Steve Job’s keynote at WWDC this year inspired some and was disappointing to others — but, as usual, it was interesting & entertaining. I’ve always liked Apple’s products, and spend an embarrassing amount of my own money on them. So I’m interested in what he’s got to say.
Every so often though, as inspired as he is, he says something that betrays at best a blurry view of the real world, at worst an explicit intent to bring more of the world under directed control from Cupertino, and that happened Monday.
The big news, of course, is that Apple’s releasing Safari on Windows — and although it’s been a rough first few days for them (and will get rougher), more choices are generally good for users, and so I’m hopeful that they can work to produce a product of quality on Windows eventually. I’m quite fond of Firefox, of course, and am very happy that people everywhere in the world continue to adopt our browser in increasing numbers.
Here’s a screen capture from the keynote of what Steve thinks the world looks like today (discussion starts at about 1:06 into the preso):
We could quibble with the numbers, but close enough. It doesn’t give much credit to the large & growing number of other quality browsers that are on the scene today, and certainly doesn’t give any sophisticated understanding of the situation outside the United States, where things vary more. Close enough, though.
But here’s the graph that betrays the way that Steve, and by extension Apple, so often looks at the world:
He said this: “Well we dream big. We would love for Safari’s marketshare to grow substantially. That’s what we’d love.” Aw, shucks.
Fantastic! Dream big! Imagine a world of…wait for it…access to the web controlled by 2 companies — and why not just go with the 2 dominant operating system vendors in the world.
But make no mistake: this wasn’t a careless presentation, or an accidental omission of all the other browsers out there, or even a crummy marketing trick. Lots of words describe Steve & his Stevenotes, but “careless” and “accidental” do not. This is, essentially, the way they’re thinking about the problem, and shows the users they want to pick up.
There are a couple of problems, of course. The first is that this isn’t really how the world is. The second is that, irrespective of Firefox, this isn’t how the world should be.
First, it isn’t really how the world is. The meteoric rise of Wikipedia, Creative Commons, Linux and Firefox, among many other examples, shows that today’s connected world is no longer constrained by the monopolies and duopolies and cartels of yesterday’s distribution — of the publishers, studios, and OS vendors. Hundreds of millions of users, in every language around the world are now making new choices. That Apple doesn’t feel this, even within the familiar reality-distortion-field confines of Moscone Center, illustrates much of the problem.
Second, it isn’t how the world should be. Even if we could somehow put that movement back in the bottle — that a world of just Starbucks & Peets, just Wal-mart & Target, just Ford & GM — that a world of tight control from a few companies is good, it’s the wrong thing to do. It destroys participation, it destroys engagement, it destroys self-determination. And, ultimately, it wrecks the quality of the end-user experience, too. Remember (or heard about) when you had to get your phone from AT&T? Good times.
So here’s my point, to be clear: another browser being available to more people is good. I’m glad that Safari will be another option for users. (Watch for the Linux port Real Soon Now.) We’ve never ever at Mozilla said that we care about Firefox market share at the expense of our more important goal: to keep the web open and a public resource. The web belongs to people, not companies.
This world view that Steve gave a glimpse into betrays their thinking: it’s out-of-date, corporate-controlled, duopoly-oriented, not-the-web thinking. And it’s not good for the web. Which is sort of moot, I think, because I don’t think this 2 party world will really come to be.
Steve asserted Monday that Safari on Windows will overturn history, attract 100M new users, and revert the world to a 2 browser state. That remains to be seen, of course.
But don’t bet on it.
John's Blog 
Nice article. I agree with a lot of it. I have a related, if more business-oriented, post on WinSafari on my site.
Astute analysis — and, I suspect, spot on.
maybe I’m overreacting, but that second pie chart just makes me sick
Great post!
Right on John.
It saddens me a bit, because when I started working at Apple in 2000 they were very big on open source, including Jobs personally, and made many contributions to the community. But now it looks more like an era that has come and gone.
Nice article. I agree with a lot of it. I have a related, if more business-oriented, post on WinSafari on my site.
When I read about the Safari beta, my first thought was that here was an opportunity to encourage web developers to break out of the thoroughly entrenched two-browser meme. Way back when, they developed for Netscape and IE. Now they develop for IE and Firefox. Maybe since Safari is the default browser on MacOS, Windows-based developers might be more willing to test in it than they seem to be with Opera. And if we can get them to actually pay attention to a third browser, maybe we could get them aiming for standards-based ways of doing things from the beginning.To learn that Apple’s goal is entirely antithetical to that is sad, and a bit disturbing.
Astute analysis — and, I suspect, spot on.
maybe I’m overreacting, but that second pie chart just makes me sick
You all are really overthinking and overreacting to this… Safari is an OK browser – Firefox is really good – IE stinks. Safari won’t replace either IE or Firefox… Just relax everyone…
Great post!
He can dream all he wants. My understanding is safari does not produce that great of an web browsing experience. Safari on Windows is going to take some work and with all that Apple has going, does it have the willpower to make something out of it.War Firefox going above 25%
Right on John.
It saddens me a bit, because when I started working at Apple in 2000 they were very big on open source, including Jobs personally, and made many contributions to the community. But now it looks more like an era that has come and gone.
Notice how the second chart doesn’t have percentages? Could this be a case of misinterpretation? Jobs diagrams could’ve been more clear, but I don’t think it’s safe to assume he meant one thing or another here.Apple is about simplifying things. In the second chart, Jobs merely showed a simpler representation of where Safari is going; that it will have 20% marketshare one day. 🙂
I have both a pc and mac and while firefox is my preferred browser on both, I can still use ie on the pc. I can’t use safari because of some simple features it doesn’t have – tabbed browsing and the ability to type keywords into the toolbar and get instant results. It seems that Jobs is attempting to beef up safari only to promote it as an avenue of writing software for the iphone.
When I read about the Safari beta, my first thought was that here was an opportunity to encourage web developers to break out of the thoroughly entrenched two-browser meme. Way back when, they developed for Netscape and IE. Now they develop for IE and Firefox. Maybe since Safari is the default browser on MacOS, Windows-based developers might be more willing to test in it than they seem to be with Opera. And if we can get them to actually pay attention to a third browser, maybe we could get them aiming for standards-based ways of doing things from the beginning.
To learn that Apple’s goal is entirely antithetical to that is sad, and a bit disturbing.
You all are really overthinking and overreacting to this… Safari is an OK browser – Firefox is really good – IE stinks. Safari won’t replace either IE or Firefox… Just relax everyone…
He can dream all he wants. My understanding is safari does not produce that great of an web browsing experience. Safari on Windows is going to take some work and with all that Apple has going, does it have the willpower to make something out of it.
War Firefox going above 25%
Notice how the second chart doesn’t have percentages? Could this be a case of misinterpretation? Jobs diagrams could’ve been more clear, but I don’t think it’s safe to assume he meant one thing or another here.
Apple is about simplifying things. In the second chart, Jobs merely showed a simpler representation of where Safari is going; that it will have 20% marketshare one day. 🙂
I have both a pc and mac and while firefox is my preferred browser on both, I can still use ie on the pc. I can’t use safari because of some simple features it doesn’t have – tabbed browsing and the ability to type keywords into the toolbar and get instant results. It seems that Jobs is attempting to beef up safari only to promote it as an avenue of writing software for the iphone.
I like Apple and Steve and all that but yeah they should have still included Firefox and others in the graph, if anything show them taking from Internet Explorer’s total, and not yours and other alternatives. Hopefully it was just an oversight or metaphor.
Looks like they reached 100M downloads anyway 🙂 I don’t want to see companies rule the net but I like Safari and the more people using it the better I also like Fire Fox its just missing a few features I would like to see 🙂 and finally I only use IE if I have to.
What’s the point. They’re not selling SAFARI, any more than Microsoft is selling IE. So what if the market share is this or that? Perhaps someone can explain the importance of this to me.
@Will: uhhh, Safari has tabs.
I understand what you’re saying, but let me take a different approach. First, I agree that the web should always belong to the people – I don’t think Apple is trying to change that. I use both Mac and Windows and, overall, I firmly believe that the two best browsers out there are Firefox and Safari. IE doesn’t even enter the realm of “okay.” So, let me suggest that perhaps the reason Jobs didn’t announce going after MS market share is because of the relationship between the two companies. The deeper you go into the archives between MS and Apple, the darker it gets, yet both Jobs/Gates sat together laughing at D5. Maybe, just maybe, Jobs isn’t trying to destroy Mozilla, but is instead trying to keep minimal tension with MS. Possibly?
I like Apple and Steve and all that but yeah they should have still included Firefox and others in the graph, if anything show them taking from Internet Explorer’s total, and not yours and other alternatives. Hopefully it was just an oversight or metaphor.
Steve Jobs doesn’t want a 2 player market…he wants a one player market, Apple 🙂 But seriously, I think you’re kind of over reacting here. Shouldn’t you be happy there is another player in the market now? I mean FF is still only at 15% so we all have to work together here to keep toppling IE. I dont think steve sees you as the enemy. You make your web browser for 3 platforms but no one accuses you of trying to take over the world. Lighten up and dont freak out just because a big name company is going to Winders too.
@patrick & others: totally — I *am* happy that there are more browsers in the world — tried to make that clear, but maybe I didn’t. I *am* glad that Safari is available. I’m just highlighting a problem in approach — and it’s one that’s been there at Apple for a long time. when I worked there in the 90s, certainly, but really throughout their history. I can love their products and have issues with their view of the world (not to mention their strategy & tactics), and I’m just highlighting the problem for everyone, as I think it’s a little bit subtle.
HELL YEAH, LET THEM HAVE IT!!
Looks like they reached 100M downloads anyway 🙂 I don’t want to see companies rule the net but I like Safari and the more people using it the better I also like Fire Fox its just missing a few features I would like to see 🙂 and finally I only use IE if I have to.
Quit whining. It seems to me that you’re complaining about Apple entering the market for cross-platform browsers and having the ambition to capture as much market share as it can. Well, as long as Apple attempts to do so by building the best browser, one that people prefers to use, that is perfectly fair, legitimate, and is exactly what we want people to do. Are you suggesting instead that Apple make a mediocre browser that will capture only so much market share so as not to dominate the market that Firefox is attempting to dominate? Is that what you do a Mozilla? It doesn’t seems so. Mozilla, both in marketing and in the way it makes Firefox, has been attempting to capture all of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer’s market share. Mozilla has not blushed to tell everyone that Firefox is vastly superior to Explorer and that all user of Explorer would be well advised to switch to Firefox. So it is alright for Mozilla to attempt to dominate the market by making the best browser. But that is not alright for Apple? Why, because Mozilla is a not for profit, open-source project, while Apple is a for profit company? Well, those aren’t the rules and never have been. If Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, or anyone else can dominate a market by making the best product or service, then that is what it is entitled to do and is expected to do. We want people to do their best in competing in the market. That means trying to make the best product or service and trying to win. So quit whining and let the games begin.
What’s the point. They’re not selling SAFARI, any more than Microsoft is selling IE. So what if the market share is this or that?
Perhaps someone can explain the importance of this to me.
@Will: uhhh, Safari has tabs.
@OrlandoNobody is criticizing Apple for being a for-profit Business. The real problem in the presentation was that the ‘Outcome’ graph makes it look like Apple aims to specifically eliminate ‘non-microsoft’ competition.I mean, looking at the graphic, it seems like the Democrats blaming the Green Party and other independents for stealing votes from them in various districts during the 2000 election.So I guess the ideology Jobs has (Perhaps unintentionally) sent us here is something like, “Of the 22% of browser share not controlled by the Repub.. err, Microsoft, we are losing out to independent useless can’t-winners! Curse them for stealing our piece of the pie!”
I understand what you’re saying, but let me take a different approach. First, I agree that the web should always belong to the people – I don’t think Apple is trying to change that. I use both Mac and Windows and, overall, I firmly believe that the two best browsers out there are Firefox and Safari. IE doesn’t even enter the realm of “okay.”
So, let me suggest that perhaps the reason Jobs didn’t announce going after MS market share is because of the relationship between the two companies. The deeper you go into the archives between MS and Apple, the darker it gets, yet both Jobs/Gates sat together laughing at D5. Maybe, just maybe, Jobs isn’t trying to destroy Mozilla, but is instead trying to keep minimal tension with MS. Possibly?
You could interpreted it that way but another way could have been that Apple doesn’t want to compete with Mozilla and other similar type groups. Instead Apple sets its aim on MS and its user base.Look at his track record and you’ll see that I’m right.Stop looking for things that obviously aren’t there.
The second graph suggests Apple think there is a huge chunk of users that remains resolutely IE led, untroubled by any quality or innovation elsewhere… What a sad comment on the world of Windows.
Steve Jobs doesn’t want a 2 player market…he wants a one player market, Apple 🙂
But seriously, I think you’re kind of over reacting here. Shouldn’t you be happy there is another player in the market now? I mean FF is still only at 15% so we all have to work together here to keep toppling IE. I dont think steve sees you as the enemy. You make your web browser for 3 platforms but no one accuses you of trying to take over the world. Lighten up and dont freak out just because a big name company is going to Winders too.
@patrick & others: totally — I *am* happy that there are more browsers in the world — tried to make that clear, but maybe I didn’t. I *am* glad that Safari is available. I’m just highlighting a problem in approach — and it’s one that’s been there at Apple for a long time. when I worked there in the 90s, certainly, but really throughout their history.
I can love their products and have issues with their view of the world (not to mention their strategy & tactics), and I’m just highlighting the problem for everyone, as I think it’s a little bit subtle.
Well said, Rocko, Rene.Sounds like a sour-grapes piece to me.
HELL YEAH, LET THEM HAVE IT!!
Quit whining. It seems to me that you’re complaining about Apple entering the market for cross-platform browsers and having the ambition to capture as much market share as it can. Well, as long as Apple attempts to do so by building the best browser, one that people prefers to use, that is perfectly fair, legitimate, and is exactly what we want people to do.
Are you suggesting instead that Apple make a mediocre browser that will capture only so much market share so as not to dominate the market that Firefox is attempting to dominate? Is that what you do a Mozilla? It doesn’t seems so. Mozilla, both in marketing and in the way it makes Firefox, has been attempting to capture all of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer’s market share. Mozilla has not blushed to tell everyone that Firefox is vastly superior to Explorer and that all user of Explorer would be well advised to switch to Firefox. So it is alright for Mozilla to attempt to dominate the market by making the best browser. But that is not alright for Apple?
Why, because Mozilla is a not for profit, open-source project, while Apple is a for profit company? Well, those aren’t the rules and never have been. If Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, or anyone else can dominate a market by making the best product or service, then that is what it is entitled to do and is expected to do. We want people to do their best in competing in the market. That means trying to make the best product or service and trying to win. So quit whining and let the games begin.
Looks like Steve’s reality distortion field has started to distort his own perception as well. The universe is probably going to implode soon.
@Orlando
Nobody is criticizing Apple for being a for-profit Business. The real problem in the presentation was that the ‘Outcome’ graph makes it look like Apple aims to specifically eliminate ‘non-microsoft’ competition.
I mean, looking at the graphic, it seems like the Democrats blaming the Green Party and other independents for stealing votes from them in various districts during the 2000 election.
So I guess the ideology Jobs has (Perhaps unintentionally) sent us here is something like, “Of the 22% of browser share not controlled by the Repub.. err, Microsoft, we are losing out to independent useless can’t-winners! Curse them for stealing our piece of the pie!”
