back to article If Google got a haircut, a tie and a suit, would it be Microsoft?

Prepare yourself. It's a new month, and that can only mean a tsunami of articles on the popularity of Internet Explorer, Chrome and Firefox will flood the globe's news aggregators. For non-mobile computers, March followed the trend emerging over the past 12 months: growth for Chrome, a drop in use of IE and Firefox stuck in a …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. FartingHippo
    Alert

    Google vs Microsoft

    I don't mind Google sharing the browser market*, or the email client market*, or the productivity suite market* with Microsoft. Competition is a great thing for the end user. It was a lack of competition that resulted in the execrable IE6, or Windows ME.

    What I really would mind was Google displacing MS at the top of the heap. That "do no evil" plaque is already looking tarnished, and a market dominance in areas other than ads would hasten its demise, I'm sure.

    * Yes, I am aware that other products exist, but you know what I mean.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Google vs Microsoft

      It's literally impossible for any company to be nice, they all have to "grow" and run a profit. But obviously you can return a good profit merely by dodging tax which is definitely evil, you're simply not contributing to infrastructure investment your business so sorely needs.

      Google, Apple and Microsoft are all as bad as each other. But all have contributed to open source quite heavily, so to talk about not using any of their products is stupid (yes you Eadon).

      1. Nuke
        Thumb Down

        AC @ 12:49 - Re: Google vs Microsoft

        Wrote :- "Google, Apple and Microsoft are all as bad as each other. But all have contributed to open source quite heavily"

        A bit rich to describe MS as "contributed heaviliy". AFAIR, about the only thing MS have contributed is code to enable Windows to work with Linux in virtualisation situations, an exception that was in their own interest. And they only released the source of that code in response to legal challenge. Apple .. don't know, but I am aware of CUPS, Webkit, what else?

        Both are in the noise level compared with Google's contributions.

        1. Spearchucker Jones

          Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

          Microsoft have done a lot of F/OSS lately - not just *gasp* - the whole of ASP.NET, but others including WebMatrix, Hadoop/Mongo/etc connectors for Azure and SQL Server, WP8 SDK, ASP.NET MVC, WebPI, Entity Framework, Reactive Extensions, and more.

          1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

            1. Frank 2
              FAIL

              Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

              What about TypeScript?

            2. Spearchucker Jones
              Holmes

              Re: @ Eadon - AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

              *patient tone* Eadon, you're generalising. And all generalists look like muppets (see what I did there?).

              ASP.NET, WebMatrix, the WP8 SDK, ASP.NET MVC, Entity Framework, and Reactive Extensions are not plugins that talk to MS Tech.

              While we're here - your OS history is somewhat lacking.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

            That's not FOSS, that's POSS.

        2. etaletc

          Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

          MS big contribtuion was a general operating system that was not tied to proprietary hardware. It allowed huge competition from compenent and PC companies that drove prices down. Without MS, the Apple model would have domintated and $500 computers would be $5k each and without the current capability.

          Personally not a big MS fan but you have to acknowledge that their operating systems which were compatible with such a wide range of equipment was key in shaping the market. Making OS that were compatible with a huge range of hardware, tossed together by DIYers all over the world is not a mean achievement. Much easier if you control the hardware and write the OS for that equipment.

          1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

          2. E Haines

            @etaletc

            Sorry, but no. Hardware-agnostic operating systems already existed before MS-DOS, and there was plenty of competition that drove computer prices far below $5K. Many computers from Commodore, Atari, etc. were typically in the $300-$1000 range (in 1980s dollars to be sure, but nevertheless what you're claiming is demonstrably false).

          3. Nuke
            Headmaster

            @ etaletc - Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

            etaletc wrote :- "MS big contribtuion was a general operating system that was not tied to proprietary hardware........ you have to acknowledge that [MS] operating systems which were compatible with such a wide range of equipment was key in shaping the market... Much easier if you control the hardware and write the OS for that equipment."

