>  Chrome:     Chrome 0.047 % (2320)
>>  Safari:     Safari 0.105 % (5089)
>>  Opera:     Opera 0.373 % (18071)
>>  Konqueror:     Konqueror (KDE)Konqueror 0.015 % (762)
>>  Lynx:          Lynx 0.071 % (3436)
>>  Search Engines: Robots/Spiders 24.41 % (1180219)
>>  Unknown:     Unknown 1.880 % (90897)
>>
>> The figures in ( ) are hits recorded last week - 7 days.
>>
>>    
>
> WHAT!!! No SeaMonkey??? What heathens these people are!!!
>
> Interesting to note that search engines/robots/spiders make up about 24%
> (i.e approx 1 in 4!!) of internet traffic, at least to this site!!
>
> Daniel
>  

If you ran a standard install of Win 98 (SE) then you DO have IE
installed - the Win Explorer uses it as well
Search for IEXPLORER.EXE - you have it someplace, maybe re-named or
otherwise hidden!
C:\programs\Internet Explorer

Perhaps, though, you have been completely Linuxed *lol*

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Jay Garcia
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 03.09.2009 07:48, Daniel wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> squaredancer wrote:
>> On 03.09.2009 12:17, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Alex K. to
>> generate the following:? :
>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>> <snip>
>
> <snip>
>
>> The only "truth" to be seen here is the fact that some version of IE
>> is INSTALLED on all Windows OS computers, due to the M$ marketing
>> strategy - the fact that IE is /installed/  does not prove the USE of
>> IE by the user!
>
> I dispute this claim of "truth" of yours, reg, as I am, at this time,
> using Windows 98 (SE maybe!!) but do not have any version of IE installed.
>
> I have used 98lite (http://www.litepc.com/index.html) on this PC, many
> moons ago, and am very happy with its operation, even thought I am
> switching, more and more, to Mandriva Linux.
>
> Daniel

IE came pre-installed when you installed '98 from the MS CD. Win95 did not.

--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Terry R.-3
In reply to this post by squaredancer
The date and time was Thu Sep 03 2009 10:07:44 GMT-0700 (Pacific
Daylight Time) , and on a whim, squaredancer pounded out on the keyboard:

> On 03.09.2009 14:54, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Daniel to
> generate the following:? :
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>  
>>> On 02.09.2009 12:58, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>
>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>    
>>>> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>      
>>>>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>>
>>>>>        
>>>>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>>>            
>> <snip>
>>
>>  
>>>  MSIE:             Internet Explorer 14.01% (677483)
>>>  FireFox:     FireFox 5.508 % (266295)
>>>  Netscape:     Netscape 53.56 % (2589576)
>>>  Chrome:     Chrome 0.047 % (2320)
>>>  Safari:     Safari 0.105 % (5089)
>>>  Opera:     Opera 0.373 % (18071)
>>>  Konqueror:     Konqueror (KDE)Konqueror 0.015 % (762)
>>>  Lynx:          Lynx 0.071 % (3436)
>>>  Search Engines: Robots/Spiders 24.41 % (1180219)
>>>  Unknown:     Unknown 1.880 % (90897)
>>>
>>> The figures in ( ) are hits recorded last week - 7 days.
>>>
>>>    
>> WHAT!!! No SeaMonkey??? What heathens these people are!!!
>>
>> Interesting to note that search engines/robots/spiders make up about 24%
>> (i.e approx 1 in 4!!) of internet traffic, at least to this site!!
>>
>> Daniel
>>  
>
> If you ran a standard install of Win 98 (SE) then you DO have IE
> installed - the Win Explorer uses it as well
> Search for IEXPLORER.EXE - you have it someplace, maybe re-named or
> otherwise hidden!
> C:\programs\Internet Explorer
>
> Perhaps, though, you have been completely Linuxed *lol*
>
> reg

that would be iexplore.exe


Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

»Q«
In reply to this post by Robert Blair-2
In <news:[hidden email]>,
"David E. Ross" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> My site is non-commercial, a personal site.  I get fewer visitors than
> commercial sites.  My most visited page gets about 1,000 hits month.
> Bots and spiders make up about 31.8% of my hits.

That's about what I see, too.  I have a few ISO and PAR2 files on my
site, and the stupider bots download chunks of them, over and over.  It
would be a hassle excluding them, and my host allows so much bandwidth
that it doesn't impact me, so I don't block them.  But it's still
annoying to see.