I agree that we’re never going back to a duopoly or browser-centric web experience, but while what Steve *says* is never accidental, it’s frequently far from the complete picture. I think that Apple’s got at least two motivations in mind here that they haven’t discussed yet.1) A larger footprint for Safari means more search field related revenue from Google for Apple. This isn’t a trivial revenue stream for them (nor for Mozilla, if what I understand is true). This reason by itself would financially justify the move to a Windows port.2) Apple is encouraging people to use the Safari engine to write web-apps for the iPhone, so why wouldn’t they release it to Windows to encourage people to do this? The iPhone will work with iTunes as the client software on Windows PCs. Now people based on either OS can develop value for the iPhone by having access to the web engine that it uses.Granted, I’d love to have Linux versions of iTunes and now Safari so my current iPod and (hopefully) new iPhone will be platform agnostic, but I already own a couple of Macs and PCs.The ironic part of all of this for me is that my MacBook Pro is the most agnostic piece of hardware that I own. Sure, I run OS X on it, but it’s also my main Windows box thanks to Parallels and BootCamp. I just threw out my old Fedora box in favor of installing Ubuntu on Parallels.Maybe Apple sees the world in a closed-experience, us-or-them view of the web, but I can literally install any major browser or internet application for Mac, Windows or Linux on a single piece of hardware. As an Apple customer, I sure don’t feel very limited. Just my $.02.
You could interpreted it that way but another way could have been that Apple doesn’t want to compete with Mozilla and other similar type groups. Instead Apple sets its aim on MS and its user base.
Look at his track record and you’ll see that I’m right.
Stop looking for things that obviously aren’t there.
The second graph suggests Apple think there is a huge chunk of users that remains resolutely IE led, untroubled by any quality or innovation elsewhere… What a sad comment on the world of Windows.
Well said, Rocko, Rene.
Sounds like a sour-grapes piece to me.
Looks like Steve’s reality distortion field has started to distort his own perception as well. The universe is probably going to implode soon.
Nice post!And you are right – the target in second figure definitely are the “smaller” alternatives. I just wonder why would he like to do a thing like that. Also, it seems a little ironic that the “thinking big” still means “apple small, microsoft big”.
One of the silliest sour grapes pieces I’ve ever seen. If Apple makes a better browser, they’ll gain share. If your browser is better, you’ll gain share. Stop whining about Apple and work on making a better browser.And, in case you hadn’t noticed it, Apple’s real target is Microsoft. The net effect is likely to be fewer “Internet Explorer Only” sites – and that’s good for everyone.
Jobs is a sneaky scumbag, but this time he will taste his own medicine.
I agree that we’re never going back to a duopoly or browser-centric web experience, but while what Steve *says* is never accidental, it’s frequently far from the complete picture. I think that Apple’s got at least two motivations in mind here that they haven’t discussed yet.
1) A larger footprint for Safari means more search field related revenue from Google for Apple. This isn’t a trivial revenue stream for them (nor for Mozilla, if what I understand is true). This reason by itself would financially justify the move to a Windows port.
2) Apple is encouraging people to use the Safari engine to write web-apps for the iPhone, so why wouldn’t they release it to Windows to encourage people to do this? The iPhone will work with iTunes as the client software on Windows PCs. Now people based on either OS can develop value for the iPhone by having access to the web engine that it uses.
Granted, I’d love to have Linux versions of iTunes and now Safari so my current iPod and (hopefully) new iPhone will be platform agnostic, but I already own a couple of Macs and PCs.
The ironic part of all of this for me is that my MacBook Pro is the most agnostic piece of hardware that I own. Sure, I run OS X on it, but it’s also my main Windows box thanks to Parallels and BootCamp. I just threw out my old Fedora box in favor of installing Ubuntu on Parallels.
Maybe Apple sees the world in a closed-experience, us-or-them view of the web, but I can literally install any major browser or internet application for Mac, Windows or Linux on a single piece of hardware. As an Apple customer, I sure don’t feel very limited. Just my $.02.
This is just silly. Stop whining. If you make Firefox run as fast as Safari, I’ll never use Safari again. What’s the problem? Competition? The one who makes the better browser wins.
First of all, I think than some people may have the wrong impression of this blog post, much as I did after reading about in here: http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&am…After reading Macworld’s coverage of it, I honestly thought that you, John, must be an idiot. After actually reading the post, I realize that I was mistaken. You have some good points. I disagree with you about what I think Steve Jobs was speaking about, but at this point the only person who really knows is Steve, and that isn’t about to change.Oh, and I am writting this in the Safari 3 Beta, which I am quite impressed with so far. It isn’t perfect (that is what “Beta” means after all) but it is pretty good already.
The Mac’s survival still is still in some ways linked to MS Office running on the Mac. You may argue that Parallels and Boot Camp change this, but we must all agree, much of the world lives in Office.Now, if Jobs had shown the second graph with significant Safari marketshare at the expense of IE, it would be an outright declaration of war against MS. Put this together with my previous statement about MS Office and maybe, just maybe you can see a possible motive to express the message in the way Jobs did.I do have to wonder…. If you asked Jobs if he preferred IE or Firefox, I think we all know how he would answer… Which is why I think that the obvious analysis that John has provided of this message is the wrong one.John, I know your feelings are hurt…. but do remember…. my enemy’s enemy is my friend.(Sometimes it is better if these two friends don’t brodcast their true relationship to the world, lest the shared enemy be better prepared for battle)
I use macs in my recording studio (since 1999). I am a serious mac fan. However, this really makes me sick too. Open source based apps should be supporting one another not trying to run each other out of existence.I live in Barbados
Nice post!
And you are right – the target in second figure definitely are the “smaller” alternatives. I just wonder why would he like to do a thing like that. Also, it seems a little ironic that the “thinking big” still means “apple small, microsoft big”.
One of the silliest sour grapes pieces I’ve ever seen. If Apple makes a better browser, they’ll gain share. If your browser is better, you’ll gain share. Stop whining about Apple and work on making a better browser.
And, in case you hadn’t noticed it, Apple’s real target is Microsoft. The net effect is likely to be fewer “Internet Explorer Only” sites – and that’s good for everyone.
Jobs is a sneaky scumbag, but this time he will taste his own medicine.
This is just silly. Stop whining. If you make Firefox run as fast as Safari, I’ll never use Safari again.
What’s the problem? Competition? The one who makes the better browser wins.
First of all, I think than some people may have the wrong impression of this blog post, much as I did after reading about in here: http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=18310
After reading Macworld’s coverage of it, I honestly thought that you, John, must be an idiot. After actually reading the post, I realize that I was mistaken. You have some good points. I disagree with you about what I think Steve Jobs was speaking about, but at this point the only person who really knows is Steve, and that isn’t about to change.
Oh, and I am writting this in the Safari 3 Beta, which I am quite impressed with so far. It isn’t perfect (that is what “Beta” means after all) but it is pretty good already.
The Mac’s survival still is still in some ways linked to MS Office running on the Mac. You may argue that Parallels and Boot Camp change this, but we must all agree, much of the world lives in Office.
Now, if Jobs had shown the second graph with significant Safari marketshare at the expense of IE, it would be an outright declaration of war against MS. Put this together with my previous statement about MS Office and maybe, just maybe you can see a possible motive to express the message in the way Jobs did.
I do have to wonder…. If you asked Jobs if he preferred IE or Firefox, I think we all know how he would answer… Which is why I think that the obvious analysis that John has provided of this message is the wrong one.
John, I know your feelings are hurt…. but do remember…. my enemy’s enemy is my friend.
(Sometimes it is better if these two friends don’t brodcast their true relationship to the world, lest the shared enemy be better prepared for battle)
I saw the keynote, and that graphic of Apple’s goal (25% Safari, 75% IE) was quite shocking to me. I also asked myself if Jobs actually thought that Safari was going to completely displace Firefox, and not affect IE’s share. It could just be Apple playing nicely with Microsoft, not wanting to antagonize them, but it really struck me as unrealistic and undesirable. What they should have done was take share from IE and Firefox evenly, and accounted for further growth of Firefox, ending up with maybe 15% Safari, 15% Firefox and 70% IE, just for PR reasons, even if they are expecting Safari to cannibalize Firefox share almost exclusively (maybe 20% Safari, 10% Firefox, if they really want to drive the point to web developers that they should support Safari).Overall, however, support for Safari means support for open standards, since Webkit is an open source project, and so Safari’s growth is not really a significant threat to the open web, as alluded to by the author. It was disappointing that Apple PR, or Jobs in particular, felt it necessary to leave other alternative browsers out of the picture, and it does betray a pretty narrow view of today’s software landscape. If Apple doesn’t see open source development as competition, they’re going to be in for a rude awakening, as it’s pretty clear that it will be increasingly prevalent. Apple should really do a better job of addressing open source projects as potential competitors and partners, and to promote their unique abilities, such as centralized leadership, clear vision, and large development resources, as their means of competing with open source, instead of continuing to ignore it completely in their public discourse.If Apple is to succeed in the general-purpose computing market in the next decade, it will be because they have learned to coexist with open source projects, leveraging them to make further progress where needed. As things like operating systems, web browsers, office suites, and other commonly-used software become commoditized and essentially free, Apple will have to address this by building on top of this commodity software, and use their centralized leadership and ability to make rapid progress in new directions to stay competitive. Software-driven consumer electronics gizmos are great and all, but Apple’s strength in software would be lost if it didn’t keep up with current trends, largely driven by open source development.Apple’s actions have been fairly consistent with this reality, as they have adopted a large number of open source projects and open protocols into their OS and software, and contributed a significant amount of work back to the community, but it’s mainly their PR that’s really lacking some depth on this issue. Apple will have to embrace open source development publicly as well as in the privacy of their internal software development. To be fair, it seems to be quite difficult for many MBA types to wrap their little heads around open source community development, and so it’s unsurprising that Apple and others haven’t really embraced this new reality. Eventually, in the not-so-distant-future, however, they are going to be forced to face this issue. As Linux has become a viable alternative OS, OpenOffice has become a viable productivity suite for businesses, Firefox has become a web standard, Apple will really have to work hard to drive home the advantages they can offer to consumers in the general-purpose computing market (which includes smart phones)./rant
I use macs in my recording studio (since 1999). I am a serious mac fan. However, this really makes me sick too. Open source based apps should be supporting one another not trying to run each other out of existence.
I live in Barbados
@Iam: “Now, if Jobs had shown the second graph with significant Safari marketshare at the expense of IE, it would be an outright declaration of war against MS.”More of a declaration of war than the “Get a Mac” ads, where the PC is a clown?
I saw the keynote, and that graphic of Apple’s goal (25% Safari, 75% IE) was quite shocking to me. I also asked myself if Jobs actually thought that Safari was going to completely displace Firefox, and not affect IE’s share. It could just be Apple playing nicely with Microsoft, not wanting to antagonize them, but it really struck me as unrealistic and undesirable. What they should have done was take share from IE and Firefox evenly, and accounted for further growth of Firefox, ending up with maybe 15% Safari, 15% Firefox and 70% IE, just for PR reasons, even if they are expecting Safari to cannibalize Firefox share almost exclusively (maybe 20% Safari, 10% Firefox, if they really want to drive the point to web developers that they should support Safari).
Overall, however, support for Safari means support for open standards, since Webkit is an open source project, and so Safari’s growth is not really a significant threat to the open web, as alluded to by the author. It was disappointing that Apple PR, or Jobs in particular, felt it necessary to leave other alternative browsers out of the picture, and it does betray a pretty narrow view of today’s software landscape. If Apple doesn’t see open source development as competition, they’re going to be in for a rude awakening, as it’s pretty clear that it will be increasingly prevalent. Apple should really do a better job of addressing open source projects as potential competitors and partners, and to promote their unique abilities, such as centralized leadership, clear vision, and large development resources, as their means of competing with open source, instead of continuing to ignore it completely in their public discourse.
If Apple is to succeed in the general-purpose computing market in the next decade, it will be because they have learned to coexist with open source projects, leveraging them to make further progress where needed. As things like operating systems, web browsers, office suites, and other commonly-used software become commoditized and essentially free, Apple will have to address this by building on top of this commodity software, and use their centralized leadership and ability to make rapid progress in new directions to stay competitive. Software-driven consumer electronics gizmos are great and all, but Apple’s strength in software would be lost if it didn’t keep up with current trends, largely driven by open source development.
Apple’s actions have been fairly consistent with this reality, as they have adopted a large number of open source projects and open protocols into their OS and software, and contributed a significant amount of work back to the community, but it’s mainly their PR that’s really lacking some depth on this issue. Apple will have to embrace open source development publicly as well as in the privacy of their internal software development. To be fair, it seems to be quite difficult for many MBA types to wrap their little heads around open source community development, and so it’s unsurprising that Apple and others haven’t really embraced this new reality. Eventually, in the not-so-distant-future, however, they are going to be forced to face this issue. As Linux has become a viable alternative OS, OpenOffice has become a viable productivity suite for businesses, Firefox has become a web standard, Apple will really have to work hard to drive home the advantages they can offer to consumers in the general-purpose computing market (which includes smart phones).
/rant
@Iam: “Now, if Jobs had shown the second graph with significant Safari marketshare at the expense of IE, it would be an outright declaration of war against MS.”
More of a declaration of war than the “Get a Mac” ads, where the PC is a clown?
Safari supports web standards and IE and FireFox don’t. If they did they’d easily pass the Acid2 test but they don’t (I’m talking current versions not betas and alphas here). By supporting standards then Safari is better for the web than IE or FireFox.The notion that Apple doesn’t support OpenSource is so plainly wrong. Safari is based on WebKit which is based on KHTML. Apple puts back what it changes of KHTML back into the KHTML community. WebKit itself is OpenSource. Why should Apple make the whole of Safari OpenSource when it’s nothing more than a wrapper for WebKit? No one asks for iTunes to be OpenSource when it’s just a wrapper for MP4, WebKit, and various other technologies that are standards or OpenSource.Of course the whole of Leopard’s underpinnings is OpenSource but why does Apple need to open up it’s layers that it owns? CoreFrameworks? Aqua? Why do these need to be OpenSource when they are part of a commercial package?Don’t get me wrong I use OpenSource all the time with GIMP and NeoOffice but to be truthful FireFox doesn’t offer me that much more than Safari offers me. I just want a browser that I can go to the sites I want to go to. Safari offers me that out of the box with the exception of our call system but then FireFox can’t offer me that either.I love FireFox but on my Mac it’s not the best option for me and on Windows at work it’s not the best option for me either. It’s a sad sad fact of life that no matter how good a product it is, if it doesn’t satisfy people’s needs then it’s not going to be used.That being said though, it’s the only browser I use on my Windows machine at home. Once our call system gets upgraded (it’s over 9 years old currently and sucks more than Paris Hilton’s career – in more ways than one) then I will be using FireFox at work and nothing but FireFox at work.