            CP/M was a general OS too, and UNIX has already been mentioned. In the period we are discussing, MS was tied to the Intel x86 processor (no hardware competition there for many years), and other than the processor, generic keyboard, 80x25 monitor, and disk drive they did not "write the OS for the equipment". Makers of printers, network cards, video cards , and even mice had to wrote their own drivers for DOS and Windows. Having got to a dominant position, MS only needed to lean back and let them do it.

            That happened back then because the HW makers and (especially) the PC press picked MS almost at random as the horse to back - once some had picked it, the others had to follow even with misgivings. They could just as well have picked CP/M 86 [www.landley.net/history/mirror/cpm/history.html].

            The price is a red herring. The personal computer revolution was happening MS or not, and with mass adoption prices would have tumbled anyway. In fact it shocks me how HIGH Microsoft have managed to maintain their prices considering their vast sales volumes.

          4. JEDIDIAH
            Linux

            Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

            > MS big contribtuion was a general operating system that was not tied to proprietary hardware

            AT&T and Digital Research already had that one covered.

          5. AlanS
            Linux

            Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

            The key was that IBM published the technical specifications of the IBM PC, just as they did for their larger, more expensive, products. That openness allowed other companies to supply add-in boards and peripherals that IBM did not supply, and when the BIOS was cloned, complete compatible systems could be produced.

            As a *nix-based Brit, I do not know the exact details of MS's behaviour from personal experience, but the gist seemed to be 1. they promised system producers to undercut the prices of their OS competiors and 2. they would supply MSDOS even cheaper, if the manufacturers didn't offer a competing OS at all. This uncompetitive behaviour was eventually stopped, but too late for the competition.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: AC @ 12:49 - Google vs Microsoft

              It's not anti competitive (per se) to say that "if you supply only our products, they'll be cheaper than if you supply our rival's products.". The problem comes when you are preventing competition by charging too much for a too popular product.

              Now, the thing that people forget about MS and their earlier products was that they killed the "Big Iron" UNIX and mini manufacturers' monopoly on the datacentre. In the late 80s/early 90s, if you wanted a file server, your choice was Novel, or Big Iron. MS came along and slashed the cost for a file server. Sure, they weren't as reliable as minis or unix, but they were good enough for a better than good enough product.

      2. Armando 123

        Re: Google vs Microsoft

        "It's literally impossible for any PUBLICLY TRADED company to be nice, "

        Fixed it for you. The privately owned ones can be turds as well, but at least there is a CHANCE ...

      3. BorkedAgain
        Thumb Down

        Re: Google vs Microsoft

        "It's literally impossible for any company to be nice..."

        I'm not sure I agree with you there. The company I work for is profitable, successful, growing and has a genuinely earned reputation for being super-nice*. And this isn't a marketing gimmick, it's just how the company is run. It's a priority for the founders, the executive team and everyone down to the new hires.

        Here's a clue: part of the reason we do well is because people love doing business with us, and word spreads. Helps that we're also shit-hot. ;)

        So, not impossible, but not common either, more's the pity...

        * 'Scuse Americanism, but it is an American company...

    2. David Simpson 1
      Devil

      Re: Google vs Microsoft

      You should be happy for ANY company to replace Microsoft you might think Google's "do no evil" is tarnished but Microsoft has actually been found guilty multiply times for market fixing, abuse of monopoly position and bribery.

      Who could do any worse ?

    3. Mips
      Childcatcher

      Re: Google vs Microsoft

      Once upon a time Microsoft were the good guys: they brought light to the darkness that was the PC. Then they became commercial and turned into the name you love to hate.

      So we then got Google and I admit to being an original Google user. They brought light to the darkness which was the Internet and we believed the "do no evil" motto. But as ever the road to hell is paved with good intentions and Google morphed into another Money Munching Monster.

      So where do we go now for honesty. For some time best value has been Firefox. OK so money is an issue but I get the feeling that Mozilla is made up of people who just want to make a living out of making things work and giving a service, not this Mega Money Madness that has struck others. So more power to Mozilla I say.

  2. volsano

    Google's sudden cancellation of services is the big question mark hanging over them for corporate adoption.

    How can I be sure that a particular service or API will not be dropped at a quarter's notice?

    Few other corporations induce such opening questions.

