IE Picks Up Market Share as Version 7.0 Looms

"The story I quoted was all over the web the day before Mr. Thurrott posted his missive. He chose to ignore it, and could only have done so willingly, because you couldn't miss that story. It was everywhere."

I'm glad you know what is going on in others' heads. I missed the story you spoke of, maybe not everyone ventures the same areas as you. Alas, I must contest to your conspiracy! It is true, we must become ignorant when people speak of the 0.5% dip...


"About the FF resources... Try upgrading to FF2.0 as it already includes a fix to optimize resources on minimize instead of close OR try adding "config.trim_on_minimize" and setting it to "true" (as a bolean value) by typing "about:config" on your address bar)."

I still havn't fiddled with the config, didn't know it was open to do that in the ole FF. But my problem mainly seems to be, if I right-click my bookmarks folder and it opens say 20 windows, FF sucks up say 120MB of system memory. Now given that we live in a high-bandwidth world where companies use ads all over the place, I can respect that it takes that much to hold all that. But when I close all those tabs except for one, the memory size retains about 70% of the resources. On a system w/ a gig of memory, its not that noticable in terms of performance, but when I bring up the task manager and see Firefox standing alone with its six figure usage... it irks me heh.

"Yar, I be Outlook 2007 Beta! And I'm proud to not have the biggest footprint in all the land!"

Any problems I've had with FF have all been minor, and of course it still looks like a saint compared to IE6. It's a bit ironic, but doing some ASP work a while back, I spent along time trying to get our intranet converted to the ferrit. But I didn't really have a leg to stand on... hard to get people to convert away from an MS product (IE) to ease your development on another (asp).

I've been trying out IE7 along with Vista x64 (although still not seeing the point in the x64 version of it :|) and it seems pretty good this far (and I'm comparing it with it's older brother only).
If I compare it with FF... it doesn't stand a chance! :| CSS support is still not good enough... I'm a webdeveloper/designer and I was just designing a new template for my blog this last week, and validating it with XHTML 1.1: Beautiful (my opinion, of course) on FF (2.0 RC2 here)... weird on IE7... "where-is-my-design?" on IE6- ...

@will84

About the FF resources... Try upgrading to FF2.0 as it already includes a fix to optimize resources on minimize instead of close OR try adding "config.trim_on_minimize" and setting it to "true" (as a bolean value) by typing "about:config" on your address bar).

But as far as I can tell, MS is at least, making a "decent" effort into supporting W3C whitepapers on XHTML and CSS... not too bad ;)

Way to go MS :)
~Levi F.

PS: I'm an OSX, Linux and Windows user... I'm not a die-hard evangelist of neither: all of them have their purpose and market share (different ones on my opinion at this point, although they overlap in a few areas... :))

"And you're [sic] implication is that he did so knowinglingly [sic]."

Well of course he did it "knowingly". To suggest otherwise is to suggest he doesn't know what he's posting.

The story I quoted was all over the web the day before Mr. Thurrott posted his missive. He chose to ignore it, and could only have done so willingly, because you couldn't miss that story. It was everywhere.

I strongly suspect he covered the story in the way he did in order to support his pro-Microsoft worldview. That's his editorial option as the writer of this page...but it WAS an option. That's all I'm saying.

"It's not slander. In my experience, ColdFusion is slow." Yes but in an unfounded manner you are attributing that to your performance problems.

I believe a netcraft sniff someone posted recently shows one of the www.apple.xx domains running IIS.

Considering MS doesn't make a caching service of their own... so what if they use someone elses? Every web server under the MS cloud is IIS.

IIS is big, Apache is big. Xserve or w/e Apple's webserver is called, is nothing.

"Apache and Mac OS X Server have plenty of endorsement from the likes of, oh, the U.S. army who runs their website on it. Imagine how many attacks they see a month!"

I already showed you the netbeui results. The army's propaganda page runs OSX, their secure site runs IIS. I'm not posting it again just because you are ignorant.

@will84:

"Thats a tad slanderous heh. Or it would be if the computing market wasn't so lax about things of that nature."

It's not slander. In my experience, ColdFusion is slow.

"And do you REALLY want to walk down that road again? Or do we need to show you again the Apple servers that are running IIS5.0?"

What road? The one where Apache has twice the market share of IIS? I think the "IIS on Apple" thing you're referring to was the New Zealand store back in 2004 which was run by a local distributor named Renaissance, who said they had no problem moving to PHP. Do we really want to bring up Hotmail running on BSD, or Microsoft using the Linux-powered Akamai caching service for its downloads?

Apache and Mac OS X Server have plenty of endorsement from the likes of, oh, the U.S. army who runs their website on it. Imagine how many attacks they see a month!