John's Blog - Latest Comments in A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

ryanchow — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:03:09 -0000

People cannot only depend on major companies for our day to day operations. Having a variety of choices allow companies to improve their products and driving greater satisfaction to the end-users. Mozilla, is a good example.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

loy — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 07:42:04 -0000

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

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Scott — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:18:27 -0000

Interesting Article, I am eager to know when Firefox will be available as a cell phone browser.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Jos Joslyn — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 09:02:14 -0000

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

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Sir Poop A Lot — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 03:13:30 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

hugh manatee — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:42:57 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Fourierist — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:24:52 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

james northcott — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 01:05:42 -0000

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?

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

FMP-Misi — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:08:08 -0000

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]

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Olly — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:32:55 -0000

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 ;)

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Jim of Davao — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 07:18:16 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Joseph — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 07:08:02 -0000

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!

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Erika Focke — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:11:08 -0000

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. :)

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

K. Festus — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 16:35:17 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

George Bourke — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:43:25 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Paul Randall — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 05:08:04 -0000

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).

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Paul Randall — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 05:04:17 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Benjamin Huot — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:52:00 -0000

here is a rational interpretation of the Apple chart http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07...

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Mgz — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:13:58 -0000

Jobs to Mozilla Firefox: All your (user)base are belong to us.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Tom Waits — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:28:28 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Gail — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 17:04:36 -0000

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?

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Bryke — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:48:41 -0000

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! ;)

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Elmo — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:32:49 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

pintwin1 — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:05:48 -0000

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.

Re: A Picture’s Worth 100M Users???

Scott Lahteine — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 10:10:11 -0000

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?