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge
      Devil

      It's quite easy to predict, if MS or Apple suddenly support it then odds on that Google will drop it.

    2. A_Kraut

      AFAIK Google only cancles free services suddenly. For instance ActiveSync is still offered for users of paid Google App services.

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Another one knocked on the head suddenly is CalDev, even if you've got a paid-for Google account. You can find a full list in an El Reg story from a few weeks ago.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      This is the whole problem with the freetard model.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @volsano - You seem to be pretty young and uninformed

      There is a lawsuit still going on after more than a decade between Novell (I doubt you've heard of them, they're gone now) and Microsoft on the exact same topic. Microsoft actively encouraged Novell to use a certain API which then has been dropped (by Microsoft of course) at a quarter's notice as you like to say. And there's more in case you want to know, and it is mostly about Microsoft.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: @volsano - You seem to be pretty young and uninformed

        An API dropped with a quarter's notice doesn't stop what's working now from working. Google dropping a service with a quarter's notice really hits customers where it hurts.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          @AC 14:26GMT - Re: @volsano - You seem to be pretty young and uninformed

          And in your opinion reducing Novell Wordperfect into ashes didn't hurt any consumer, is it? Just go ahead, read the court documents and come back here.

    5. David Simpson 1
      FAIL

      Apart from the fact that the company has to upgrade to something new from XP and IE6 BECAUSE MICROSOFT IS DROPPING SUPPORT!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Dropping support from XP or IE6 isn't with short notice - They were released in 2001, people have had well publicised timetables for support since the inception of the product. If you don't know that it's going out of support, it's your problem not anyone else's.

    6. oldcoder

      There is always MS doing that.

      Just look at the lawsuits over it.

      MS did exactly that to Wordperfect...

  3. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Windows

    Mozilla

    What Mozilla needs to do is make an admin control panel, and MSI, and extol the virtues of Firefox LTS and make all three easily findable from the front page under 'Firefox for business' or something. There are third parties that help with admin and MSIs but Mozilla really needs to do that itself. Relatively little effort yet it would signal that they're serious about enterprise and there's no question whatsoever about privacy, unlike Chrome.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @Dan55 - Re: Mozilla

      1. Try to type about:config in the URL field of Mozilla and you'll get your control panel

      2. I was not aware Google Chrome has an LTS version and an admin control panel.

  4. Gordon Pryra

    Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

    Check the analytic's for El Reg and tell us the % of people using IE6 still.

    Its depressing having to design sites that view perfectly in this crappy system, but it needs to be done. While many people have shiny modern browsers at home and on their portable devices, the VAST majority of web surfers are doing it from this shitty works laptop/PC.

    And they all use IE6

    1. bob's hamster

      Re: Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

      Seeing as the audience of The Register is predominantely IT literate I suspect very few IE6 users will appear in its website stats. For the past year I have refused to even check compatibility of any websites in IE6, let alone spend time recoding for the extremely limited number of users who might access any the websites I create. My customers are also unwilling to pay more for the additional time this would take.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

        IT literacy in the workforce doesn't equal IT literacy in the organisation. Despite working for an IT consultancy, of all things, I'm stuck with IE8 for internet access. There's an uphill struggle happening to get Chrome as an alternative browser which I expect will pay off by the end of the decade...

        1. bob's hamster

          Re: Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

          Well I've just check Google Analytics for the main website I run, which has a large number of visitors from emerging countries such as India and the Phillipines, and IE6 usage is running at under 2% down from nearer 15% a year ago. But I take your point about IT Literacy in workforce not equalling it in the Organisation. But still I would be surprised if there were very many IE6 users in The Register site stats.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

          Google Chrome and/or Firefox Portable is your friend. You may want to fake the user agent to fulfill the lust for power of your fascist, Microsoft minded security/network admins.

          Anyway don't let yourself be fooled, IT consultancy does not always equal what you would expect.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

            We tried Chrome Frame and Firefox Portable, but we have some pretty strict application whitelisting software too...