Safari for Windows will not displace Firefox users. Many Firefox users will use both browsers. Most new Safari users will come from the default browser, in this case Internet Explorer. Apple knows this. Microsoft knows this. And the Firefox community should know this.Most Firefox users are more committed to their browser than the typical Internet Explorer user. Apple will get much of their increase of browser market share from the masses — the same people who buy the iPods and iPhones. Some of these will be Firefox and misc. browser users, but the vast majority of those who will install Safari are folks who have never heard of Firefox, or who haven’t bothered to download Firefox. Most are default IE users. So most Safari increase will likely come at the expense of IE.So think of increased Safari marketshare as an increase in standards-based browser marketshare and a decrease in proprietary Internet Explorer marketshare. Both of these changes are good for Firefox and the Firefox community.Remember that as the diversity of browsers, particularly standards-based browsers, increase; and as their utilization increase; then Microsoft will have less influence in being able to dictate proprietary standards that break in other non-IE browsers. This is a good thing for everyone, including Firefox users.Many, if not most, Firefox users will also download Safari because they are more open to non-IE browsers than the typical Windows user. Apple will also get most iPod, iPhone, AppleTV, and Mac users to also download and use Safari. Apple will be committed to Safari. This commitment will increase non-IE standards-based browser utilization which will indirectly benefit Firefox.BTW The only reason Steve used that graphic is because no one at Apple actually thinks that Safari will kill off Firefox. My thinking is that they want to antagonize Bill Gates less. Apple has been poking fun at Windows with the PC and Mac guys, and of late have been taking all of Microsoft’s cookies. Apart from their two cash cows: Windows and Office, Microsoft has been losing all of their other battles to others, mostly Apple, but also Wii and Sony. No one wants to kick someone while they’re down, especially when they are still bringing in billions of dollars in free cash EVERY month. Don’t be afraid because of Steve’s graphic. Safari will benefit Firefox more than IE does. Steve is just being smart about not antagonizing a sleeping giant when not necessary.Even a duopoly between a standards- based browser (Safari) and a proprietary browser (IE) will benefit Firefox more than a monopoly of a non-standards-based browser (IE). This is similar to the same way that Firefox utilization benefits Safari and all other non-IE standards-based browsers.Firefox isn’t going anywhere, so celebrate a new entrant that has more in common with Firefox and the monopolistic IE. Even in the unlikely event that Safari usage goes to 75%, the remaining 25% that use Firefox will find that websites will display better than those sites that had been designed especially for IE.That’s a good thing.
I dont understand. Why are you worried about duopoly?? Do you want monopoly like search that firefox is trying to build as a part of its deal with google?? Looks like you are afraid
Safari supports web standards and IE and FireFox don’t. If they did they’d easily pass the Acid2 test but they don’t (I’m talking current versions not betas and alphas here). By supporting standards then Safari is better for the web than IE or FireFox.
The notion that Apple doesn’t support OpenSource is so plainly wrong. Safari is based on WebKit which is based on KHTML. Apple puts back what it changes of KHTML back into the KHTML community. WebKit itself is OpenSource. Why should Apple make the whole of Safari OpenSource when it’s nothing more than a wrapper for WebKit? No one asks for iTunes to be OpenSource when it’s just a wrapper for MP4, WebKit, and various other technologies that are standards or OpenSource.
Of course the whole of Leopard’s underpinnings is OpenSource but why does Apple need to open up it’s layers that it owns? CoreFrameworks? Aqua? Why do these need to be OpenSource when they are part of a commercial package?
Don’t get me wrong I use OpenSource all the time with GIMP and NeoOffice but to be truthful FireFox doesn’t offer me that much more than Safari offers me. I just want a browser that I can go to the sites I want to go to. Safari offers me that out of the box with the exception of our call system but then FireFox can’t offer me that either.
I love FireFox but on my Mac it’s not the best option for me and on Windows at work it’s not the best option for me either. It’s a sad sad fact of life that no matter how good a product it is, if it doesn’t satisfy people’s needs then it’s not going to be used.
That being said though, it’s the only browser I use on my Windows machine at home. Once our call system gets upgraded (it’s over 9 years old currently and sucks more than Paris Hilton’s career – in more ways than one) then I will be using FireFox at work and nothing but FireFox at work.
Safari for Windows will not displace Firefox users. Many Firefox users will use both browsers. Most new Safari users will come from the default browser, in this case Internet Explorer. Apple knows this. Microsoft knows this. And the Firefox community should know this.
Most Firefox users are more committed to their browser than the typical Internet Explorer user. Apple will get much of their increase of browser market share from the masses — the same people who buy the iPods and iPhones. Some of these will be Firefox and misc. browser users, but the vast majority of those who will install Safari are folks who have never heard of Firefox, or who haven’t bothered to download Firefox. Most are default IE users. So most Safari increase will likely come at the expense of IE.
So think of increased Safari marketshare as an increase in standards-based browser marketshare and a decrease in proprietary Internet Explorer marketshare. Both of these changes are good for Firefox and the Firefox community.
Remember that as the diversity of browsers, particularly standards-based browsers, increase; and as their utilization increase; then Microsoft will have less influence in being able to dictate proprietary standards that break in other non-IE browsers. This is a good thing for everyone, including Firefox users.
Many, if not most, Firefox users will also download Safari because they are more open to non-IE browsers than the typical Windows user. Apple will also get most iPod, iPhone, AppleTV, and Mac users to also download and use Safari. Apple will be committed to Safari. This commitment will increase non-IE standards-based browser utilization which will indirectly benefit Firefox.
BTW The only reason Steve used that graphic is because no one at Apple actually thinks that Safari will kill off Firefox. My thinking is that they want to antagonize Bill Gates less. Apple has been poking fun at Windows with the PC and Mac guys, and of late have been taking all of Microsoft’s cookies. Apart from their two cash cows: Windows and Office, Microsoft has been losing all of their other battles to others, mostly Apple, but also Wii and Sony. No one wants to kick someone while they’re down, especially when they are still bringing in billions of dollars in free cash EVERY month. Don’t be afraid because of Steve’s graphic. Safari will benefit Firefox more than IE does. Steve is just being smart about not antagonizing a sleeping giant when not necessary.
Even a duopoly between a standards- based browser (Safari) and a proprietary browser (IE) will benefit Firefox more than a monopoly of a non-standards-based browser (IE). This is similar to the same way that Firefox utilization benefits Safari and all other non-IE standards-based browsers.
Firefox isn’t going anywhere, so celebrate a new entrant that has more in common with Firefox and the monopolistic IE. Even in the unlikely event that Safari usage goes to 75%, the remaining 25% that use Firefox will find that websites will display better than those sites that had been designed especially for IE.
That’s a good thing.
i don’t interpret these slides as “Apple vs Open-Source”, because as many have pointed out, Apple has developed a very strong symbiosis with Open-Source since OS X’s inception. Without this symbiosis, there would not be a Mac OS X, there would not be a Safari. I disagree with one poster’s opinion that Apple isn’t public or forward with its open-source involvement. It is. It’s core to its strategy, it’s vital to its success, it has proudly advocated it, and continues to do so http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html . No these slides are very much about “Apple’s Open-Source pet, vs all other browsers, including non-open-source ones”So … Apple is throwing a slap at Mozilla’s face. It’s simply one open-source project posturing against another. The first slap was when Apple chose Konqeror/KHTML over Mozilla/Gecko for what would later become WebKit (http://webkit.org/), Safari’s underlying engine. WebKit’s been going mobile too: http://opensource.nokia.com/projects/S60browser/ . WebKit also happens to power commercial software, including a commercial web browser, OmniWeb: http://www.omnigroup.com/applications/omniweb/. Tiger introduced Dashboard, largely powered by WebKit, paving the way for today’s thriving Widgets ecosystem. And now WebKit’s doing Windows in the form of Safari! That’s quite a bit of ground covered since Safari’s first public beta only 4 years ago.I touched on WebKit and Widgets heavily because to me the big news isn’t really Safari, it’s rather the fact that WebKit’s now running on Windows and it’s ridiculously fast. Apple is injecting a web-technologies-driven applications framework onto Windows and handheld devices.Sounds familiar? Yea, whatever happened to XUL?Let’s indeed look at Mozilla now. Look at how much adoption XUL has gained in the software marketplace? It’s frickin’ sad, because XUL is a billion times cooler in concept than sliced-bread, has been for like what, nearly a decade now? Without XUL, there would be no Firefox. Yet why do i not see more killer desktop apps being built with XUL by parties other than Mozilla? Why did Nokia end-up going for Apple’s open-source pet, WebKit, even after it had funded Mozilla’s pet, Minimo?Perhaps instead of making El Jobso’s little spiel into this “Evil Corporation trying to take over the Web” controversy, you might consider Apple’s provocation as a wake-up call, an ominous hint for Mozilla to get their sh1t together.The RDF can go both ways.Before Apple unleashed iPod, there *were* and *still are* plenty of music players on the market, happily serving their niche audiences. But they are and have been kind-of stuck where they’re at. If Safari and WebKit adoption on Windows, for some reasons, happen to make strategic sense to Apple, it’s unlikely that Apple will beat the sheer inertia of a browser built into the guts of Windows. It could however very likely position itself as The Better Browsing Solution more effectively with its brand and Marketing Mojo, than Mozilla ever has with Firefox thru grassroots and word-of-mouth. That doesn’t mean Firefox will die, it just means that right now, El Jobso’s not seeing it much relevance in Mozilla’s future.
I dont understand. Why are you worried about duopoly?? Do you want monopoly like search that firefox is trying to build as a part of its deal with google?? Looks like you are afraid
i don’t interpret these slides as “Apple vs Open-Source”, because as many have pointed out, Apple has developed a very strong symbiosis with Open-Source since OS X’s inception. Without this symbiosis, there would not be a Mac OS X, there would not be a Safari.
I disagree with one poster’s opinion that Apple isn’t public or forward with its open-source involvement. It is. It’s core to its strategy, it’s vital to its success, it has proudly advocated it, and continues to do so http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html .
No these slides are very much about “Apple’s Open-Source pet, vs all other browsers, including non-open-source ones”
So … Apple is throwing a slap at Mozilla’s face. It’s simply one open-source project posturing against another. The first slap was when Apple chose Konqeror/KHTML over Mozilla/Gecko for what would later become WebKit (http://webkit.org/), Safari’s underlying engine. WebKit’s been going mobile too: http://opensource.nokia.com/projects/S60browser/ . WebKit also happens to power commercial software, including a commercial web browser, OmniWeb: http://www.omnigroup.com/applications/omniweb/. Tiger introduced Dashboard, largely powered by WebKit, paving the way for today’s thriving Widgets ecosystem. And now WebKit’s doing Windows in the form of Safari! That’s quite a bit of ground covered since Safari’s first public beta only 4 years ago.
I touched on WebKit and Widgets heavily because to me the big news isn’t really Safari, it’s rather the fact that WebKit’s now running on Windows and it’s ridiculously fast. Apple is injecting a web-technologies-driven applications framework onto Windows and handheld devices.
Sounds familiar? Yea, whatever happened to XUL?
Let’s indeed look at Mozilla now. Look at how much adoption XUL has gained in the software marketplace? It’s frickin’ sad, because XUL is a billion times cooler in concept than sliced-bread, has been for like what, nearly a decade now? Without XUL, there would be no Firefox. Yet why do i not see more killer desktop apps being built with XUL by parties other than Mozilla?
Why did Nokia end-up going for Apple’s open-source pet, WebKit, even after it had funded Mozilla’s pet, Minimo?
Perhaps instead of making El Jobso’s little spiel into this “Evil Corporation trying to take over the Web” controversy, you might consider Apple’s provocation as a wake-up call, an ominous hint for Mozilla to get their sh1t together.
The RDF can go both ways.
Before Apple unleashed iPod, there *were* and *still are* plenty of music players on the market, happily serving their niche audiences. But they are and have been kind-of stuck where they’re at.
If Safari and WebKit adoption on Windows, for some reasons, happen to make strategic sense to Apple, it’s unlikely that Apple will beat the sheer inertia of a browser built into the guts of Windows. It could however very likely position itself as The Better Browsing Solution more effectively with its brand and Marketing Mojo, than Mozilla ever has with Firefox thru grassroots and word-of-mouth. That doesn’t mean Firefox will die, it just means that right now, El Jobso’s not seeing it much relevance in Mozilla’s future.
It seems just about possible to me that Steve put the Safari/IE slide there rather than a Safari/Firefox/IE out of deference to the those in Redmond who would probably react badly to Apple making the suggestion that they are now back in direct competition with each other.If the choice was ‘would I rather offend Mozilla or Microsoft?’ I know I would 9 times out of 10 pick on Mozilla. Sorry.
It seems just about possible to me that Steve put the Safari/IE slide there rather than a Safari/Firefox/IE out of deference to the those in Redmond who would probably react badly to Apple making the suggestion that they are now back in direct competition with each other.
If the choice was ‘would I rather offend Mozilla or Microsoft?’ I know I would 9 times out of 10 pick on Mozilla. Sorry.
There is a difference between using a pie chart to state a goal, and believing that this same pie chart represents reality. Take that same pie chart and replace “Internet Explorer” w/ Firefox and ask yourself “Would I like this to be the reality” placing emphasis on the portion of the chart that represents Firefox, not on the portion that doesn’t represent Firefox, regardless of how many players it truly represents. It’s representative of a “big dream”, not of a perfect world where everybody happily just gets along.If I own stock in Apple, my interest is directly attached to Apple generating revenue and/or in other ways increasing the value of my stock. In other words, I’m interested in Apple treating business as business, and community as community. In the world of business, #1 and #2 are all that matter. #3 still makes money, but they don’t have leverage, nor do they control enough of the market to be considered a threat.Be happy w/ your #2 spot, but recognize that Apple isn’t looking at this from the perspective of “How do we beat Mozilla?” and instead “How do we beat Microsoft?”That said, I would have *MUCH* rather the slide suggested something more to the effect of Safari representing what Internet Explorer represents, and the other portion listed as “Other”. Why? Because nobody aims for second place. They aim for first, and deal w/ being second/third/fourth/fifth and so forth for as long as have to. Anything else, and you’ve lost your *competive* edge, and when it comes down to it, *THAT’S* what is most important.Competition.
There is a difference between using a pie chart to state a goal, and believing that this same pie chart represents reality. Take that same pie chart and replace “Internet Explorer” w/ Firefox and ask yourself “Would I like this to be the reality” placing emphasis on the portion of the chart that represents Firefox, not on the portion that doesn’t represent Firefox, regardless of how many players it truly represents. It’s representative of a “big dream”, not of a perfect world where everybody happily just gets along.
If I own stock in Apple, my interest is directly attached to Apple generating revenue and/or in other ways increasing the value of my stock. In other words, I’m interested in Apple treating business as business, and community as community. In the world of business, #1 and #2 are all that matter. #3 still makes money, but they don’t have leverage, nor do they control enough of the market to be considered a threat.
Be happy w/ your #2 spot, but recognize that Apple isn’t looking at this from the perspective of “How do we beat Mozilla?” and instead “How do we beat Microsoft?”
That said, I would have *MUCH* rather the slide suggested something more to the effect of Safari representing what Internet Explorer represents, and the other portion listed as “Other”. Why? Because nobody aims for second place. They aim for first, and deal w/ being second/third/fourth/fifth and so forth for as long as have to. Anything else, and you’ve lost your *competive* edge, and when it comes down to it, *THAT’S* what is most important.
Competition.
Flaws:1) Steve said he wants a big piece of the market share, this means his first goal is money not to create the “best browser of this world”2) The browser benchmarks are fraudulos, tests were probably made by/with the apple marketing team.The company puts to much weight on the devoted users which trust(&love) apple by default and that is just stupid.
cry me a river…jesus…people need to get a life.HE IS SELLING SOMETHING. Steve Job’s knows more about the “IT” world than anyone here. Have you made any big innovations? Nope…so just go back to your corner and cry some more.
So in this case, “Dream Big!” means “Crush the little guys?” That’s a bully’s dream.
Will,You are a moron. Safari has tabs and a Google toolbar, among others.Let me guess – you think Macs can’t use multi-button mouse, either, right?
I’ll be happy to use safari on pc-windows (if i would own one..) just piss off the open source-nazis here. Not everything NEEDS to be open-source, ok? It’s perfect when there is MORE CHOICE, ie you can buy the software or you can get the free alternative. Freedom of choice usually equals better end result, but sometimes a company like Jobsian Apple comes along and thigns get upside down and myself for example I will be happy giving my finnish euros to S. Jobs so he can continue providing some rock n roll to this nerd society or culture or whatever.
I tried Safari for Windows- impressive. I tried Firefox 2 years ago. Not going back Steve (or Bill) FireFox has want I want, and I can customize it with plugins, the way I want to. Nothing else to say.mike
Flaws:
1) Steve said he wants a big piece of the market share, this means his first goal is money not to create the “best browser of this world”
2) The browser benchmarks are fraudulos, tests were probably made by/with the apple marketing team.
