Do your detailed stats show which are the most popular web browsers being used worldwide today? (I know the two big winners are IE and NETSCAPE, but was wondering which other browsers are also popular today).

Any opinions or links to find out how much average percentage share IE has over Netscape today worldwide?

Learner

Can't think of any good urls, off the top of my head. The browser market is changing tho, with the advent of internet appliances.

http://websnapshot.mycomputer.com/

The URL Annette mentioned is one I use for all kinds of info and stats regarding browsers, resolutions, colors, finding methods, etc. I think it's a good one.

Although the figures can fluctuate daily since they are live samplings, MSIE accounts for about 75% of the browser market, into the 80s if you add AOL's browser (which is basically MSIE). Last week, there was a combined total of 86%. Right now, it's 82%

There are other browsers, though they are a tiny fraction of the market. Opera is one. Just a few years ago (3-4), when the Internet was coming into the mainstream, there were something like 137 different browsers as companies struggled to establish their products and gather market share. Most faded quickly and the results are obvious.

It's a shame as both of the main survivors stink. There are no good browsers for the majority of us with Windows on our PCs.

Totally agreed Duster. While the rationale behind Opera making us pay is totally understandable, unfortunately it's also the main hindrance in it receiving wider acceptance.

That said, hopefully Netscape 6 will prove not to be a stinker (since all versions of 4 stink anyway), and people might like to check out a wonderfully lightweight, standards-compliant browser - K-Meleon at http://kmeleon.org

It doesn't have support for JScript yet, but it's a blessing in disguise if you're sick of popup windows and daggy/weird rollover effects ;)

Well the news appears good for Netscape 6 from what I've read. That beta of theirs they put out at first may well be the death of them though - you could see the IE percentage soar after that as die-hard Netscape fans jumped ship (I know, I was one of them). Microsoft gets a lot of flack for a lot of VERY good reasons, but I have to say the IE 5.0 browser was a gem to use, and they did give in finally and complied to standard for the most part. Apparently 5.5 went and ruined all their good work as they went out on their own again and began implementing their own standards but from my use of it, I've yet to come across a page that breaks under it (unless it's badly designed in the first place). Even then, it's quite forgiving for the most part. It does crash more then 5.0 but I think that's due to a need to do a reinstall of Windows in general *shudder*.

As that site Annette pointed out IE is far and way the goliath of the web (as is the Win op. system). Designing too wide isn't very cost effective, and for the most part isn't needed unless your code is going way out there. About the only issue worth really worrying about it the Netscape resize problem (when maximising a window). Frames and tables get pretty upset about that at times. (though a javascript available will override it).

I've mentioned it elsewhere but if you aim at this you usually cover most bases, with a minimum or problems.

800x600 screen res.
4.0 browser
16 bit color
gifs where possible (websafe palette)

I used to check my logs quite a bit at my old host, and the IE percentage was actually higher than average at over 90% (that's 4.0 plus). Of the remaining 10%, 6% was Netscape, and the final 4% was IE and Netscape 3.0 and one linux browser.

So technically you could just build for IE and forget the rest, though some 'safe' coding options always help, and will cover *most* of the alternatives. If you're doing some wilder stuff, try to add backward compatibility if possible, or look at an alternative.

Finally, think of who's going to come to the site. People looking for webspace will *usually* have a modern browser, unless they come looking from an office comp, or an older laptop etc. With well designed graphics even the simplest site will impress people. Every bell and whistle under the sun isn't going to help someone's 'technocolor yawn' :)

Greg Moore
http://www.akashik.net

Hmmm... I'm glad I started this thread. Intersting info here to take into consideration for our new clients.

Duster, thanks for clarifying that Annette's URL is a good one to go by. I just surfed through the site very quickly and found it very informative too, but wasn't too sure that they do a live sampling.

Actually I was waiting for this thread to expand further so that I could spend more time surfing there over the weekend.

After reading through Akashik's post, I really wonder if there is anything more anyone could add to this topic! He seems to have wrapped this issue up quite well :)

Learner

Although Greg only said it in passing, not as a serious suggestion, I wouldn't advise designing sites just for IE. Right now, AOL is using an IE based browser. That's probably because they recognize that it is more stable than Netscape's. Remember, though, that AOL owns Netscape. That makes it likely at some point that Netscape's share might rise as AOL switches over to it.

I too partly dumped Netscape as the preview release of version 6 I found it s l o w, much slower than IE, which is slower than NN 4.x It's also the ugliest browser I've seen (although they will be adding the ability to add "skins" to it" and Netscape made some of the functions more cumbersome to use (a mistake they also made with the early versions of release 4).

It's a shame. I like the bookmark system in Netscape better, as I do the way it handles e-mail and newsgroups. Outlook has too many vulnerabilities. IE has more support for style sheets, and is more stable, though 5.5 does crash a bit (the first IE browser I've ever had do that).

The smaller browsers would almost have to be better. It would be hard for them to be worse.

[Edited by Duster on 09-22-2000 at 05:09 PM]

Yeah good point. With AOL being slightly above 'small fry' **understatement of the day** should they ever use the browser they OWN then the tables turn yet again. But as it stands IE is the closest thing we have to W3C standards that supports the extra stuff available as well, AND works most of the time. Netscape 6 is a *maybe* though people are really not liking it. That skin option is a possibility, but at the end of the day if it's not a dream to use then people won't use it, regardless of it's look. A case in point is Neoplanet. A great idea but a dog to use - especially when the upgrade wouldn't stick and it kept asking me every 5 minutes to go and upgrade (1/2 an hour of that and into the trash it went, never to return).

In a perfect world some small no-body will appear soon with a lightweight browser, that is super powered and supports everything perfectly to standard (and is free). Till then, better the devil you know I suppose :)

The 'build for IE' had a proviso attached. As long as you know the limitations of the other browsers and add compatibility where possible all should go well. To build for Netscape and try to go the other way is bad news (and bloated code). Maybe we should lock them all in a room and not them out till they agree on a way of doing things :)

Greg Moore
http://www.akashik.net

I've followed Mozilla development and have been unimpressed with the Netscape PRs. Not sure what happens to Mozilla in transit to AOL's offices. I agree though, Mozilla is too bulky and the group plans to trim it. I dislike IE's attempts to contact its home (microsoft) and I regularly use a Mozilla nightly build. M17 is supposedly more stable, but I've had no problems with nightly builds.
For mozilla, see http://www.mozilla.org
If you use Linux, see the above or http://sourceforge.net/projects/galeon/