    2. Mike Dimmick

      Re: Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

      Microsoft's own upgrade-from-IE6 website http://www.ie6countdown.com/ (which uses statistics from http://netmarketshare.com/ ) indicates that the Far East is really the only outpost left where IE6 has significant usage share on the open web. Well, let's be honest: China. In the UK it's well below 1%.

      NetMarketShare weight their statistics - gathered from tracking bugs on websites using HitsLink, I believe - by overall internet traffic from each country, to rebalance the distribution of users of their customers' websites. StatCounter do not do this. It does mean there could be big sampling errors if relatively few users from China are browsing sites that use HitsLink.

      I'm still not sure how well these companies deal with Network Address Translation, having multiple computers behind a single public IP address. The Far East notoriously also has very few public IPv4 addresses, with NATs being widely deployed. If the counter cannot see through the NAT, it will record a count of 1 for each browser used behind the NAT regardless of whether there is one instance or a million, heavily distorting the results.

    3. Jim Carter
      Thumb Down

      Re: Internet Explorer 6 staggers on?

      I'm a freelance web designer, when I have the time, and I flat out refuse to design for IE6. If it doesn't render standards-complaint code, it can sod off. Luckily, the vast majority of browsers actually do that these days.

  5. Russ Tarbox
    FAIL

    Firefox seems to suck badly in a corporate environment

    It relies on weird profiles, which are often incompatible across different versions. At a large licence funded media organisation I worked at, I saw it frequently. As "hot desking" (ugh) was the norm, if someone switched from a machine running Firefox 9 to 12, for example, their favourites may not be visible. It caused no end of headaches to users who had been encouraged to use the browser for certain in-house applications before Chrome had existed as a serious alternative.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    1. Don Jefe

      Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

      Forking (fragmentation) is seriously desktop Linux back, why would fragmentation help with browsers?

      1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Devil

      Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

      If Chrome totally dominates, there can continue to be forks of their browser with any undesirable parts stripped out. Most people will use the official versions for convenience and geeks the unofficial versions cleansed of evil.

      When Chrome was first released I gave it a test drive and was somewhat surprised to see that whenever I logged in to an SSL site Chrome also made an SSL connection to a Google-owned server. I then tried the supposedly flea-free version known as SWIron. It had the same behaviour despite claims that dodgy code had been removed. Neither got a second chance.

      Firefox all the way here. It's the only one I feel I can trust.

      1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    3. El Andy

      Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

      @Eadon: So where does one download the source to Google Apps then? And why have Google ditched CalDAV in favour of their own proprietary calendaring API? They're no more "pro Open Source" than Microsoft are, except when it suits them to be.

      1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

          So without adverts Google would be selling software? it's hardly fair to use the profits from one side of your business to subsidise given away another product in a different market for free. That is anti-competitive.

          It's no different to Microsoft using Windows profits to subsidise selling XBoxes or something else for lower than cost.

          Google are evil, simple as. They'll get a vastly high mobile marketshare and then start charging for the OS.

          1. David Simpson 1
            Devil

            Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

            Someone is feeling a little paranoid, why charge for a free OS when it makes them billions in the search market.

            Nothing illegal being done you just don't understand the law AT ALL.

        2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

          Eadon,

          you really must stop and think before opening your mouth and spouting forth.

          IBM have adopted Linux, very true. But there is no way they have dropped AIX.

          If you want the most from a Power 6/6+/7/7+ CPU Then AIX is the way to go.

          I dare you to go to an IBM office and tell them that they (IBM) have dropped AIX. They have not.

          Total fail

          1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

            1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
              Boffin

              Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

              No Eadon, I was not nit picking pedantically.

              You were making false claims. End of story. There are HACMP features in AIX that ost Linux users can only dream about. Still nowt comes close to VMS Clustering though and that is 30yrs old this year.

              Please carry on slagging off Microsoft and leave others alone.

              btw, I've just completed a POC on a Power 7 System. Using the same Application Software (made by IBM) the AIX based solution outperformed the Linux based solution by close to 40% in raw throughput.

              ergo, AIX is tuned to work on Power H/W a lot better than Linux. Guess which O/S we will be using?

              1. JEDIDIAH
                Linux

                Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

                > There are HACMP features in AIX that ost Linux users can only dream about.