The company puts to much weight on the devoted users which trust(&love) apple by default and that is just stupid.
cry me a river…jesus…people need to get a life.
HE IS SELLING SOMETHING. Steve Job’s knows more about the “IT” world than anyone here. Have you made any big innovations? Nope…so just go back to your corner and cry some more.
So in this case, “Dream Big!” means “Crush the little guys?” That’s a bully’s dream.
A Pictures Worth 100M Users???…This story has been submitted to Stirrdup. If it can generate enough interest, it will make it to the main page….
Safari on Windows is a collosal mistake for many reasons.1. In one stroke Apple have removed the incentive for probably 80% of their prospective customers to purchase an Apple computer.2. They’re not going to be able to compete with existing Windows based browsers.3. Apple exists largely on hot air and myth making. By allowing consumers to substantially test their products without paying a sucker fee, Apple are putting their image at risk.Bookmark this post:Safari will flounder on Windows for a few years, then it will be quietly withdrawn.
Will,
You are a moron. Safari has tabs and a Google toolbar, among others.
Let me guess – you think Macs can’t use multi-button mouse, either, right?
Mozilla corp. makes a profit off of your hard-worki dont understand the fanaticism behind mozilla. although i understand the anti-IE sentiment after we were stuck in an era of stagnation thanks to Windows arrogance and OS monopoly. I suppose Open-source allows everybody to develop the platform and allows it to be in a perpetuate state of development but hey, that doesn’t inspire me enough to love Mozilla so passionately. I’d like to get paid to do tedious work.Jobs doesn’t have a deluded perspective on the world he just wants a larger market share of the internet browser. Sure he didn’t include Firefox in the future equation. So? Point being? Maybe he made a little error, maybe he doesn’t realise the significance of Firefox. Can you blame him? he shipped itunes over to windows and that virtually spelled the end for winamp the most popular alternative music player to windows media.You can’t blame a man for having a little success go to his head. And with the obsession over iphone Steve is probably trying to capitalise on the success of it. Its going to be a fully functional internet browser. Before your product releases what do you do? Fix Bugs. If someone likes a product of yours what do you do? try to sell them a little more cake.its a win win situation for apple, moving safari unto the windows platform was a smart move on the basis that it helped fix bugs for the release of iphone, and it may expand apple software further into the windows world.
I’ll be happy to use safari on pc-windows (if i would own one..) just piss off the open source-nazis here.
Not everything NEEDS to be open-source, ok? It’s perfect when there is MORE CHOICE, ie you can buy the software or you can get the free alternative.
Freedom of choice usually equals better end result, but sometimes a company like Jobsian Apple comes along and thigns get upside down and myself for example I will be happy giving my finnish euros to S. Jobs so he can continue providing some rock n roll to this nerd society or culture or whatever.
I tried Safari for Windows- impressive. I tried Firefox 2 years ago. Not going back Steve (or Bill) FireFox has want I want, and I can customize it with plugins, the way I want to. Nothing else to say.
mike
I think Camino is pretty good – it certainly is fast. I admire some of Firefox’s versatility. But I use Safari – it’s setup and ease of use work best for me. If people want to pay for the browser of choice, I see nothing wrong with that – there are plenty of options where you don’t have to pay if you don’t want to.
Safari on Windows is a collosal mistake for many reasons.
1. In one stroke Apple have removed the incentive for probably 80% of their prospective customers to purchase an Apple computer.
2. They’re not going to be able to compete with existing Windows based browsers.
3. Apple exists largely on hot air and myth making. By allowing consumers to substantially test their products without paying a sucker fee, Apple are putting their image at risk.
Bookmark this post:
Safari will flounder on Windows for a few years, then it will be quietly withdrawn.
Mozilla corp. makes a profit off of your hard-work
i dont understand the fanaticism behind mozilla. although i understand the anti-IE sentiment after we were stuck in an era of stagnation thanks to Windows arrogance and OS monopoly. I suppose Open-source allows everybody to develop the platform and allows it to be in a perpetuate state of development but hey, that doesn’t inspire me enough to love Mozilla so passionately. I’d like to get paid to do tedious work.
Jobs doesn’t have a deluded perspective on the world he just wants a larger market share of the internet browser. Sure he didn’t include Firefox in the future equation. So? Point being? Maybe he made a little error, maybe he doesn’t realise the significance of Firefox. Can you blame him? he shipped itunes over to windows and that virtually spelled the end for winamp the most popular alternative music player to windows media.
You can’t blame a man for having a little success go to his head. And with the obsession over iphone Steve is probably trying to capitalise on the success of it. Its going to be a fully functional internet browser. Before your product releases what do you do? Fix Bugs. If someone likes a product of yours what do you do? try to sell them a little more cake.
its a win win situation for apple, moving safari unto the windows platform was a smart move on the basis that it helped fix bugs for the release of iphone, and it may expand apple software further into the windows world.
I think Camino is pretty good – it certainly is fast. I admire some of Firefox’s versatility. But I use Safari – it’s setup and ease of use work best for me. If people want to pay for the browser of choice, I see nothing wrong with that – there are plenty of options where you don’t have to pay if you don’t want to.
Jobs is just doing what Avis did to Budget, National and the other car rental companies when they ran their “We’re number two, we try harder ads.” Everyone started watching Hertz and Avis, and they ignored everyone else. I doubt it will happen in the browser market, if only because no company can make a browser a profit making product. At best, it can drive brand name, provide a few links and defaults, and perhaps drive business in some other, indirect ways.Me, I use SeaMonkey. When it pukes, I use Safari. I keep trying to use Firefox, but it always fails at some vital task or another. The latest is that it will neither display, nor pass PDF files to another program to display, and there is no way to change the default download and ignore default. I’ve installed it three times now, and each time I’ve run into something like this. When it is as useful as Seamonkey or Mozilla, I’ll try again. Maybe the ninth time will be the charm.
i’ve never used a mac. it’s not so common in India. But to me, it seems like a skinned firefox (xcuse the pun). maybe it’s the other way round. it IS faster though.
I would argue he was trying to make a *visual* point by taking IE and Safari out of context, not necessarily that they’ll be the only ones the market, but rather that Safari’s *ultimate* challenger in the browser market will most likely be IE just because of their market share. If he were to attempt to predict what Firefox’s and other browser’s shares of the pie would be it would just muddy the waters of the point he’s trying to get across, which is Safari is now taking on IE, on their home turg.
Jobs is just doing what Avis did to Budget, National and the other car rental companies when they ran their “We’re number two, we try harder ads.” Everyone started watching Hertz and Avis, and they ignored everyone else. I doubt it will happen in the browser market, if only because no company can make a browser a profit making product. At best, it can drive brand name, provide a few links and defaults, and perhaps drive business in some other, indirect ways.
Me, I use SeaMonkey. When it pukes, I use Safari. I keep trying to use Firefox, but it always fails at some vital task or another. The latest is that it will neither display, nor pass PDF files to another program to display, and there is no way to change the default download and ignore default. I’ve installed it three times now, and each time I’ve run into something like this. When it is as useful as Seamonkey or Mozilla, I’ll try again. Maybe the ninth time will be the charm.
i’ve never used a mac. it’s not so common in India. But to me, it seems like a skinned firefox (xcuse the pun). maybe it’s the other way round. it IS faster though.
I would argue he was trying to make a *visual* point by taking IE and Safari out of context, not necessarily that they’ll be the only ones the market, but rather that Safari’s *ultimate* challenger in the browser market will most likely be IE just because of their market share. If he were to attempt to predict what Firefox’s and other browser’s shares of the pie would be it would just muddy the waters of the point he’s trying to get across, which is Safari is now taking on IE, on their home turg.
Did you ever consider that the 2nd graph’s total may be different from 1st one? It can just as well mean to say that Steve aims to get that portion of IE’s current users. I sincerely doubt Apple is after FireFox and Opera etc.
I think if Apple or Jobs had any intention of actually saying that Safari was gunning for Firefox’s share of the market, it would have been said, not passively suggested in a slide. Compare when Jobs made the “we’re coming after you, buddy,” comment about Dell with a slide of Michael Dell in a bullseye target(!). Nobody had to read any interpretation into that. Or the Macworld Expo keynotes where Jobs targeted competitors to iTunes, specifically Target, making a joke about it being the next company for iTunes to pass.Jobs doesn’t make coy allusions to threats in keynote slides. He made no comments about killing Firefox in his presentation. That slide was briefly thrown up with nothing really said about it. Also, why would Apple intentionally subtract Firefox’s entire share, leaving IE’s share unchanged? That slide was a bit sloppy, but reading anything into it is really grasping for straws. Mozilla is an important ally to Apple in its efforts to build standardized web development. When bloggers make comments like “make no mistake: this wasn’t a careless presentation,” it’s a sign they are being dramatic idiots and trying to portray some fluff as the center of the universe. When the blogger is John Lilly, or say any executive, its a sign that company should have a blogger policy to prevent upper management from looking like fools to the public.
Did you ever consider that the 2nd graph’s total may be different from 1st one? It can just as well mean to say that Steve aims to get that portion of IE’s current users.
I sincerely doubt Apple is after FireFox and Opera etc.
I think if Apple or Jobs had any intention of actually saying that Safari was gunning for Firefox’s share of the market, it would have been said, not passively suggested in a slide.
Compare when Jobs made the “we’re coming after you, buddy,” comment about Dell with a slide of Michael Dell in a bullseye target(!). Nobody had to read any interpretation into that. Or the Macworld Expo keynotes where Jobs targeted competitors to iTunes, specifically Target, making a joke about it being the next company for iTunes to pass.
Jobs doesn’t make coy allusions to threats in keynote slides. He made no comments about killing Firefox in his presentation. That slide was briefly thrown up with nothing really said about it. Also, why would Apple intentionally subtract Firefox’s entire share, leaving IE’s share unchanged? That slide was a bit sloppy, but reading anything into it is really grasping for straws.
Mozilla is an important ally to Apple in its efforts to build standardized web development. When bloggers make comments like “make no mistake: this wasn’t a careless presentation,” it’s a sign they are being dramatic idiots and trying to portray some fluff as the center of the universe.
When the blogger is John Lilly, or say any executive, its a sign that company should have a blogger policy to prevent upper management from looking like fools to the public.
Iam: “Now, if Jobs had shown the second graph with significant Safari marketshare at the expense of IE, it would be an outright declaration of war against MS.”So what? Apple is routinely making fun of MS. Remember the Mac vs PC ads, the “Redmond, start your photocopiers” banners at the WWDC. Steve Jobs showed a graph comparing the iPod and Zune market share during his Macworld keynote, and poked fun at MS, etc.danieleran: “That slide was briefly thrown up with nothing really said about it.”Showing a slide with only Safari and IE, Jobs said: “That’s what we’d love.” What? To kill Firefox, Opera and all alternatives? I wouldn’t read too much into it, it must be a misunderstanding. But the slide is a bit of a PR blunder.
Iam: “Now, if Jobs had shown the second graph with significant Safari marketshare at the expense of IE, it would be an outright declaration of war against MS.”
So what? Apple is routinely making fun of MS. Remember the Mac vs PC ads, the “Redmond, start your photocopiers” banners at the WWDC. Steve Jobs showed a graph comparing the iPod and Zune market share during his Macworld keynote, and poked fun at MS, etc.
danieleran: “That slide was briefly thrown up with nothing really said about it.”
Showing a slide with only Safari and IE, Jobs said: “That’s what we’d love.” What? To kill Firefox, Opera and all alternatives? I wouldn’t read too much into it, it must be a misunderstanding. But the slide is a bit of a PR blunder.
Man, I almost did a spit-take when Steve showed that graph, and then showed Safari eating not from I.E.’s share, but from the indie scene??? Anyways, you’re right, and I’m glad he couldn’t pull it off anyways. Still I wonder about that. That sends such a particular message, and Steve, I read, takes the keynotes details seriously. I wonder if someone’s getting fired for this, or he really was sending a message.Regardless you’re not the only who was shocked to see it. I thought to myself, ‘Snap! Apple just served the (non-IE) browsers; what a slap in the face!’
Man, I almost did a spit-take when Steve showed that graph, and then showed Safari eating not from I.E.’s share, but from the indie scene???
Anyways, you’re right, and I’m glad he couldn’t pull it off anyways. Still I wonder about that. That sends such a particular message, and Steve, I read, takes the keynotes details seriously. I wonder if someone’s getting fired for this, or he really was sending a message.
Regardless you’re not the only who was shocked to see it. I thought to myself, ‘Snap! Apple just served the (non-IE) browsers; what a slap in the face!’
Hey, Firefox can still be a player – just retool to sit on top of WebKit – that way, Apple work on improving HTML rendering, and you guys can build better plumbing “outside the view”.But of course, this simply degenerates into another ‘render-engine-war’ which no-one every wins. Apple is going to be pouring money into WebKit support because it *must* have it working on all platforms. You should ride on its coattails…
I don’t think safari on windows is really anything negative. Sure he could have big hopes for it, but that doesn’t mean his heart is in it. Also windows already has a great app from Apple – Itunes. Itunes is by far the most top notch music player out there for a general user in my opinion.
Hey, Firefox can still be a player – just retool to sit on top of WebKit – that way, Apple work on improving HTML rendering, and you guys can build better plumbing “outside the view”.
But of course, this simply degenerates into another ‘render-engine-war’ which no-one every wins. Apple is going to be pouring money into WebKit support because it *must* have it working on all platforms. You should ride on its coattails…
I don’t think safari on windows is really anything negative. Sure he could have big hopes for it, but that doesn’t mean his heart is in it. Also windows already has a great app from Apple – Itunes. Itunes is by far the most top notch music player out there for a general user in my opinion.
I think Safari for windows is more of a “times changed” statement than one of practical use. Think back to when microsoft had made internet explorer for OS X. I think Apple is saying that it is now a contender for the mainstream. I don’t think this has anything to do with Firefox…Firefox is a great browser, it has its own solid reputation. Don’t turn this into a conspiracy.
If anything IE and Firefox both need to loose some market share. They’re both crappy browsers that should really be used. And to note, I use Opera, not Safari.
To be honest, I think the download rate will greatly slow to this browser. Being on linux, I can’t try it out, but those I have known on windows have downloaded it, seen how ugly and crappy it is, and deleted it. I never used to like firefox, always preferred Opera. Then one day I heard about the ad block addon, so I had to try that out, then I started looking around the addon section, and well, opera got deleted from my system, and I just love firefox, and that is where firefox sets itself out from apple’s browser, from opera, and IE. The addons allow people to experince the net the way they want to, to create the browser that gives them the best experince.
Isn’t it every company’s goal to have their product sell as many as it can. You’d be lying if you said you didn’t want Firefox to do as well as Jobs wants Safari to do.It’s a goal, and a very high-set and difficult to reach goal. Firefox will never die in all likelihood. Sure, Apple may take away a few Firefox users. But every day Firefox will get more.
I think Safari for windows is more of a “times changed” statement than one of practical use. Think back to when microsoft had made internet explorer for OS X. I think Apple is saying that it is now a contender for the mainstream. I don’t think this has anything to do with Firefox…
Firefox is a great browser, it has its own solid reputation. Don’t turn this into a conspiracy.
If anything IE and Firefox both need to loose some market share. They’re both crappy browsers that should really be used. And to note, I use Opera, not Safari.
To be honest, I think the download rate will greatly slow to this browser. Being on linux, I can’t try it out, but those I have known on windows have downloaded it, seen how ugly and crappy it is, and deleted it.