--
»Q«                                                              /"\
                                      ASCII Ribbon Campaign      \ /
                                       against html e-mail        X
                                     <http://asciiribbon.org/>   / \
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

squaredancer
In reply to this post by Terry R.-3
On 04.09.2009 01:53, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Terry R. to
generate the following:? :

> The date and time was Thu Sep 03 2009 10:07:44 GMT-0700 (Pacific
> Daylight Time) , and on a whim, squaredancer pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>  
>> On 03.09.2009 14:54, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Daniel to
>> generate the following:? :
>>    
>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>  
>>>      
>>>> On 02.09.2009 12:58, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>>>> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>>>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>>>>            
>>>>>>>>                
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>  
>>>      
>>>>  MSIE:             Internet Explorer 14.01% (677483)
>>>>  FireFox:     FireFox 5.508 % (266295)
>>>>  Netscape:     Netscape 53.56 % (2589576)
>>>>  Chrome:     Chrome 0.047 % (2320)
>>>>  Safari:     Safari 0.105 % (5089)
>>>>  Opera:     Opera 0.373 % (18071)
>>>>  Konqueror:     Konqueror (KDE)Konqueror 0.015 % (762)
>>>>  Lynx:          Lynx 0.071 % (3436)
>>>>  Search Engines: Robots/Spiders 24.41 % (1180219)
>>>>  Unknown:     Unknown 1.880 % (90897)
>>>>
>>>> The figures in ( ) are hits recorded last week - 7 days.
>>>>
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>> WHAT!!! No SeaMonkey??? What heathens these people are!!!
>>>
>>> Interesting to note that search engines/robots/spiders make up about 24%
>>> (i.e approx 1 in 4!!) of internet traffic, at least to this site!!
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>>  
>>>      
>> If you ran a standard install of Win 98 (SE) then you DO have IE
>> installed - the Win Explorer uses it as well
>> Search for IEXPLORER.EXE - you have it someplace, maybe re-named or
>> otherwise hidden!
>> C:\programs\Internet Explorer
>>
>> Perhaps, though, you have been completely Linuxed *lol*
>>
>> reg
>>    
>
> that would be iexplore.exe
>
>
> Terry R.
>  

yepp - got that as well :-P

reg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Daniel-257
In reply to this post by Jay Garcia
Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 03.09.2009 07:48, Daniel wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>> squaredancer wrote:
>>> On 03.09.2009 12:17, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Alex K. to
>>> generate the following:? :
>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> The only "truth" to be seen here is the fact that some version of IE
>>> is INSTALLED on all Windows OS computers, due to the M$ marketing
>>> strategy - the fact that IE is /installed/  does not prove the USE of
>>> IE by the user!
>>
>> I dispute this claim of "truth" of yours, reg, as I am, at this time,
>> using Windows 98 (SE maybe!!) but do not have any version of IE
>> installed.
>>
>> I have used 98lite (http://www.litepc.com/index.html) on this PC, many
>> moons ago, and am very happy with its operation, even thought I am
>> switching, more and more, to Mandriva Linux.
>>
>> Daniel
>
> IE came pre-installed when you installed '98 from the MS CD. Win95 did not.
>

Understood, but I'm saying I got rid of it from my computer, so, even if
IE came pre-installed on Win95 and Win3.1 and....., my Windows does not
have IE on it.

reg's statement says ".....the fact that some version of IE is INSTALLED
on all Windows OS computers...."

Daniel
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Daniel-257
In reply to this post by squaredancer
squaredancer wrote:

> On 04.09.2009 01:53, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Terry R. to
> generate the following:? :
>> The date and time was Thu Sep 03 2009 10:07:44 GMT-0700 (Pacific
>> Daylight Time) , and on a whim, squaredancer pounded out on the keyboard:
>>
>>  
>>> On 03.09.2009 14:54, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Daniel to
>>> generate the following:? :
>>>    
>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>>        
>>>>> On 02.09.2009 12:58, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>>>> "Jay Garcia" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>>>                
>>>>>>> On 02.09.2009 02:50, Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  --- Original Message ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                    
>>>>>>>> "kes" <[hidden email]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:[hidden email]...
>>>>>>>>                        
>>>>>>>>> Lion Irons wrote:
>>>>>>>>>                            
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>>  MSIE:             Internet Explorer 14.01% (677483)
>>>>>  FireFox:     FireFox 5.508 % (266295)
>>>>>  Netscape:     Netscape 53.56 % (2589576)
>>>>>  Chrome:     Chrome 0.047 % (2320)
>>>>>  Safari:     Safari 0.105 % (5089)
>>>>>  Opera:     Opera 0.373 % (18071)
>>>>>  Konqueror:     Konqueror (KDE)Konqueror 0.015 % (762)
>>>>>  Lynx:          Lynx 0.071 % (3436)
>>>>>  Search Engines: Robots/Spiders 24.41 % (1180219)
>>>>>  Unknown:     Unknown 1.880 % (90897)
>>>>>
>>>>> The figures in ( ) are hits recorded last week - 7 days.
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> WHAT!!! No SeaMonkey??? What heathens these people are!!!
>>>>
>>>> Interesting to note that search engines/robots/spiders make up about
>>>> 24% (i.e approx 1 in 4!!) of internet traffic, at least to this site!!
>>>>
>>>> Daniel
>>>>        
>>> If you ran a standard install of Win 98 (SE) then you DO have IE
>>> installed - the Win Explorer uses it as well
>>> Search for IEXPLORER.EXE - you have it someplace, maybe re-named or
>>> otherwise hidden!
>>> C:\programs\Internet Explorer
>>>
>>> Perhaps, though, you have been completely Linuxed *lol*
>>>
>>> reg
>>>    
>>
>> that would be iexplore.exe
>>
>>
>> Terry R.
>>  
>
> yepp - got that as well :-P
>
> reg