                IBM itself is pretty agnostic when it comes to tech. They are far less enthusiastic about pushing AIX then you are. Same goes for PPC kit.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

          @Eadon - You keep on banging on about IBM and getting it wrong. I work for IBM, we use lots of Linux, we run Linux as a service for some customers, we produce sofware which runs on Linux, but we also use and run Windows as a service and HPUX and Solaris, zOS, etc, etc.

          Some people use Linux on their workstations, but the vast majority use Windows. That said, if we wanted to use any GPL in a piece of software that we are developing, it's basically not going to happen. We contribute to Linux, but we don't use GPL code, not without a swarm of lawyers all over us.

          Making comments like IBM has dropped AIX show you up to have no credibility whatsoever.

          1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

              @Eadon - Now let's go through my post again:

              Linux is not replacing systems in house, new systems may run linux, older systems tend to stay running what they've always run. Linux is much more likely to run new stuff than replace old stuff.

              I'm fully aware Linux is GPL, that's why I brought it up - IBM write code for linux, we've put a lot of money into it, this code is GPL, we don't use other GPLd code in our products or even around our other products without a swarm of lawyers making sure that we're doing it right. No contradiction.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

      Sorry but some of the largest proprietary patent hungry software houses are the biggest contributors to open source, so you pathetic crusade against Microsoft is pointless.

      1. JEDIDIAH
        Linux

        Re: Google winning the browser wars - not as scary as the dark days of IE

        The problem with Microsoft isn't that they're proprietary, it's that they're crap.

        Although all monopolies are annoying, even those run by competent engineers (AT&T, IBM).

    5. Hungry Sean

      @Eadon

      "Google want to use their browser to help sell ads. MS want to use their browser to lock you in."

      And as a professional, one of these leads to a readily understood risk, while the upshot of the other is a big scary question mark. What exactly are google willing to do with their browser to help sell ads? For MS lock-in is presumably sufficient, but clearly it can't end there for Google if their mission is to "monetize" their market share.

      1. David Simpson 1
        Devil

        Re: @Eadon

        Ever heard of BING - Microsoft want to lock you in AND sell ads. They don't want to just kill Google they want to steal their market.

  7. ShelLuser
    Windows

    Listening to your customers....

    THAT is what Microsoft really should do a lot more often. And then I'm not talking about the several inquiries they perform on their websites ("has this information helped you?") or the rants you see on several blogs.

    I'm talking about listening to the people who actually use, respect and like your products, preferably before they move on to something else.

    I'm quite new to the Visual Studio environment, but what I've done is go over a lot of forums (even trying to help out people myself if I could) in order to get a good impression of what could be done, what couldn't and which caveats I had to look out for. I also found the place where users could make feature requests...

    If the number one request (link to visual studio feature request site) is to bring back colour to the program which gets 12.500 (approx) votes and 1100 (approx) comments then surely its not that hard to realize that something is seriously amiss here?

    (for the record: when you look at page 2 or further you'll notice that an average good idea has approx. 1000 votes or lower (800+, 600+, etc). So twelve thousand is really a lot!).

    But... Nope. Microsoft has very quickly worked up a theme editor to bring some sanity back to the user interface, but the colours remain mostly absent.

    NOW realize that this same interface is in par with the overall 'new' Windows look and feel. Office has almost the same look and feel to it, including the NICE TO READ MENUS. And although I know there is a difference between programmers and office users, the line that separates them can be quite thin (sitting the whole day behind Visual Studio, or sitting the whole day behind Word, Excel and maybe PowerPoint).

    That is in my opinion Microsoft's number one problem today. They don't seem to realize (enough) that they're no longer in a position where they can dictate the world. At least by far in the same amounts as they could in the past.

    So yes; when people dislike something enough they move on. If you don't want that to happen you really need to come up with something which will attract people's interest instead of scaring them off whilst you keep on claiming that "you redefined the way people work".

    Get your act together Microsoft, before the empire comes crumbling down.

    1. El Andy

      Re: Listening to your customers....