I never used to like firefox, always preferred Opera. Then one day I heard about the ad block addon, so I had to try that out, then I started looking around the addon section, and well, opera got deleted from my system, and I just love firefox, and that is where firefox sets itself out from apple’s browser, from opera, and IE. The addons allow people to experince the net the way they want to, to create the browser that gives them the best experince.
If Apple do actually want to gain a significant market share in the Windows market they are going to have a hard time. A lot of the people who switched to Firefox, did so at a time when IE was at only version 6 and there were compelling reasons to switch: tabs, pop up blocking, extensions, top right search box etc. These people didn’t switch back to IE when version 7 came out because there was no compelling reason to. For Safari the problem is that IE, Firefox and Opera most of the stuff Safari does already. The problem Apple has is making Safari interesting enough that someone would even try it.
How about just using Opera, the best browser of all 😀
Isn’t it every company’s goal to have their product sell as many as it can. You’d be lying if you said you didn’t want Firefox to do as well as Jobs wants Safari to do.
It’s a goal, and a very high-set and difficult to reach goal. Firefox will never die in all likelihood. Sure, Apple may take away a few Firefox users. But every day Firefox will get more.
I find it very annoying that some companies think that the world is only United States of America. It is not. This illustrates it very well,http://www.xitimonitor.com/en-us/browsers-barom…(link from the ‘article’)Another amazing fact, is that Safari for win32 has(d?) problems with national alphabets! Hello, Europe is a big market share too!?
It’s all about the iPhone. Apple is less and less interested in the MacPro towers. It’s into gadgets like,MacBook, MacBookPro, Ipod and now the iPhone. This move into Gadgets allows Apple to become a monopoly with impunity. The Safari push is to lock in iPhone window customers to a degraded experience and force them to buy another gadget. I hope Apple will fail to go beyond that core of owners as Firefox with all its problems offers by far the richest and most Mac like experience on the Web. Windows feels like the wild, wild West by comparison. I use Firefox on both systems. When you look at the iPhone you see the real Jobs, not think different but think like MS of old, one browser and total control of software/hardware. This little candy will sell well but the future is the phone that lets the customer choose how to interface. Jobs sees a future far more scary than his Keynote display. With the iPhone only using Safari he hopes for one platform, one phone, one MP3 player. I will not buy an iPhone for that reason alone.
I think some of you missed his point. He’s happy there is another competitor in the market. He just doesn’t like their approach.
Holy missing the point, Batman! John, I just want to let you know that there are people out there that did read your post, did understand it, and do share your well-founded dislike. Please treat the storm of misled comments here with the lack of interest they deserve.Seriously, no one reading this post cares what browser Joe Commenter prefers. All the assertions that building the best browser will naturally result in becoming the leading browser by usage is not only beside the point, but clearly wrong by historical evidence. John is not freaking out because Apple is now a bigger competitor – quite to the contrary, he is encouraging the increase in browser options. John’s point is clearly made in his post – please do the world a favour and read it before commenting.The point concerns the picture painted by the two sector pie chart. It’s a seriously tasteless portrayal that is worth discussing. Regardless of whether you’re a fan of a particular browser, the two browser picture is a unfavourable result. Remember Netscape vs IE, when each browser started implementing browser-specific extensions? It was not a pretty scene. I suspect if Netscape had it’s own OS foundation to leverage and promote, things would have been even uglier.As for John’s other point, the lack of appreciation for reality in the pie chart really is a concern. It really is a slap in the face for anyone who is, in software terms, pro-choice. The irony is that these people also form the passionate majority of Apple customers. People like John, and like me.
If Apple do actually want to gain a significant market share in the Windows market they are going to have a hard time. A lot of the people who switched to Firefox, did so at a time when IE was at only version 6 and there were compelling reasons to switch: tabs, pop up blocking, extensions, top right search box etc. These people didn’t switch back to IE when version 7 came out because there was no compelling reason to. For Safari the problem is that IE, Firefox and Opera most of the stuff Safari does already. The problem Apple has is making Safari interesting enough that someone would even try it.
How about just using Opera, the best browser of all 😀
I find it very annoying that some companies think that the world is only United States of America. It is not. This illustrates it very well,
http://www.xitimonitor.com/en-us/browsers-barometer/firefox-march-2007/index-1-2-3-77.html
(link from the ‘article’)
Another amazing fact, is that Safari for win32 has(d?) problems with national alphabets! Hello, Europe is a big market share too!?
If Apple didn’t create products that got the attention of the world outside their historically pitiful market share, they wouldn’t be here today. QuickTime, iPod, and now Safari cross over into the Windows world and encourage people to reconsider Apple (besides being successful products in themselves). I rather think that climbing out of single-digit market share is more on Apple’s mind than crushing Mozilla, so maybe folks shouldn’t get all Scott McNealy about it.Apple didn’t escape its near-death experience by complaining about Microsoft; it did it by producing superior products. If Mozilla were to produce a really superior browser, then I’d use it. As things stand, I don’t believe that’s the case.(Hi John!)
It’s all about the iPhone. Apple is less and less interested in the MacPro towers. It’s into gadgets like,MacBook, MacBookPro, Ipod and now the iPhone. This move into Gadgets allows Apple to become a monopoly with impunity. The Safari push is to lock in iPhone window customers to a degraded experience and force them to buy another gadget. I hope Apple will fail to go beyond that core of owners as Firefox with all its problems offers by far the richest and most Mac like experience on the Web.
Windows feels like the wild, wild West by comparison. I use Firefox on both systems. When you look at the iPhone you see the real Jobs, not think different but think like MS of old, one browser and total control of software/hardware. This little candy will sell well but the future is the phone that lets the customer choose how to interface. Jobs sees a future far more scary than his Keynote display. With the iPhone only using Safari he hopes for one platform, one phone, one MP3 player. I will not buy an iPhone for that reason alone.
I think some of you missed his point. He’s happy there is another competitor in the market. He just doesn’t like their approach.
I have a pc at home and a mac at work, and I use Firefox at both. IE is annoying and slow. Safari is incompatible with half the things I want to do on the web at work. I don’t care who says what numbers are out there. I know from experience that every single friend I have uses Firefox on their home desktop and/or laptop. Many of my co-workers have switched to Firefox and I convert more every year.
John could you cry any louder? Safari was released so Windowz Developers could write apps for the iphone, besides that it’s garbage. Mac users don’t even use it, they use Firefox. However if your read between the lines he is going after the mobile browsing market, something you might want to think about because people need it. Firefox if the best browser in the market place and people still use IE, people also want to know whats going on with Paris Hilton. My point john, people are dumb. Stop acting like them, your taking this way to far and looking like a fool. I hope to jezuz this is some kind of odd FUD, if not I have completely lost faith in you.
Holy missing the point, Batman! John, I just want to let you know that there are people out there that did read your post, did understand it, and do share your well-founded dislike. Please treat the storm of misled comments here with the lack of interest they deserve.
Seriously, no one reading this post cares what browser Joe Commenter prefers. All the assertions that building the best browser will naturally result in becoming the leading browser by usage is not only beside the point, but clearly wrong by historical evidence. John is not freaking out because Apple is now a bigger competitor – quite to the contrary, he is encouraging the increase in browser options. John’s point is clearly made in his post – please do the world a favour and read it before commenting.
The point concerns the picture painted by the two sector pie chart. It’s a seriously tasteless portrayal that is worth discussing. Regardless of whether you’re a fan of a particular browser, the two browser picture is a unfavourable result. Remember Netscape vs IE, when each browser started implementing browser-specific extensions? It was not a pretty scene. I suspect if Netscape had it’s own OS foundation to leverage and promote, things would have been even uglier.
As for John’s other point, the lack of appreciation for reality in the pie chart really is a concern. It really is a slap in the face for anyone who is, in software terms, pro-choice. The irony is that these people also form the passionate majority of Apple customers. People like John, and like me.
Hey, it was a joke to developers. Of course, the “enemy” of mac developers is Microsoft. So the second graph was to innocently show that M$ would not be the target.Probably, Apple is able to reach some IE users which Firefox doesn’t… If Safari is less worth than Firefox, you should not fear it.Oh, and I use Safari because of its brilliant font rendering.
Well, I downloaded Safari for Windows and I can’t say I’m overly impressed. Yea, it’s fast but it’s butt ugly interface and lack of so many features that I have added to Firefox I dropped it and went back to my faithful Firefox. Firefox is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. It’s got it’s flaws like the constant bug that comes and goes of typing words like don’t or wouldn’t and having the find function popping up and blocking the use of apostrophes. It’s quite annoying but it’s about the only issue I have with FF. Safari has tabs, goodie, it’s got allot going for it but reading this article and seeing that Steve Jobbs has the imperialistic attitude totally turns me off. It’s fine to think big but being humble about it helps get the point across. Not “we’re taking over, just you wait and see”. That turns me off to no end. I may use WinXP but IE is just as ugly and it functions far below what I can do with FF!!
If Apple didn’t create products that got the attention of the world outside their historically pitiful market share, they wouldn’t be here today. QuickTime, iPod, and now Safari cross over into the Windows world and encourage people to reconsider Apple (besides being successful products in themselves). I rather think that climbing out of single-digit market share is more on Apple’s mind than crushing Mozilla, so maybe folks shouldn’t get all Scott McNealy about it.
Apple didn’t escape its near-death experience by complaining about Microsoft; it did it by producing superior products. If Mozilla were to produce a really superior browser, then I’d use it. As things stand, I don’t believe that’s the case.
(Hi John!)
I have a pc at home and a mac at work, and I use Firefox at both. IE is annoying and slow. Safari is incompatible with half the things I want to do on the web at work.
I don’t care who says what numbers are out there. I know from experience that every single friend I have uses Firefox on their home desktop and/or laptop. Many of my co-workers have switched to Firefox and I convert more every year.
John could you cry any louder? Safari was released so Windowz Developers could write apps for the iphone, besides that it’s garbage. Mac users don’t even use it, they use Firefox. However if your read between the lines he is going after the mobile browsing market, something you might want to think about because people need it. Firefox if the best browser in the market place and people still use IE, people also want to know whats going on with Paris Hilton. My point john, people are dumb. Stop acting like them, your taking this way to far and looking like a fool. I hope to jezuz this is some kind of odd FUD, if not I have completely lost faith in you.
I think Mr. Lilly is reading too way much into this and OVERREACTING. What was Steve Jobs supposed to do, show a second pie chart with each of the competing browsers’ shares proportionately reduced? I believe he chose the second image merely for the sake of SIMPLICITY to convey his hope for Safari’s increased market share. Notice that IE’s share seems to unchanged in the second chart. Does anyone really believe Steve’s hope is to wipe out Firefox and leave IE’s market share untouched?
BTW, I’m a fan of Steve Jobs, Apple, and FIREFOX. Firefox is my browser of choice. As long as Firefox continues to be a great, innovative browser, what are you worried about? It will continue to have a significant share of the market.
Hey, it was a joke to developers. Of course, the “enemy” of mac developers is Microsoft. So the second graph was to innocently show that M$ would not be the target.
Probably, Apple is able to reach some IE users which Firefox doesn’t… If Safari is less worth than Firefox, you should not fear it.
Oh, and I use Safari because of its brilliant font rendering.
Well, I downloaded Safari for Windows and I can’t say I’m overly impressed. Yea, it’s fast but it’s butt ugly interface and lack of so many features that I have added to Firefox I dropped it and went back to my faithful Firefox. Firefox is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. It’s got it’s flaws like the constant bug that comes and goes of typing words like don’t or wouldn’t and having the find function popping up and blocking the use of apostrophes. It’s quite annoying but it’s about the only issue I have with FF. Safari has tabs, goodie, it’s got allot going for it but reading this article and seeing that Steve Jobbs has the imperialistic attitude totally turns me off. It’s fine to think big but being humble about it helps get the point across. Not “we’re taking over, just you wait and see”. That turns me off to no end. I may use WinXP but IE is just as ugly and it functions far below what I can do with FF!!
“Steve asserted Monday that Safari on Windows will overturn history, attract 100M new users, and revert the world to a 2 browser state. That remains to be seen, of course.” His chart gave that impression, but it was just a pie chart. I was actually thinking while Steve did cover the Firefox part of the chart, Apple was actually (actively) thinking more about the Microsoft part of the chart, if you know what I mean – the oldest trick in the book, misdirection.
I think Mr. Lilly is reading too way much into this and OVERREACTING. What was Steve Jobs supposed to do, show a second pie chart with each of the competing browsers’ shares proportionately reduced? I believe he chose the second image merely for the sake of SIMPLICITY to convey his hope for Safari’s increased market share. Notice that IE’s share seems to unchanged in the second chart. Does anyone really believe Steve’s hope is to wipe out Firefox and leave IE’s market share untouched?
BTW, I’m a fan of Steve Jobs, Apple, and FIREFOX. Firefox is my browser of choice. As long as Firefox continues to be a great, innovative browser, what are you worried about? It will continue to have a significant share of the market.
Everyone keeps looking at the browser as “browser” – try looking at it as “application platform”.Webkit is going to have a 100% compatible presence on PCs Macs and iPhone, if Apple get their act together, which they have demonstrated they can do with iPod.If Firefox doesn’t get with that program, then they’ll sure they’ll be an open platform defending the rights of the brave and the free, but they won’t be compatible with the apps that start appearing.Webkit is the platform. Safari is just one application wrapper around it. In the same way that MSHTML is the browser engine, and Internet Explorer is just a crappy application around it.This has nothing to do with Mom and Pop surfing MySpace and everything to do with real Web 2.0 capability
“Steve asserted Monday that Safari on Windows will overturn history, attract 100M new users, and revert the world to a 2 browser state. That remains to be seen, of course.” His chart gave that impression, but it was just a pie chart. I was actually thinking while Steve did cover the Firefox part of the chart, Apple was actually (actively) thinking more about the Microsoft part of the chart, if you know what I mean – the oldest trick in the book, misdirection.
“Steve asserted Monday that Safari on Windows will overturn history, attract 100M new users, and revert the world to a 2 browser state.”Aren’t we tired yet of drinking this kool-aid? For sure I am.
Everyone keeps looking at the browser as “browser” – try looking at it as “application platform”.
Webkit is going to have a 100% compatible presence on PCs Macs and iPhone, if Apple get their act together, which they have demonstrated they can do with iPod.
If Firefox doesn’t get with that program, then they’ll sure they’ll be an open platform defending the rights of the brave and the free, but they won’t be compatible with the apps that start appearing.
Webkit is the platform. Safari is just one application wrapper around it. In the same way that MSHTML is the browser engine, and Internet Explorer is just a crappy application around it.
This has nothing to do with Mom and Pop surfing MySpace and everything to do with real Web 2.0 capability
“Steve asserted Monday that Safari on Windows will overturn history, attract 100M new users, and revert the world to a 2 browser state.”
Aren’t we tired yet of drinking this kool-aid? For sure I am.
Windows users are not going to flock to safari on IE simply because Most windows user have been trained by microsoft and its real easy for a novice user to use. The simple fact is that its a good thing that the 800 pound gorrilla is going to ldo this bit that because he deffinatly not the least bit threatened and we knoe that the program os going to crash more than IE……………….
Windows users are not going to flock to safari on IE simply because Most windows user have been trained by microsoft and its real easy for a novice user to use. The simple fact is that its a good thing that the 800 pound gorrilla is going to ldo this bit that because he deffinatly not the least bit threatened and we knoe that the program os going to crash more than IE……………….
It is a dream in fact. Safari second beta is unable to start on my WinXP SP2 system, and several report said crashes and other cool bugs. It is a long way to even reach a stable state, 100M user is a far dream. :)If there are any browser that takes market share from Firefox, this is Opera! Opera 6 & 7 are the fastest browser with the lightest requirements, that i ever seen before… except lynx of course. ;)But Firefox is an open source project, this is the main difference! Open source mean innovation, power, flexibility.
