Browsers in web stats

Need clarification

[Hester]

We've just got some new web stats set up which show a bewildering array of browsers hitting our site. Firstly, terrible, terrible news - Netscape 4 is still going strong. And I mean strong.

For March 2004, so far it ranks 2nd, with 13.4%. (IE6 is 1st with 63.21%.)

But what are these other browsers listed?

Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/5.1.2600 (6th, 2.37%)
Microsoft Data Access Internet Publishing Provider DAV 1.1 (7th, 1.05%)
Microsoft Data Access Internet Publishing Provider Cache Manager (10th, 0.79%)
contype (12th, 0.39%)
Microsoft Data Access Internet Publishing Provider Protocol Discovery (13th, 0.39%)
Microsoft Office Protocol Discovery (15th, 0.26%)
WWlib v1.1 (17th, 0.13%)

Are the Microsoft ones to do with holding Word and Excel files on the site?

In February, these browsers also made an appearance. Or should I say "spiders"? Our web stats also have a list of spiders, but these names are not down there.

Wget (21st, 0.06%)
TREX (24th, 0.06%)

Then in January's stats, I see these:

Sqworm/2.9.85-BETA (beta_release; 20011115-775; i686-pc-linux-gnu) (19th, 0.06%) - that's not a virus is it?
MSProxy/2.0 (21st, 0.06%)
Microsoft URL Control - 6.00.8862 (22nd, 0.06%)

I know the percentages are low, but they could increase. Should I be allowing these programs to access the site or not?

[grahamstewart]

13.4% for Netscape 4 - Wow! that seems very high indeed. :(

BrowserNews [upsdell.com] currently reports between 0.45% and 1.6% for Netscape 4.

Have you got some content that particularly appeals to Netscape 4 users?

Or is your primary audience in some way unusual (e.g. are they academic? Or are they all just luddites?)

Are you sure your browser detection is working correctly?

[Hester]

The site is academic. Say no more.

[encyclo]

I vaguely know Squorm - it is something to do with inria.fr (the research institute which hosts w3.org amongst others). Try here for more info:

[webmasterworld.com...]

For WebDav, try: [webmasterworld.com...]

WWlib is a spider: h**p://www7.scu.edu.au/programme/posters/1846/com1846.htm

The other MS ones, as you mention, are probably something to do with MS Office etc. accessing your .doc or .xls content. Try:

[microsoft.com...]

And as for Netscape 4, you're right, it's not unusual to get such a high percentage as many academic environments standardized on NN4 as it is multi-platform and had a good email client.

[grahamstewart]

aaahh.. the wonders of academia. Standardise on a browser that no one is ever likely to use in "the real world".

Could be worse, if they 'standardised' student transport then they would all be riding around on donkeys. :)

Anyway, I would say that, unless they are taking a lot of bandwidth or are cauding any kind of problems on your site, you should let the spiders in. Anything that helps your URL get out there is a "good thing".

Others however tend to take a more proactive approach and ban anything that is not definitely a person or a search bot.

[jomaxx]

Public access terminals such as Internet Cafes are another good source of outdated platforms. Last summer on vacation I had to view my site from several locations that were basically Netscape 4, 640x480, 16 colors. I have a reasonably platform-friendly site, but all I can say is -- yuck. And to think I've probably had millions of visitors see my site this way over the years.

[Hester]

Of course it's possible that the hits from Crapscape 4 are mostly myself testing the site to make sure it works! I plan to not test in that browser for a month (if I can) to get a true figure.