      The Internet is an echo chamber and the loudest noise often comes from a vocal minority, rather than necessecarily representing the population at large. Obviously anybody who does like the new VS UI (personally I'm not a big fan) isn't going to be submitting a feature request to leave it as it is, are they? And taken as a proportion of the overall number of Visual Studio users out there, twelve thousand isn't really very many at all.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Listening to your customers....

      Technology companies don't listen to their customers because your customer will tell you what they want now, which will often be a slightly improved version of what they have already. By the time you give them this slightly improved product, it will be 18 months after they want it.

      If you asked people what they wanted from a smartphone in 2006 they would probably have said better battery, nicer camera, better keyboard. They wouldn't have said App store, multi-touch or stylus free touch screen. The customer basically doesn't know jack-shit in most cases, they aren't in the loop of what technology is available!

      1. turnip handler

        Re: Listening to your customers....

        "Technology companies don't listen to their customers "

        Tech companies tend to listen to those that actually pay them. If you are in the top 10 customers list for a tech company they will do all sorts of crazy things to add colour, menu items and hold off retiring applications that only you use.

  8. Aoyagi Aichou

    Opera the sad panda

    No wonder its share is dropping. It has dropped the support of Unite, will drop Presto in favor of WebKit... oh well.

    1. Captain Scarlet Silver badge

      Re: Opera the sad panda

      Dammit want to defend Opera but can't :(

      Havent used it much since as the only feature I still like over other browsers is the close and have everything saved by default (Much like Lotus Notes).

    2. captain veg

      Re: Opera the sad panda

      Even so, Google still doesn't play nice with it. Tried to get into their Cloud Storage thing earlier today. Computer said no, suggested I use Chrome instead. This is behaviour learned from Microsoft.

      -A.

  9. Bodhi

    Google Apps = pretty good, Chrome = not so much

    We use Google Apps for business here, and in fairness, they are pretty good. Lots of functionality (even if Docs can be a bit flaky), lots of good collaboration tools. Only thing which grates is the constant new interfaces on GMail (got round by using Outlook instead) and the Calendar.

    Chrome itself however? Kill it, kill it with fire. So far I;ve seen it reduce well specced laptops to a crawl, fill up every C: drive it can find with crap, start up 20 useless processes in Task Manager, forget passwords randomly and generally be a little bitch. I've stuck with Firefox and it seems to work much better,

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Mistry told The Reg

    ""As a product manager, I have to dispel myths - and tell lots of lies," Mistry told The Reg."

    Fixed.

  11. Tom 38 Silver badge

    Browsium said […] no one it has spoken to has made Chrome the primary office web browser

    They can't have talked to that many people. Which makes their 'insight' into the browser market somewhat dubious.

  12. Justice
    Thumb Up

    Chrome > IE6

    The business I work for, (large worldwide insurance company) has ditched IE6 for everything but our intranet. Chrome is installed for everything else.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Microsoft: Where do you want to go today

    Google: We know where you went today.

    1. David Simpson 1
      FAIL

      So ever heard of BING ? Microsoft want to know where you go to they just can't work out how to do it as well as Google.

  14. BeerTokens
    WTF?

    First time in a long time.

    Was needing to purchase some goods from a manufacturer in the north of England yesterday and for the first time in at least 3 years I was unable to proceed as the site required IE 6 now this left me with three options,

    1) Install it in wine and piss around trying to get the bugger to work. I don't care what anyone else says I've never found wine reliable.

    2) call their sales department and make the order (it was 7pm)

    3) Purchase similar item from different supplier

    Yeah I choose number 3!

    The thing that bugs me about this conversation is that we are still having it in 2013! It strikes me that a lot of IT departments have known about this issue since the release of IE7 7 years ago! What the fuck do they expect build something once on some proprietary code base and think it will continue to run forever! Yes you could just run it on internal systems but the flags have been there for everyone to see for years!

    The other part of this question that puzzles me is how complicated are these internal systems that could not be re-written easily using more modern code and open standards?

    1. El Andy

      Re: First time in a long time.

      @BeerTokens: "What the fuck do they expect build something once on some proprietary code base and think it will continue to run forever!"

