Asa Dotzler: Firefox and more

LOL, comparing other product's first beta test release to your final stable release, that surely makes some sense... or not :rolleyes:

maybe you should try compare the first day download count of Chrome to that of Firefox 3 beta 1, instead of Firefox 3 final, LOL.

Or it shows you only have as much confidence in your own final release product as in other's first public beta release.

Since Chrome is currently Windows only, and the graph only listed Safari for Windows, do the statistics for Firefox and Opera only include the Windows versions too? If they also include Mac and Linux then it's not really a fair comparison. It would also be interesting to see if IE's stats dropped by any significant amount too.

According to Clicky, Opera has not only overtaken Chrome again, but has nearly doubled its market share since Chrome was launched:

http://getclicky.com/global-marketshare-statistics

Right now:

* Opera: 2.358 % (vs 1.3% four days ago)
* Chrome: 2.16 %

By the way, what Asa neglects to tell you is that Opera's market share has not gone down due to Chrome according to those stats. Why would Opera be concerned if Chrome doesn't affect its market share?

Except, of course, according to Clicky, Chrome caused Oepra usage to nearly double.

It's not wise to draw conclusions from the stats of a single site. Opera's global market share can't have doubled because of Chrome. I guess time will make that obvious, if it already isn't.

Waleof Suous: your reading comprehension is seriously lacking. The point here is that Chrome does not appear to have reduced Firefox's growth. And the download day of Firefox 3 beta 1 was not a world record, which is the whole point of comparing the download counts; it's not simply "see, we had more downloads".

Lachlan Hunt: indeed, a very good point.

heh: correlation does not imply causation.

Gee, you think Stifu? You can't draw conclusions from the stats of a single site? But it's fine to draw conclusions from Net Applications because they show good things for Firefox?

Never mind the fact that they manipulate their numbers:

BEFORE: http://img293.imageshack.us/my.php?image=beforepz4.png
AFTER: http://img293.imageshack.us/my.php?image=aftercb4.png

Here's a correction:

Real after pic: http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=aftercz5.png

There's also the, "Hey, this is new, I wonder what it's like?" factor. I've been doing a lot of browsing with Chrome over the last week to get a feel for how it works, but I'm already shifting back to my usual mix of Firefox and Opera.

Geez - I forgot about how much vitriol was in this blog's comments.

Anyway, I really don't think it's fair to classify Google's marketshare as a stable 1%. There are lots of people heavily experimenting the first few weeks after a launch. Better to look at the stats overall in a month's time to see where things are at (personally I'd be surprised if Chrome 0.2 makes 1% by then - it has a lot of missing features). All but the fanbois will have gone back to their browser of choice by then.

Asa please don't link to Net Application, they manipulate their numbers
http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/2008/09/04/why-is-net-applications-hitslink-changing-its-browser-stats-after-publishing

mors, Net Applications provides the best numbers of any public service. Surely you understand that measuring browser share in the sub-1% range is difficult and subject to error.

(That is, unless you're accusing Net Applications of taking the time out of their real work just to try to make Opera look bad, which I'll just say is complete wack-o conspiracy theory territory and leave it at that.)

I might (though probably not) care a little bit more about Opera trying to spin the Net Application numbers when Opera stops using Net Applications to track all their own sites' stats.

- A

Sub-1%? Opera was close to 2% when Net Applications decided to change everything last time.

And what about back when Opera had 5% according to the same statistics, but suddenly they were down to below 1% the next day?

And now they are playing around with the Chrome statistics.

Whether they do this on purpose or not is besides the point. The bottom line is that Net Applications keep changing stuff around, and can't be trusted.

No browser statistics can be trusted, but in this case there's clear evidence of tampering and unreliable claims.

snappy: I don't remember having said it was fine to draw conclusions from Net Applications either. I'm not Asa, and don't agree with everything he does.
But if your whole argument revolves around "But he did it first!!!", then I guess we're done.
On a side note, W3Schools also tempers with their numbers.

Not sure if Opera or Apple is concerned Asa, but by making this post you kinda reveil your ouw concern... I think Microsoft will be the one to take the biggest hit..

> Waleof Suous: your reading comprehension is seriously lacking. The point here is that Chrome does not appear to have reduced Firefox's growth. And the download day of Firefox 3 beta 1 was not a world record, which is the whole point of comparing the download counts; it's not simply "see, we had more downloads".

> Posted by: Daniel Luz | September 7, 2008 9:04 AM

Daniel Luz: LOL your reading comprehension is surely not lacking, in fact it's so abundant that you keep pulling craps out of it. Go read the whole thing again, both Asa's and mine, before babbling nonsense here.

Nope, it's not that my reading comprehension is lacking, not to mention "seriously" or whatever nonsense from you, but yours that's complete crap.

Trying to compare download counts of a final release to that of a public beta is retarded, and if you actually care about it, you are more retarded.

And that "MWHAHAHAHA look Firefox is not hurt, it's Safari and Opera who should be concerned" line is also retarded. Why should Safari be concerned when their main market is on Mac OS? And why should Opera be concerned when their market share is not affected by Chrome at all?

It just shows how insecure you are, it shows you have to spread nonsense in order to feel secure yourself, and it shows you only have as much confidence in your own final release product as in other's first public release. yup, that's reading comprehension. getting so worked up to "prove" that other's first public beta release does not reduce the growth of your own stable product, it only proves your serious lack of confidence in your own product, that's the point here, yours is just nonsense.

ugh: right on. Those who say they are "not concerned" exactly shows how much concerned they are, and the serious lack of confidence and security.

BTW, Chrome is said to have more than 14 million users worldwide after the first two days, take that however you want.

WaleofSuous.. please stop trolling, noone takes your garbage seriously.

WaleofSuous.. please stop trolling, no one takes your garbage seriously.