Why would Firefox die, unless everyone associated with it gives up? This whole rant is nothing more than John misinterpreting a pie chart. Hint, John: the second chart focuses on Safari versus IE. Get it?
“corporate-controlled”That’s it in a nutshell. Ultimately, that’s the prison that Apple and Microsoft builds and that Linux helps you escape from. It might be more comfortable sometimes to stay in prison, like when you want to open a .doc email attachment made in Word, or view something made with the most recent features of Flash, but ultimately it’s a boring, one-dimensional (or two), anemic world.Firefox has probably been the best example, so far, of how open source is the better way.
hi all — thanks for the great comments. but for everyone who thinks that the 2nd chart is showing something different, watch the actual keynote & see if you still think that.
It is a dream in fact. Safari second beta is unable to start on my WinXP SP2 system, and several report said crashes and other cool bugs. It is a long way to even reach a stable state, 100M user is a far dream. 🙂
If there are any browser that takes market share from Firefox, this is Opera! Opera 6 & 7 are the fastest browser with the lightest requirements, that i ever seen before… except lynx of course. 😉
But Firefox is an open source project, this is the main difference! Open source mean innovation, power, flexibility.
Why would Firefox die, unless everyone associated with it gives up? This whole rant is nothing more than John misinterpreting a pie chart. Hint, John: the second chart focuses on Safari versus IE. Get it?
“corporate-controlled”
That’s it in a nutshell. Ultimately, that’s the prison that Apple and Microsoft builds and that Linux helps you escape from. It might be more comfortable sometimes to stay in prison, like when you want to open a .doc email attachment made in Word, or view something made with the most recent features of Flash, but ultimately it’s a boring, one-dimensional (or two), anemic world.
Firefox has probably been the best example, so far, of how open source is the better way.
hi all — thanks for the great comments. but for everyone who thinks that the 2nd chart is showing something different, watch the actual keynote & see if you still think that.
Wrong. This is a classic example of taking something and making a big deal about it so you’re in the news. I’m an avid Safari and Firefox user and think that all these wars of words are silly. The good thing is that it does lead to better browsers. 🙂
Seems to me that Apple may tweak Microsoft’s nose every now and then, there are some places they’re too chicken to mess with them: browsers and the Office suite
If Apple takes all of Firefox’s users, who’s fault is that? Apple’s? No, it’s Mozilla’s fault, isn’t it? You’re just afraid that Safari may just make Firefox irrelevant. So this is your way of dealing with Safari? By bitching about it in a blog? Here’s an idea, get out there and build a better browser. This is why Safari’s entrance into the Windows platform is a good thing: Competition. With another major player on the field, it’s likely that we’ll see even more innovation in the browser space. If this is the way you’re going to deal with Apple, you might as well lay down and die. Safari is an excellent browser. For me, it has replaced Firefox on my Windows desktop. Safari has always been my number one choice on the Mac desktop. It’s just easier to use, it looks nice and it’s fast. I don’t mind living in the world of Apple. They are embracing open standards much better than Microsoft.
Apple was simply attacking MS. END OF STORY. Get over it, you already lost the war, focus on making a product people will use, and you might get some market share back.
No offence, but Firefox on OS X is a huge, bloated sloth-of-a-browser with virtually no redeeming features. If it weren’t for Firebug, it wouldn’t be half as well adopted on the Mac platform.Fix it, and maybe Mozilla will increase its share of the Mac market, not decrease it.
I think you over rate this chart. It’s only a Steve Jobs marketing speech nothing more.It is his method of simplifying a graphics he also had rename this 4/3 pie-chart element to “All Other Browsers”But in the Apple comunity their is always this fight betweengood (Apple) and evil (Microsoft)
Wrong. This is a classic example of taking something and making a big deal about it so you’re in the news.
I’m an avid Safari and Firefox user and think that all these wars of words are silly. The good thing is that it does lead to better browsers. 🙂
Seems to me that Apple may tweak Microsoft’s nose every now and then, there are some places they’re too chicken to mess with them: browsers and the Office suite
I agree with so many of you. Apple wasn’t attacking those who help to push the envelope (open source) to force companies like Microsoft to make better products…well, actually, catch up. IE is a behemoth with no-sense design like Vista. Firefox is a much better browser than IE. I love Safari but there are sites that are not compatible with Safari. We spend most all our computing experience on a web browser so what is wrong with a little competition to make both Firefox and Safari better browsers and both take a chunk out of the IE market (whose dominance stems from the average consumer using it because “that is what is installed on my Windows machine”)? Apple wants a chunk of IE, not of Firefox. John Lilly needs to stop being so sensitive. Competition will push Firefox to continue to innovate and improve just like it forces Apple.
If Apple takes all of Firefox’s users, who’s fault is that? Apple’s? No, it’s Mozilla’s fault, isn’t it? You’re just afraid that Safari may just make Firefox irrelevant. So this is your way of dealing with Safari? By bitching about it in a blog? Here’s an idea, get out there and build a better browser. This is why Safari’s entrance into the Windows platform is a good thing: Competition. With another major player on the field, it’s likely that we’ll see even more innovation in the browser space. If this is the way you’re going to deal with Apple, you might as well lay down and die. Safari is an excellent browser. For me, it has replaced Firefox on my Windows desktop. Safari has always been my number one choice on the Mac desktop. It’s just easier to use, it looks nice and it’s fast. I don’t mind living in the world of Apple. They are embracing open standards much better than Microsoft.
Apple was simply attacking MS. END OF STORY. Get over it, you already lost the war, focus on making a product people will use, and you might get some market share back.
No offence, but Firefox on OS X is a huge, bloated sloth-of-a-browser with virtually no redeeming features.
If it weren’t for Firebug, it wouldn’t be half as well adopted on the Mac platform.
Fix it, and maybe Mozilla will increase its share of the Mac market, not decrease it.
I think you over rate this chart. It’s only a Steve Jobs marketing speech nothing more.
It is his method of simplifying a graphics he also had rename this 4/3 pie-chart element to “All Other Browsers”
But in the Apple comunity their is always this fight between
good (Apple) and evil (Microsoft)
I was a Firefox fan when everyone was talking more about Mozilla. Then Firefox finally took off and is the talk of today. Lately though it has been getting to be bloatware in my book and has always taken forever to launch on OS X.I want a straight forward simple internet browser and that is where Safari comes in. Its simple, straight forward options although I would like a few more, but its simple and does what its made for surfing the internet.Its not choked down by launch times, Profiles for a browser, or getting pested by embedded first launches by tabs opening or webpages opening to advertise its self. With Safari you can set your homepage and its set then even after upgrades…..Firefox you get pested and sent to a Mozilla webpage on every upgrade with any ways of stopping it.I switched from Firefox to Safari when I moved to 10.4 and love the move I made expecially since Firefox 2.0 bloatware was released. Hopefully 3.0 will fix the issues I have with Firefox but I doubt that.-Dan
I agree with so many of you. Apple wasn’t attacking those who help to push the envelope (open source) to force companies like Microsoft to make better products…well, actually, catch up. IE is a behemoth with no-sense design like Vista. Firefox is a much better browser than IE. I love Safari but there are sites that are not compatible with Safari. We spend most all our computing experience on a web browser so what is wrong with a little competition to make both Firefox and Safari better browsers and both take a chunk out of the IE market (whose dominance stems from the average consumer using it because “that is what is installed on my Windows machine”)? Apple wants a chunk of IE, not of Firefox. John Lilly needs to stop being so sensitive. Competition will push Firefox to continue to innovate and improve just like it forces Apple.
I was a Firefox fan when everyone was talking more about Mozilla. Then Firefox finally took off and is the talk of today. Lately though it has been getting to be bloatware in my book and has always taken forever to launch on OS X.
I want a straight forward simple internet browser and that is where Safari comes in. Its simple, straight forward options although I would like a few more, but its simple and does what its made for surfing the internet.
Its not choked down by launch times, Profiles for a browser, or getting pested by embedded first launches by tabs opening or webpages opening to advertise its self. With Safari you can set your homepage and its set then even after upgrades…..Firefox you get pested and sent to a Mozilla webpage on every upgrade with any ways of stopping it.
I switched from Firefox to Safari when I moved to 10.4 and love the move I made expecially since Firefox 2.0 bloatware was released. Hopefully 3.0 will fix the issues I have with Firefox but I doubt that.
-Dan
will you ever get it.jobs is so clever no one even understand what is he thinking.he just released the safari for the windows to get the web developers aknowledge the browser as a web standard so that his iphone has no problem to access web pages all around the webapple does not make any product if they dont profit unlike mr. gates
will you ever get it.
jobs is so clever no one even understand what is he thinking.
he just released the safari for the windows to get the web developers aknowledge the browser as a web standard so that his iphone has no problem to access web pages all around the web
apple does not make any product if they dont profit unlike mr. gates
its quite an amateur view shown in 2nd presentation. i haven’t seen safari [ as its unavailable for linux, & will remain so 🙂 ], but for any new browser to get near firefox is a huge ask. i have been using browsers for past 10 years & firefox remains the best.
As a Windows user, I love Firefox and I use it all the time… I encourage all Windows users I know to use Firefox and have been an ardent supporter since the earliest days. However, the OS X version of Firefox is abysmal. The reasons are well documented, and the response has always been the same.OS X is and has been a third-class citizen with regard to the Firefox platform, and as long as that remains the case, I welcome and encourage alternatives to Firefox on this unfavored platform, and if said choices migrate out more power to them.Don’t throw OS X users your leftovers from the windows port and then complain when Apple tires of it. Microsoft did it with IE, and you do it with Firefox. More power to them for putting some effort into their platform, and doing it with an open source core.
Lilly, you showed your worst side when you commented so quickly. Obviously you hadn’t had a chance to really put Safari on Windows through its paces with such a quick response which shows a rather disturbing lack of due diligence and credibility. Mozilla is the reigning king of alternative browsers and you should have acted like a leader not a paranoid freshman. Instead you played right into Steve’s PR game and showed you cards too early (And it wasn’t a winning hand.)Also you showed a genuine lack of grace and culture by whining about how Steve views the world. You may be correct on Steve’s view (and it may have been a marketing ploy) but if you and your Mozilla peers were more focused on just creating a fine product, you wouldn’t have anything to worry about from Safari. People will choose the better product and if you aren’t so afraid that Safrari is better, you sure didn’t show it. Instead you sounded like a whiny little child. Any PR exec worth their salt would have told you that you should have welcomed the increased diversity and talked about how you looked forward to the healthy competition Apple would provide for Mozilla and Microsoft. You could also have talked about how Apple is helping you spread the word about standards-compliant websites. You did mention it once or twice but in now way did you stress that. Instead you focused on whining about duopolies and how Apple is trying to take over the browser market. Or if you couldn’t bring yourself to praise and welcome them, you should have kept your mouth shut. Our mothers were right when they said, “if you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say anything at all.” Lilly, you should have heeded that advice.-AslamP.S. All you really needed to say to both praise and smack them down while coming off as the leader that you are and showing a bit of class all at the same time was, “I praise Steve and Apple’s bravery. Come on in, the water’s warm.”P.P.S. You need your PR or Public Strategy people vetting your blog posts because in your position of authority you can’t assume that this little sandbox doesn’t have consequences.
its quite an amateur view shown in 2nd presentation. i haven’t seen safari [ as its unavailable for linux, & will remain so 🙂 ], but for any new browser to get near firefox is a huge ask. i have been using browsers for past 10 years & firefox remains the best.
As a Windows user, I love Firefox and I use it all the time… I encourage all Windows users I know to use Firefox and have been an ardent supporter since the earliest days. However, the OS X version of Firefox is abysmal. The reasons are well documented, and the response has always been the same.
OS X is and has been a third-class citizen with regard to the Firefox platform, and as long as that remains the case, I welcome and encourage alternatives to Firefox on this unfavored platform, and if said choices migrate out more power to them.
Don’t throw OS X users your leftovers from the windows port and then complain when Apple tires of it. Microsoft did it with IE, and you do it with Firefox. More power to them for putting some effort into their platform, and doing it with an open source core.
Lilly, you showed your worst side when you commented so quickly. Obviously you hadn’t had a chance to really put Safari on Windows through its paces with such a quick response which shows a rather disturbing lack of due diligence and credibility. Mozilla is the reigning king of alternative browsers and you should have acted like a leader not a paranoid freshman. Instead you played right into Steve’s PR game and showed you cards too early (And it wasn’t a winning hand.)
Also you showed a genuine lack of grace and culture by whining about how Steve views the world. You may be correct on Steve’s view (and it may have been a marketing ploy) but if you and your Mozilla peers were more focused on just creating a fine product, you wouldn’t have anything to worry about from Safari. People will choose the better product and if you aren’t so afraid that Safrari is better, you sure didn’t show it. Instead you sounded like a whiny little child.
Any PR exec worth their salt would have told you that you should have welcomed the increased diversity and talked about how you looked forward to the healthy competition Apple would provide for Mozilla and Microsoft. You could also have talked about how Apple is helping you spread the word about standards-compliant websites. You did mention it once or twice but in now way did you stress that. Instead you focused on whining about duopolies and how Apple is trying to take over the browser market. Or if you couldn’t bring yourself to praise and welcome them, you should have kept your mouth shut. Our mothers were right when they said, “if you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say anything at all.” Lilly, you should have heeded that advice.
-Aslam
P.S. All you really needed to say to both praise and smack them down while coming off as the leader that you are and showing a bit of class all at the same time was, “I praise Steve and Apple’s bravery. Come on in, the water’s warm.”
P.P.S. You need your PR or Public Strategy people vetting your blog posts because in your position of authority you can’t assume that this little sandbox doesn’t have consequences.
I really don’t think this is good branding nor good communication to have such an approach of Apple. Love to see Mozilla / Firefox evolving.
Aslam, you showed your worst side when you commented so quickly… It seems from the 2 PS, which also shows a rather disturbing lack of due diligence and credibility… And so on. :)I do not see, how Public Strategy people come to a private blog? If you want to live in a censured world (and web), move to China, and let everyone else the right of deliverance.Also you showed a genuine lack of grace and culture by whining about how John views the world….
I can’t believe there’s not one single post here that correctly explains the pie chart. Didn’t any of you watch the WWDC Keynote? Alas… let me explain it for you…In the first chart Jobs displays the current breakdown of browser market-share. Then he explains that even if Apple could acquire *all* the browser marketshare on the Mac, they could only ever get the non-IE portion of the pie. This is what he intended to portray by the second chart. However, the second chart is a mistaken representation of his spoken point. If it were consistent with his speech it would still show a sliver of non-IE Windows-based browsers.The intent of his speech and chart was to illustrate (in a tongue-in-cheek manner) that Apple can’t get any further market-share without moving into the Windows application space.So there was a conceptual glitch in the charts. Or you could say that while the second chart represented browser market-share on all platforms, the second chart represented Windows only.Of course Apple neither expects nor wants to displace all other third-party browsers. Again, that was not the point of this part of Steve’s presentation. He was merely saying that “even if Apple *could* gain all the non-IE mindshare out there, the pie chart would still be overwhelmingly dominated by IE” and for this point I think his charts were effective.So John Lilly is misinterpreting and misrepresenting Steve’s presentation in order to produce FUD. And I for one find this ironic considering the original reasons for the Mozilla Project to exist in the first place. Namely, to combat Microsoft’s monopolization and FUD-spreading ways.Has Mozilla become so caught up in its own projected insecurities that it now has to emulate Microsoft?
I really don’t think this is good branding nor good communication to have such an approach of Apple. Love to see Mozilla / Firefox evolving.