      You're forgetting that being able to do that was precisely the lie developers were pushing when most of these businesses were being sold "web applications" as a replacement for their internal Windows applications in the first place. Having been told it would free them from the pain of having to upgrade systems as regularly and bypass all those compatility issues, only to find out in managed neither, it's hardly surprising many are sceptical about doing it all again just because another bunch of web developers are touting how HTML5 will make all those same problems go away and everything will "just work"

      Until the industry grows up a bit and learns that you just can't break existing applications, regardless of what kind of crappy code they have, the world will be lumbered with the pain of massive fragmentation in the browser market and people running old versions just to make site X work.

    2. JEDIDIAH
      Linux

      Re: First time in a long time.

      > 1) Install it in wine and piss around trying to get the bugger to work. I don't care what anyone else says I've never found wine reliable.

      This is pretty much automagical in any recent variation of wine including the commercial ones they sell in the Mac section of Best Buy or the one you can get from the Ubuntu repository.

      That's not a very interesting example of wine really.

    3. David Simpson 1
      Trollface

      Re: First time in a long time.

      Ever tried IE Tab for Firefox ?

  15. John Lilburne Silver badge

    On the systems here Chrome will NOT be installed.

    1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        For God's sake, Eadon, give it a rest. We're so far beyond tedious that it's stopped even being amusing, just grindingly predictable.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Linux

          hehe

          Eadon is like one of these vietnamese soldiers and you MS operatives have a hard time with him, just like the US Army had then.

          He is after you not because he is in the pay of a competing corrupt leader like you are, but because he hates your support of corrupt leaders. Now have fun in the next Tet offensive !

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: hehe

            That's the thing though: I don't just do MS, I use all the UNIXes, Linux, Mac OS, Windows even RISC OS. They are all good at some things and less good at others, suggesting that there is something inherently "evil" or "corrupt" is just pathetic. The sooner that people who are "Windows users" and "Linux users" (etc) realise that they better themselves if they learn other OSes the better. And learn them, not just try them for five minutes and react badly because it's not what they're used to and somehow therefore worthless.

            1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: hehe

                @Eadon - Like I said those who can't be arsed to better themselves just slag off what they see as the "opposition"

                Pathetic really, you can learn so much about your favorite OS by learning about other OSes.

                Care to say why you think that storing your settings in a journalling database with ACLs for every single setting is a "disaster"? Over conf files, or was that one a cnf file, or is it in a directory called conf, or config - Linux needs a standard - where you can set access at the file level or nothing.

                1. Tinker Tailor Soldier

                  Re: hehe

                  The database gets out of sync with the filesystem state really easily, it prevents seamless install of apps by just copying them in? It prevents partitioning a users space over different file systems. It can't be cleaned up.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: hehe

                    @Tinker Tailor Soldier:

                    It's a journalling database - it doesn't get out of sync with the filesystem. Ever.

                    You can easily install apps by copying them, you dump the appropriate part of the registry copy it and the associated files to the target and then install it. That said you shouldn't do this, you should use the appropriate package msi etc. That goes for Linux as much as it does for Windows.

                    It in no way prevents partitioning a users' filespace over different filesystems.

                    It can be cleaned up, should it need to be, in fact it can be cleaned up more easily than with individual text files because everything is in the same place and presented to you through a dedicated application in a tree structure.

                    I have still to hear a compelling argument against The Registry which doesn't boil down to "it's different to what I know, therefore no good."

              2. mmeier

                Re: hehe

                GOOD engineers use the RIGHT system for the task and that depends on a lot of things. Like "what does the end user have" (Makes little sense to force a Linux box into a Windows network or a Windows server in a Solaris environment), "does the job need special hardware and how is the mid/long term support" (Try connecting to a S5/S7 series communication processor) and so on. So they know many systems and choose.

          2. mmeier

            Re: hehe

            After Tet the Vietcong where no longer a factor in the Vietnam War. The North Vietnamese government basically used them up as cannon fodder. Post Tet it was mostly the regular NV army doing the fighting. And when the US started fighting seriously - NV ran to the conference table.

