Hester
msg:590647 | 11:53 am on Feb 1, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Will IE7 automatically be downloaded as part of a future security patch? Or will users have to download it separately? If the former, then bye bye IE6! At least on XP.
|
encyclo
msg:590648 | 4:39 pm on Feb 1, 2006 (gmt 0) |
The following is little more than a wild guess, but: | What will be a realistic share of the browser market IE7 can get in 2006? |
|
If it is released soon, maybe 10% to 15%. I doubt it will ever be a forced update for XP. So significant but not dominant. | How long will it take until IE6 usage drops below 10%? |
|
About five years, with a bit of luck.
|
pmkpmk
msg:590649 | 8:22 am on Feb 3, 2006 (gmt 0) |
So it all boils down to wether MS makes it part of the automatic update or not. Why do you think they are NOT going to do it?
|
Hester
msg:590650 | 9:13 am on Feb 3, 2006 (gmt 0) |
I read that it will be part of SP3. If so, then all XP users who get that will also get IE7. I see it as the natural way for Microsoft to boost their market share of the new browser. Of course many users are still on machines with older versions of Windows.
|
CritterNYC
msg:590651 | 5:19 pm on Feb 10, 2006 (gmt 0) |
It's gonna be a while. IE7 isn't even an option for the 23% of the world not running Windows XP (10%: Windows 2000, 8%: Windows 98, 2%: Mac, 3%: other Windows, Unix, etc) and it never will be. It also isn't an option for those running Windows XP SP1 (there are still a lot of people not on SP2) And there are lots of us that simply won't use Internet Explorer any more. IE7 will *finally* fix some of the most eggregious issues (after many years) but not all. And it won't have access to all the handy Firefox extensions out there.
|
drhowarddrfine
msg:590652 | 7:39 pm on Feb 10, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Hotwired.com posted this: | "Internet Explorer 7 has some inherent shortcomings that will keep it from being the browser of choice for absolutely everyone." "Microsoft won't be able to one-up Firefox's extensible architecture anytime soon." "CSS support, while vastly improved since version 6, is still incomplete, with limited support" |
|
[hotwired.com...] [edited by: encyclo at 7:54 pm (utc) on Feb. 10, 2006]
[edit reason] added link to article [/edit]
|
pmkpmk
msg:590653 | 1:12 pm on Feb 11, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Critter: I was not speculating about Mac-Users or Firefox supporters. My question was about those users who already use IE and are not inclined to switch to FF or Opera anytime soon but will stay IE users.
|
CritterNYC
msg:590654 | 2:39 pm on Feb 13, 2006 (gmt 0) |
pmkpmk: Right, in which case it's important to keep in mind that at least 20% (or more... who knows how many XP users are still on XP SP1) of Windows users don't even have the option of upgrading to IE7 as it is Windows XP SP2 only.
|
pmkpmk
msg:590655 | 6:57 pm on Feb 13, 2006 (gmt 0) |
For the time being...
|
drhowarddrfine
msg:590656 | 11:14 pm on Feb 13, 2006 (gmt 0) |
There are no plans to port IE7 to anything but that and Vista.
|
pmkpmk
msg:590657 | 8:15 am on Feb 14, 2006 (gmt 0) |
So they say.
|
drhowarddrfine
msg:590658 | 2:37 pm on Feb 14, 2006 (gmt 0) |
They can't even get it right on Windows so how would they do it with good operating systems? They've never put IE on any other OS before so why would they now? You're dreaming if you think they would. It would be bad for the web anyway. We don't need this cancer spreading.
|
pmkpmk
msg:590659 | 2:58 pm on Feb 14, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Misunderstanding: I thought you referred to XPSP1 and 2000. I agree that we will probably not see an IE7 for Mac or even Linux :-)
|
mattglet
msg:590660 | 5:36 pm on Feb 14, 2006 (gmt 0) |
| They've never put IE on any other OS before so why would they now? |
|
What was Mac IE then?
|
drhowarddrfine
msg:590661 | 10:28 pm on Feb 14, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Forgot about that one. But that worked out great, didn't it? Camino was introduced today. All Hail Gecko! Down with IE!
|
andy_boyd
msg:590662 | 3:17 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0) |
If you were a "sandboxed" webmaster getting nowhere in Google but doing well in MSN I'm sure you would be hoping for a fast adoption. Aside from all the standards arguments etc. I am looking forward to a major browser coming out with an engine other than Google as the default for web search. Personally I'm a Camino man myself, but in terms of marketing ... there couldn't be enough people using it if you know what I mean. ;)
|
Lorel
msg:590663 | 5:09 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0) |
MS quit supporting Mac with version 5.2.... I miss my IE but now I like Safari just as well.
If you were a "sandboxed" webmaster getting nowhere in Google but doing well in MSN I'm sure you would be hoping for a fast adoption. Aside from all the standards arguments etc. I am looking forward to a major browser coming out with an engine other than Google as the default for web search.
|
|
Why settle for less than 10% of traffic when 80% is just over the horizon?
|
drhowarddrfine
msg:590664 | 6:16 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0) |
I don't understand. Firefox lets you switch search engines easy enough.
|
andy_boyd
msg:590665 | 3:20 pm on Feb 22, 2006 (gmt 0) |
| Why settle for less than 10% of traffic when 80% is just over the horizon? |
|
Because Google traffic isn't anywhere near as click-happy as MSN / Yahoo traffic ... it's strange but true. I'd take 1,000 MSNers over 1,000 Googlers any day.
|
|