Aslam, you showed your worst side when you commented so quickly… It seems from the 2 PS, which also shows a rather disturbing lack of due diligence and credibility… And so on. 🙂
I do not see, how Public Strategy people come to a private blog? If you want to live in a censured world (and web), move to China, and let everyone else the right of deliverance.
Also you showed a genuine lack of grace and culture by whining about how John views the world….
John: A very nice article, even if it is just a bit disingenuous: If you could create a product that was not only novel, elegant, helpful, and widely popular, but fostered competition while curing various ills of capitalism & society, would you do it? Sure you would! However, I’m also sure you’re not so altruistic that you’d simply give it away as a panacea following a moment of personal instrospection: No doubt you have bills to pay, assets to accumulate, vacations to take, and investors to satisfy. Starbucks, Ben & Jerry’s, Apple, Microsoft, and others firms may have grown to the point where capitalism has subsumed idealism, but that’s how human nature has worked for quite awhile…and, I suspect, also works for Mozilla, if their purported arrangement with Google is actually true (see: http://www.scroogle.org/mozilla.html). While I’m not a big fan of any “opolies”, I am intelligent enough to recognize that it is possible to legitimately and honestly earn a monopoly position. What irritates me no end is when it is “earned” by subterfuge, FUD, a Reality Distortion Field, or whatever other moniker one wishes to apply to the darker attributes of capitalism. I’m far more impressed with open & honest competition & communication that builds trust between the company & consumer: Something I feel is seriously lacking in our current economic structure. Thanks for reading, and best wishes for your business.
I can’t believe there’s not one single post here that correctly explains the pie chart. Didn’t any of you watch the WWDC Keynote? Alas… let me explain it for you…
In the first chart Jobs displays the current breakdown of browser market-share. Then he explains that even if Apple could acquire *all* the browser marketshare on the Mac, they could only ever get the non-IE portion of the pie. This is what he intended to portray by the second chart. However, the second chart is a mistaken representation of his spoken point. If it were consistent with his speech it would still show a sliver of non-IE Windows-based browsers.
The intent of his speech and chart was to illustrate (in a tongue-in-cheek manner) that Apple can’t get any further market-share without moving into the Windows application space.
So there was a conceptual glitch in the charts. Or you could say that while the second chart represented browser market-share on all platforms, the second chart represented Windows only.
Of course Apple neither expects nor wants to displace all other third-party browsers. Again, that was not the point of this part of Steve’s presentation. He was merely saying that “even if Apple *could* gain all the non-IE mindshare out there, the pie chart would still be overwhelmingly dominated by IE” and for this point I think his charts were effective.
So John Lilly is misinterpreting and misrepresenting Steve’s presentation in order to produce FUD. And I for one find this ironic considering the original reasons for the Mozilla Project to exist in the first place. Namely, to combat Microsoft’s monopolization and FUD-spreading ways.
Has Mozilla become so caught up in its own projected insecurities that it now has to emulate Microsoft?
You totally missed the mark on this. There is one reason why Apple released Safari for Windows and one reason only. This makes it easier for developers to code webpages for the iPhone. If consumers buy the iPhone and they can’t read webpages it will fail. Since Safari is the only browser for the iPhone, Jobs and co. needed a way to make it easier for the developers to help them.Apple’s browser is not going to convert Windows users to the Mac line, and having used all three browsers, no one is going to switch to Safari as their main browser if they already use Firefox.
Neither Google, YouTube or MySpace adhere to your non-corporate ideologies (hell, even Firefox has shareholders, as you said), and they are all successful in their fields of the web. Why Apple can’t release a corporate controlled competitor without upsetting you exposes – not really a shareholder-pleasing stratagem (that was news to you alone) – a deep envy of Apple’s goals, one that people with a mind to aid the Mozilla foundation really could do without. I would suggest realigning your politic: instead of scorning Safari’s ambitions, make Firefox better so that eventuality doesn’t happen! 😉
John: A very nice article, even if it is just a bit disingenuous: If you could create a product that was not only novel, elegant, helpful, and widely popular, but fostered competition while curing various ills of capitalism & society, would you do it? Sure you would! However, I’m also sure you’re not so altruistic that you’d simply give it away as a panacea following a moment of personal instrospection: No doubt you have bills to pay, assets to accumulate, vacations to take, and investors to satisfy. Starbucks, Ben & Jerry’s, Apple, Microsoft, and others firms may have grown to the point where capitalism has subsumed idealism, but that’s how human nature has worked for quite awhile…and, I suspect, also works for Mozilla, if their purported arrangement with Google is actually true (see: http://www.scroogle.org/mozilla.html). While I’m not a big fan of any “opolies”, I am intelligent enough to recognize that it is possible to legitimately and honestly earn a monopoly position. What irritates me no end is when it is “earned” by subterfuge, FUD, a Reality Distortion Field, or whatever other moniker one wishes to apply to the darker attributes of capitalism. I’m far more impressed with open & honest competition & communication that builds trust between the company & consumer: Something I feel is seriously lacking in our current economic structure. Thanks for reading, and best wishes for your business.
You totally missed the mark on this. There is one reason why Apple released Safari for Windows and one reason only. This makes it easier for developers to code webpages for the iPhone. If consumers buy the iPhone and they can’t read webpages it will fail. Since Safari is the only browser for the iPhone, Jobs and co. needed a way to make it easier for the developers to help them.
Apple’s browser is not going to convert Windows users to the Mac line, and having used all three browsers, no one is going to switch to Safari as their main browser if they already use Firefox.
Neither Google, YouTube or MySpace adhere to your non-corporate ideologies (hell, even Firefox has shareholders, as you said), and they are all successful in their fields of the web. Why Apple can’t release a corporate controlled competitor without upsetting you exposes – not really a shareholder-pleasing stratagem (that was news to you alone) – a deep envy of Apple’s goals, one that people with a mind to aid the Mozilla foundation really could do without. I would suggest realigning your politic: instead of scorning Safari’s ambitions, make Firefox better so that eventuality doesn’t happen! 😉
Every time Apple wins over a new computer user, Firefox eventually gets another user. Firefox is far preferable to Safari in my experience. I really think what Steve did was all about the iPhone, which is where all his attention is now, anyway, and not about the Macintosh. I recently put Firefox on my PC and now I can tolerate it, too, after years of fighting IE. Who knew that IE was half of what made Windows so loathesome?
Every time Apple wins over a new computer user, Firefox eventually gets another user. Firefox is far preferable to Safari in my experience. I really think what Steve did was all about the iPhone, which is where all his attention is now, anyway, and not about the Macintosh. I recently put Firefox on my PC and now I can tolerate it, too, after years of fighting IE. Who knew that IE was half of what made Windows so loathesome?
John you need to get out more if you really believe Apple wants a duopoly of browsers.Roughly Drafted addresses your misunderstandings better than I can here so do yourself a favour and go read it.http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07…Cheers.
Jobs to Mozilla Firefox: All your (user)base are belong to us.
here is a rational interpretation of the Apple chart http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07…
John you need to get out more if you really believe Apple wants a duopoly of browsers.
Roughly Drafted addresses your misunderstandings better than I can here so do yourself a favour and go read it.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07/44123EA6-4742-4C36-B73E-4DB1E767D138.html
Cheers.
Jobs to Mozilla Firefox: All your (user)base are belong to us.
here is a rational interpretation of the Apple chart http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07/44123EA6-4742-4C36-B73E-4DB1E767D138.html
Salutations John,As a user of Safari on the Mac I can honestly say it has it’s plus points and it’s minus points like any browser. It’s support for JavaScript until this new beta was a little sparse and it didn’t support SVG until this beta either. It also suffered a few memory leaks. But besides these it is an amazing browser. Font rendering is the closest to how the fonts were meant to display by their creators (even though they will look better in Leopard with it’s resolution independance once higher resolution screens are produced), Photos with colour profles will display as intended for the first time. It’s simple (not in your face interface which is functional but leaves plenty of real estate for the website to display in. All good points and can obviously make the competition squirm a little. (I aimed that one at IE by the way). Now onto the charts. The first chart obviously is a close – best you can do – representation of US browser market share. These figures sort of exist but it’s not really possible for them to be accurate. Installed base is the best way to represent browsers in the real world. A pie chart is also not the best way to show how many installed copies of each browser are on people’s computers. Real figures are not that clean. Many people have installed and regularly use more than one browser. As we all know, browsers have things they are good at and things they suck at. So in real terms the second chart might not actually represent Browser market share at all. Maybe it just represents the hopeful installed base for Safari and for comparison purposes the installed base of the current most widely used browser which unfortunately is IE. So it shows around 20% of people hopefully evntually having Safari installed on their machines. And around 80% of people having IE installed (again just for comparitive reasons). You see, Apple are about creating great products, stirring up the pot and waiting to see what happens. In contrast, Microsoft are about creating mediocre stuff, then using FUD and dodgy deals with vendors to kill all competition. That’s why they are getting fined billions every year due to Anti-Trust lawsuits.As far as Apple is concerned it’s all about getting web developers to take Safari seriously and code for it so sites work well for all Mac users and the iPhone. If you think anything else then it’s understandable paranoia but not really justified.I suggest you ring Steve Jobs and ask him if he means to kill Firefox of if he views you as an ally in the war against IE. Then get him to explain his simple view of the browser world.You need to remember that you have a link to Firefox on the OS X software downloads area of Apple’s website. Would Microsoft do this on their site? I think not. John, Firefox supports standards very well, so does Opera, so does Safari. IE on the other hand does not. If web developers eventually see that around 20% of people use Safari sometimes, 20% of people use Firefox sometimes, 15% use other browsers that support standards sometimes and 80% of people use IE sometimes they will have to code sites to take into consideration there are 50 – 60% of people (or more) using alternative (standards compliant) browsers to IE with it’s suport for MS proprietary standards and shoddy support for standards it will signify a big move away from IE for users in general and hopefully start a potential rebellion among web developers (like me) to go for standards based only web development. Personally I can’t wait to stop having to use conditional comments and a second stylesheet for IE. It will save me no end of lost earnings. This is good for Firefox, Apple (because of the iPhone), open source in general and especially good for web developers that care about the W3C and web standards and the progress of the Internet that Microsoft has forced to stagnate for so long with it’s forced monopoly.I can see why you might get a little paranoid though John as you have a lot invested in Firefox.Remember John. For browser makers like you it’s about the Google hits generating revenue. For developers it’s about “painless markup and CSS” that’s why so many idiots develop for IE. Because of the numbers of users. But for the end user, it’s about being able to view websites on their computers, phones and other connected devices. If Gecko and Webkit gain in market share then IE will lose market share. I suggest you team up with Apple, consider Webkit as a possible project to join and use it or the next version of Firefox then you can help with the particular standards based stuff you are excellent at that the Webkit project might lack in and at the same time benefit from better font rendering, support for colour profiles in images, Better SVG integration etc. That way you could eat into IE’s share of the pie between you. At the moment you have around 15% installed base. Joning with Apple may give you both 25 – 30% each. IE will be left with just the silly asses that rely on the flaky (security liability) of their Active-X riddled corporate intranets.Think about it and seriously, Ring (or email) Steve Jobs.
Just a thought. If I were to advise Steve Jobs on how he should represent the pie chart I would put in the bit that sais IE “All other browsers”. That way you wouldn’t know who it would displace which is more realistic anyway.Just my 10 pennies worth. (I had my £100 worth on the last post).
Salutations John,
As a user of Safari on the Mac I can honestly say it has it’s plus points and it’s minus points like any browser.
It’s support for JavaScript until this new beta was a little sparse and it didn’t support SVG until this beta either. It also suffered a few memory leaks. But besides these it is an amazing browser. Font rendering is the closest to how the fonts were meant to display by their creators (even though they will look better in Leopard with it’s resolution independance once higher resolution screens are produced), Photos with colour profles will display as intended for the first time. It’s simple (not in your face interface which is functional but leaves plenty of real estate for the website to display in. All good points and can obviously make the competition squirm a little. (I aimed that one at IE by the way).
Now onto the charts. The first chart obviously is a close – best you can do – representation of US browser market share. These figures sort of exist but it’s not really possible for them to be accurate. Installed base is the best way to represent browsers in the real world.
A pie chart is also not the best way to show how many installed copies of each browser are on people’s computers. Real figures are not that clean. Many people have installed and regularly use more than one browser. As we all know, browsers have things they are good at and things they suck at. So in real terms the second chart might not actually represent Browser market share at all. Maybe it just represents the hopeful installed base for Safari and for comparison purposes the installed base of the current most widely used browser which unfortunately is IE.
So it shows around 20% of people hopefully evntually having Safari installed on their machines. And around 80% of people having IE installed (again just for comparitive reasons).
You see, Apple are about creating great products, stirring up the pot and waiting to see what happens. In contrast, Microsoft are about creating mediocre stuff, then using FUD and dodgy deals with vendors to kill all competition. That’s why they are getting fined billions every year due to Anti-Trust lawsuits.
As far as Apple is concerned it’s all about getting web developers to take Safari seriously and code for it so sites work well for all Mac users and the iPhone. If you think anything else then it’s understandable paranoia but not really justified.
I suggest you ring Steve Jobs and ask him if he means to kill Firefox of if he views you as an ally in the war against IE. Then get him to explain his simple view of the browser world.
You need to remember that you have a link to Firefox on the OS X software downloads area of Apple’s website. Would Microsoft do this on their site? I think not.
John, Firefox supports standards very well, so does Opera, so does Safari. IE on the other hand does not. If web developers eventually see that around 20% of people use Safari sometimes, 20% of people use Firefox sometimes, 15% use other browsers that support standards sometimes and 80% of people use IE sometimes they will have to code sites to take into consideration there are 50 – 60% of people (or more) using alternative (standards compliant) browsers to IE with it’s suport for MS proprietary standards and shoddy support for standards it will signify a big move away from IE for users in general and hopefully start a potential rebellion among web developers (like me) to go for standards based only web development. Personally I can’t wait to stop having to use conditional comments and a second stylesheet for IE. It will save me no end of lost earnings. This is good for Firefox, Apple (because of the iPhone), open source in general and especially good for web developers that care about the W3C and web standards and the progress of the Internet that Microsoft has forced to stagnate for so long with it’s forced monopoly.
I can see why you might get a little paranoid though John as you have a lot invested in Firefox.
Remember John. For browser makers like you it’s about the Google hits generating revenue. For developers it’s about “painless markup and CSS” that’s why so many idiots develop for IE. Because of the numbers of users. But for the end user, it’s about being able to view websites on their computers, phones and other connected devices.
If Gecko and Webkit gain in market share then IE will lose market share.
I suggest you team up with Apple, consider Webkit as a possible project to join and use it or the next version of Firefox then you can help with the particular standards based stuff you are excellent at that the Webkit project might lack in and at the same time benefit from better font rendering, support for colour profiles in images, Better SVG integration etc. That way you could eat into IE’s share of the pie between you. At the moment you have around 15% installed base. Joning with Apple may give you both 25 – 30% each. IE will be left with just the silly asses that rely on the flaky (security liability) of their Active-X riddled corporate intranets.
Think about it and seriously, Ring (or email) Steve Jobs.
Just a thought. If I were to advise Steve Jobs on how he should represent the pie chart I would put in the bit that sais IE “All other browsers”.
That way you wouldn’t know who it would displace which is more realistic anyway.
Just my 10 pennies worth. (I had my £100 worth on the last post).