A Windows Find File and Folder for "iexplore" (without the inverted
commas) over all my Drives (C:\ D:\ E:\ F:\ & G:\) just came up with:-

iexplore.ini in C:\WINDOWS
iexplore.chm in C:\WINDOWS\HELP
iexplore.hlp in C:\WINDOWS\HELP

That's it, there isn't any more!!

Daniel
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Jay Garcia
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
On 04.09.2009 06:13, Daniel wrote:

  --- Original Message ---

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 03.09.2009 07:48, Daniel wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>> On 03.09.2009 12:17, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Alex K. to
>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> The only "truth" to be seen here is the fact that some version of IE
>>>> is INSTALLED on all Windows OS computers, due to the M$ marketing
>>>> strategy - the fact that IE is /installed/  does not prove the USE
>>>> of IE by the user!
>>>
>>> I dispute this claim of "truth" of yours, reg, as I am, at this time,
>>> using Windows 98 (SE maybe!!) but do not have any version of IE
>>> installed.
>>>
>>> I have used 98lite (http://www.litepc.com/index.html) on this PC,
>>> many moons ago, and am very happy with its operation, even thought I
>>> am switching, more and more, to Mandriva Linux.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>>
>> IE came pre-installed when you installed '98 from the MS CD. Win95 did
>> not.
>>
>
> Understood, but I'm saying I got rid of it from my computer, so, even if
> IE came pre-installed on Win95 and Win3.1 and....., my Windows does not
> have IE on it.
>
> reg's statement says ".....the fact that some version of IE is INSTALLED
> on all Windows OS computers...."
>
> Daniel

Cripes !!! NOW you say that!! :-D

--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Ron Hunter
In reply to this post by Daniel-257
Daniel wrote:

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 03.09.2009 07:48, Daniel wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>> On 03.09.2009 12:17, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Alex K. to
>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>> <snip>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> The only "truth" to be seen here is the fact that some version of IE
>>>> is INSTALLED on all Windows OS computers, due to the M$ marketing
>>>> strategy - the fact that IE is /installed/  does not prove the USE of
>>>> IE by the user!
>>> I dispute this claim of "truth" of yours, reg, as I am, at this time,
>>> using Windows 98 (SE maybe!!) but do not have any version of IE
>>> installed.
>>>
>>> I have used 98lite (http://www.litepc.com/index.html) on this PC, many
>>> moons ago, and am very happy with its operation, even thought I am
>>> switching, more and more, to Mandriva Linux.
>>>
>>> Daniel
>> IE came pre-installed when you installed '98 from the MS CD. Win95 did not.
>>
>
> Understood, but I'm saying I got rid of it from my computer, so, even if
> IE came pre-installed on Win95 and Win3.1 and....., my Windows does not
> have IE on it.
>
> reg's statement says ".....the fact that some version of IE is INSTALLED
> on all Windows OS computers...."
>
> Daniel
It is possible to remove IE from Win98SE, but ONLY at the expense of
returning the user interface to the same level as Win95, which seems to
be too high a price to pay.
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OT Re: Firefox market share dodgy

Melchert Fruitema-2
On 05-09-2009 02:23 CET, Ron Hunter composed this enchanting statement:
> <x>
> It is possible to remove IE from Win98SE, but ONLY at the expense of
> returning the user interface to the same level as Win95, which seems
> to be too high a price to pay.

Well, how cripple will Windows 7 be without IE(8), I wonder.

--
Kind regards,
Melchert

(MacOS 10.3.9 / Firefox 2.0, Thunderbird 2.0)
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12