Simon 06.16.07 / 4pm “Safari on Windows is a collosal mistake for many reasons.1. In one stroke Apple have removed the incentive for probably 80% of their prospective customers to purchase an Apple computer.2. They’re not going to be able to compete with existing Windows based browsers.3. Apple exists largely on hot air and myth making. By allowing consumers to substantially test their products without paying a sucker fee, Apple are putting their image at risk.Bookmark this post:Safari will flounder on Windows for a few years, then it will be quietly withdrawn.”This is so laughable Simon.1. A prospective customer does not refrain from buying a Macbook or iMac because Safari is available on Windows! Safari does not make OSX, it is simply one of the many compelling features offered. The design and integration of both the hardware and software is what makes the mac a mac. Maybe I’ll switch to Vista because of Safari :-)2. Why not? Why is not conceivable that the engineers at Apple could write a piece software than can compete with IE. IE is trash, it’s used primarily because it’s a default. Tabs were only added last year and touted as a great new feature!!!3. Do you use any Apple products? I thought iTunes was free? I struggle with the notion that any company could exist on “hot air” and “myth making” for this long. You certainly don’t give Apple consumers any credit. There is no guarantee Safari will succeed, based on the reasons you have given I see no reason why it would fail.Sorry I had to reply to this even though its off topic.To John’s PostAll it does is highlight the difference in interpretation of this pie chart. The only fact is Firefox has a much greater share of the browser market than Safari.I can see why Safari entering the market is such a concern for Firefox. Safari will be the default browser on the iPhone, so many users (10+ million by 09) will become accustomed to it and it’s nuances. If we look at the number of Mac users total say 20 million (probably 30m by 09), an increase of this amount represents a significant jump in potential Safari users. Of course not all Mac (desktop, laptop) users are Safari users, but all iPhone users will be.iPhone exposure is what will drive Safari adoption, a pleasurably browsing experience on the phone will make it much easier to “sell” the browser to windows users. The fact that there is very little difference between the desktop and phone experience is where Apple will gain.If the iPhone is half as successful as analysts believe, 100m Safari users is closer than we think.
Simon 06.16.07 / 4pm
“Safari on Windows is a collosal mistake for many reasons.
1. In one stroke Apple have removed the incentive for probably 80% of their prospective customers to purchase an Apple computer.
2. They’re not going to be able to compete with existing Windows based browsers.
3. Apple exists largely on hot air and myth making. By allowing consumers to substantially test their products without paying a sucker fee, Apple are putting their image at risk.
Bookmark this post:
Safari will flounder on Windows for a few years, then it will be quietly withdrawn.”
This is so laughable Simon.
1. A prospective customer does not refrain from buying a Macbook or iMac because Safari is available on Windows! Safari does not make OSX, it is simply one of the many compelling features offered. The design and integration of both the hardware and software is what makes the mac a mac. Maybe I’ll switch to Vista because of Safari 🙂
2. Why not? Why is not conceivable that the engineers at Apple could write a piece software than can compete with IE. IE is trash, it’s used primarily because it’s a default. Tabs were only added last year and touted as a great new feature!!!
3. Do you use any Apple products? I thought iTunes was free? I struggle with the notion that any company could exist on “hot air” and “myth making” for this long. You certainly don’t give Apple consumers any credit.
There is no guarantee Safari will succeed, based on the reasons you have given I see no reason why it would fail.
Sorry I had to reply to this even though its off topic.
To John’s Post
All it does is highlight the difference in interpretation of this pie chart. The only fact is Firefox has a much greater share of the browser market than Safari.
I can see why Safari entering the market is such a concern for Firefox. Safari will be the default browser on the iPhone, so many users (10+ million by 09) will become accustomed to it and it’s nuances. If we look at the number of Mac users total say 20 million (probably 30m by 09), an increase of this amount represents a significant jump in potential Safari users.
Of course not all Mac (desktop, laptop) users are Safari users, but all iPhone users will be.
iPhone exposure is what will drive Safari adoption, a pleasurably browsing experience on the phone will make it much easier to “sell” the browser to windows users. The fact that there is very little difference between the desktop and phone experience is where Apple will gain.
If the iPhone is half as successful as analysts believe, 100m Safari users is closer than we think.
Right On, Brother. From a business perspective, Apple Computer is just like Microsoft except they have more design and marketing savvy. Both companies are playing to “win” by locking consumers into their products/services, but Apple does a neat trick on its “users” by turning them into sycophants for the company. Dammit if they won’t fight you over the right-ness of every word coming out of Steve Jobs’ gullet. In this browser battle, as well, you can look forward to Apple Zombies claiming that buggy-ass Safari on Windows is the shiz-nit, and the rest of us don’t know how much we’re missing by being estranged from Daddy-Mac. No thanks, conformists, I will continue to enjoy my freedom of choice.
Well, I think Jobs is a dreamer, of course Safari will not get this place on pcs. IPhone success will not promote Safari just because the both are from Apple, of course! hugs from brasil. 🙂
Right On, Brother. From a business perspective, Apple Computer is just like Microsoft except they have more design and marketing savvy. Both companies are playing to “win” by locking consumers into their products/services, but Apple does a neat trick on its “users” by turning them into sycophants for the company. Dammit if they won’t fight you over the right-ness of every word coming out of Steve Jobs’ gullet. In this browser battle, as well, you can look forward to Apple Zombies claiming that buggy-ass Safari on Windows is the shiz-nit, and the rest of us don’t know how much we’re missing by being estranged from Daddy-Mac. No thanks, conformists, I will continue to enjoy my freedom of choice.
Well, I think Jobs is a dreamer, of course Safari will not get this place on pcs. IPhone success will not promote Safari just because the both are from Apple, of course!
hugs from brasil. 🙂
Can Safari replace Firefox?…Much ado has been made about Steve Job’s presentation at WWDC and, specifically, a pie chart showing IE with a market share unaffected by the release of Safari for Windows but with Safari claiming the entirety of the remaining market share. Mozilla C…
Safari will never overtake firefox. Firefox rules!And i think that Steve Job should be using those anti-PC ads at all. Come on, who gave finanicial support to Apple when it was about to close down? Who promised to help Apple rise up again? Who???? It is none other than Microsoft! IT IS OUR FAVOURITE BILL GATES! Without his help, Apple and its iPod and Mac OS X would have never gone this far! I can still recall how ashamed Steve Jobs was when Microsoft stood up and support them financially. What a pity that Apple do not know how to appreciate Microsoft’s help!
Safari will never overtake firefox. Firefox rules!
And i think that Steve Job should be using those anti-PC ads at all. Come on, who gave finanicial support to Apple when it was about to close down? Who promised to help Apple rise up again? Who???? It is none other than Microsoft! IT IS OUR FAVOURITE BILL GATES! Without his help, Apple and its iPod and Mac OS X would have never gone this far! I can still recall how ashamed Steve Jobs was when Microsoft stood up and support them financially. What a pity that Apple do not know how to appreciate Microsoft’s help!
I don’t get it. Is Lilly so insecure of Firefox’s ability to compete with IE and Safari that he had to spout this idiocy? If he is then Mozilla better find another COO. Apple cannot force people to use Safari. It’s OUR choice to pick which browser we think best suit our needs. Lilly seems to have forgotten that. Stop whining, John. If you can’t, quit. You won’t do Firefox and the community around it any good.
I don’t get it. Is Lilly so insecure of Firefox’s ability to compete with IE and Safari that he had to spout this idiocy? If he is then Mozilla better find another COO.
Apple cannot force people to use Safari. It’s OUR choice to pick which browser we think best suit our needs. Lilly seems to have forgotten that.
Stop whining, John. If you can’t, quit. You won’t do Firefox and the community around it any good.
Chance of this being a deliberate statement by SJ that he wants to push FireFox out of the market: 1%Chance that this was just SJ’s slide designer making things up: 99%Really, the existence of FireFox only helps Apple. No way do Apple want to damage that. You’ve read waaaaay to much into a single slide.Great browser by the way! Considerably better than Safari 😉
Chance of this being a deliberate statement by SJ that he wants to push FireFox out of the market: 1%
Chance that this was just SJ’s slide designer making things up: 99%
Really, the existence of FireFox only helps Apple. No way do Apple want to damage that. You’ve read waaaaay to much into a single slide.
Great browser by the way! Considerably better than Safari 😉
Actually, my opinion is following. Don’t think about the people choose from two way. People like freedom… But Apple likes business….Here an interesting arcticle:[i]The NeWS version of UniPress’s Gosling Emacs text editor was the first commercially available product to pioneer the use of multiple tabbed windows in 1988. It was used to develop an authoring tool for the Ben Shneiderman’s HyperTIES browser (the NeWS workstation version of The Interactive Encyclopedia System), in 1988.[2] HyperTIES also supported pie menus for managing windows and browsing hypermedia documents with PostScript applets. Don Hopkins developed and released several versions of tabbed window frames for the NeWS window system as free software, which the window manager applied to all NeWS applications, and enabled users to drag the tabs around to any edge of the window.[3]Six years later, in 1994, BookLink Technologies featured tabbed windows in its InternetWorks browser. The tabbed interface approach was then followed by the Internet Explorer shell NetCaptor in 1997. These were followed by a number of others like IBrowse in 1999, Opera in 2000 (with the release of version 4), Mozilla in 2001 (through the MultiZilla extension in April of 2001 and a built-in tabbed browsing mode added to Mozilla 0.9.5 in October of 2001), Konqueror 3.1 in January 2003, and Safari in 2003. As of 2006, most graphical web browsers support a tabbed interface, including Internet Explorer 7. Software, such as the freeware AM Browser, is also available to add a TDI around earlier versions of Internet Explorer. OmniWeb version 5, released August 2004, includes visual tabbed browsing which displays preview images of pages in a drawer to the left or right of the main browser window. Avant Browser, Maxthon and Slim Browser are some of the most popular tabbed browsers using Internet Explorer’s rendering engine.[/i]
Actually, my opinion is following. Don’t think about the people choose from two way. People like freedom…
But Apple likes business….
Here an interesting arcticle:
[i]The NeWS version of UniPress’s Gosling Emacs text editor was the first commercially available product to pioneer the use of multiple tabbed windows in 1988. It was used to develop an authoring tool for the Ben Shneiderman’s HyperTIES browser (the NeWS workstation version of The Interactive Encyclopedia System), in 1988.[2] HyperTIES also supported pie menus for managing windows and browsing hypermedia documents with PostScript applets. Don Hopkins developed and released several versions of tabbed window frames for the NeWS window system as free software, which the window manager applied to all NeWS applications, and enabled users to drag the tabs around to any edge of the window.[3]
Six years later, in 1994, BookLink Technologies featured tabbed windows in its InternetWorks browser. The tabbed interface approach was then followed by the Internet Explorer shell NetCaptor in 1997. These were followed by a number of others like IBrowse in 1999, Opera in 2000 (with the release of version 4), Mozilla in 2001 (through the MultiZilla extension in April of 2001 and a built-in tabbed browsing mode added to Mozilla 0.9.5 in October of 2001), Konqueror 3.1 in January 2003, and Safari in 2003. As of 2006, most graphical web browsers support a tabbed interface, including Internet Explorer 7. Software, such as the freeware AM Browser, is also available to add a TDI around earlier versions of Internet Explorer. OmniWeb version 5, released August 2004, includes visual tabbed browsing which displays preview images of pages in a drawer to the left or right of the main browser window. Avant Browser, Maxthon and Slim Browser are some of the most popular tabbed browsers using Internet Explorer’s rendering engine.[/i]
We the people of the internet, in order to form a more perfect web, establish justice, insure cyber tranquility, provide for the common website, promote the general search , and secure the optimization of content to ourselves and all others, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Free and Equal internet………………………..hmmmmm could a revolution take place on the web?
We the people of the internet, in order to form a more perfect web, establish justice, insure cyber tranquility, provide for the common website, promote the general search , and secure the optimization of content to ourselves and all others, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Free and Equal internet………………………..hmmmmm could a revolution take place on the web?
Let’s not kid ourselves. While Jobs and Apple have been symbols of toned-down rebellion against the “establishment” and while Apple has consistently brought about progress and created awesome products, the corporation that is Apple remains just that…a corporation. Don’t get me wrong…I’m actually planning on purchasing my MacBook Pro this weekend. But let’s not delude ourselves. A corporation is an entity that is obligated, by law, to serve one purpose: to bring profit to its shareholders. With that in mind, whatever deviant marketing vision Steve Jobs is trying to pull here cannot come as a surprise. The idea of open-source is not only antithetical to the framework of business in the now…it is paradoxical to the type of product Apple produces. Who ever said Apple was such a “good guy”. I commend the Firefox team and their colleagues…but it’s ridiculous to suggest that Jobs’ over-the-top business presentations are anymore than business as usual.
Let’s not kid ourselves. While Jobs and Apple have been symbols of toned-down rebellion against the “establishment” and while Apple has consistently brought about progress and created awesome products, the corporation that is Apple remains just that…a corporation. Don’t get me wrong…I’m actually planning on purchasing my MacBook Pro this weekend. But let’s not delude ourselves. A corporation is an entity that is obligated, by law, to serve one purpose: to bring profit to its shareholders. With that in mind, whatever deviant marketing vision Steve Jobs is trying to pull here cannot come as a surprise. The idea of open-source is not only antithetical to the framework of business in the now…it is paradoxical to the type of product Apple produces. Who ever said Apple was such a “good guy”. I commend the Firefox team and their colleagues…but it’s ridiculous to suggest that Jobs’ over-the-top business presentations are anymore than business as usual.
heading Apple means that when the 2-browser chart reads IE as opposed to ‘all other browsers’ it is likely deliberate imho. All things given, Jobs would likely be aware of this post by now and have issed a retraction/correction were it not in the ballpark.Personally I think Firefox is a great browser – gracias grande; whenever I use *IE or other* computers I download it for others and 7 times out of 10 it stays. I am surprised that there are so many sour-grape related comments here, kind of indicating that most of the people who read No Logo aren’t spending much time in online discussions.
heading Apple means that when the 2-browser chart reads IE as opposed to ‘all other browsers’ it is likely deliberate imho. All things given, Jobs would likely be aware of this post by now and have issed a retraction/correction were it not in the ballpark.
Personally I think Firefox is a great browser – gracias grande; whenever I use *IE or other* computers I download it for others and 7 times out of 10 it stays. I am surprised that there are so many sour-grape related comments here, kind of indicating that most of the people who read No Logo aren’t spending much time in online discussions.
火狐狸與非州打獵隊…簡單地說，Steve Job 在做今年的蘋果開發人員年報時，有個願景，把火狐狸的開發者給惹火了，「什麼，你畫了一個具有百萬名使用者價值的大餅？」看人家吵架蠻有趣的，…
Your post is not very professional John. Jumping the gun like that would get you fired if your worked in the real world instead of a non-profit.
Your post is not very professional John. Jumping the gun like that would get you fired if your worked in the real world instead of a non-profit.
A passionate user/consumer of Apple products as I am, it is not necessary to provoke an alarmist reaction to the Jobs presentation pie-chart. Globally there are really only two flavours of browser – when it comes to on-line activities – IE & Mozilla/Netscape. Until, or unless the banking world and other secure transaction sites recognise additional browsers beyond IE/Mozilla, any growth of substantial proportions are pipe-dreams
A passionate user/consumer of Apple products as I am, it is not necessary to provoke an alarmist reaction to the Jobs presentation pie-chart. Globally there are really only two flavours of browser – when it comes to on-line activities – IE & Mozilla/Netscape. Until, or unless the banking world and other secure transaction sites recognise additional browsers beyond IE/Mozilla, any growth of substantial proportions are pipe-dreams
Interesting Article, I am eager to know when Firefox will be available as a cell phone browser.
Interesting Article, I am eager to know when Firefox will be available as a cell phone browser.
hey steve its loy i saw your charts and want to share one thing while browsing through i came across a very good web charting component called visifireand it under open source i am shure it will improve your charts drawing
hey steve its loy i saw your charts and want to share one thing while browsing through i came across a very good web charting component called visifireand it under open source i am shure it will improve your charts drawing