            Too bad Congress later was so obsessed with Tricky Dick that they abandoned South Vietnam to the Commies

        2. David Simpson 1
          Devil

          Yes Eadon listen to ********'s opinion - oh wait it is probably a spam bot - just ignore it.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            IOt's even pretty well argued spam, with spelling mistakes/gramatical mistakes, or a genuine person who wants to remain anonymous.

            Incidentally, is "David Simpson 1" one of Eadon's alter egos or another person, I just don't know.

  16. bag o' spanners

    Inept management with a taste for wonky policy over longterm strategy will never be proactive. The only known temporary cure for their doofusitis is a hefty boot up the arse, preferably a wince-inducing financial one. XP, IE6 and Office 2007 were still in daily use at my last public sector job. The real pain for the clingy ones is when their slothlike SQL Server ugrades require more than one step to extract the contents of the db.

    Following Google's failed attempt to take over the socmedia market with the cavernous echo chamber that is G+, I'm even more wary of their hype-fuelled ambitions exceeding their ability to deliver.

    As a browser, Chrome has some odd behaviours which I find slightly offputting. The default UI's a bit meh too.

    I wouldn't use IE if MS paid me. Firefox may be delightfully klutzy, but it does what I want it to, happily integrates Adblock, and doesn't insist on phoning home every five nanoseconds.

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    No admin rights required.

    IE in any version is CRAP. However, being able to install and update Chrome manually without resorting to Helldesk makes all the difference.

    Ever since windows7 was deployed here, our intranet geniuses were forced to recode all to the new IE and forcibly it works in chrome.

  18. HarshKarma
    Joke

    Google - "We are extremely cautions about privacy."

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Flame

      Why Joking ?

      They are certainly jealously guarding their intel take from the competition. Monitored, card-reader-protected doors, elevators everywhere and so on.

      They won't divulge a bit of their treasure, except when they receive a piece of paper with an FBI, DHS, or any of the other 277 eligible agencies' letterhead.

  19. mvaar

    Would like to argue the comparison

    on the point of google being like m$ in promoting their interests -

    1) Google products and services do work with other browsers, including IE and in fact, even konqueror ! It treats konqueror as 'safari'. This may change if they become the dominant browser. However, Google does follow standards for the most part, even if they happen to be among the first to support them. Of course, their desire to push dart reminds one of active X etc.

    2) m$ went above and beyond giving preference to IE in THEIR products/services. IMO, they were within their right to support IE over and above competitors' browsers. What I cannot condone is the fact that they twisted every ISV to do the same. I haven't forgotten how most 3rd party software insisted that they would only work with IE, even when the s/w itself was a desktop or client server application ! In fact, many of them even bundled IE as part of their installation process since windows 95.

    Yes, most companies resort to such tactics to promote their business but m$ went above and beyond the call of nether primarily because they totally lack imagination, brain power etc to actually run a tech business and they would be lost without their underhanded ways. For e.g., look what browser dominance led to - NOTHING. It was easy for m$ to screw competitors on windows and then WHAT ? If they had any imagination, they would have come out with new products and services based on this dominance; instead, they wait for someone else to come out with ideas and then steal from them.

  20. Nick L

    According to Secunia...?

    I don't like Chrome. I don't like the idea that Google - an advertising company - should also be in the browser business. They also don't seem to be very good at developing secure software: Secunia's vulnerability list had Chrome at the top of the table for number of vulnerabilities last year...

    I don't understand why Adobe feel the need to install Chrome by default when installing flash player, either, but I am not party to any agreement that's happened between the two companies.

    Firefox? Sure. Chrome? Too many ulterior motives for Google I'm afraid.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: According to Secunia...?

      > I don't like Chrome. I don't like the idea that Google - an advertising company - should also be in the browser business.

      Yes, i only ever use Bing and Internet Explorer 10 ...

    2. David Simpson 1
      Devil

      Re: According to Secunia...?

      Funny - it was the only broswer to beat the hacking competition for several years in a row.

      Microsoft have Bing - Search and advertising, what have you been smoking ?

  21. Anonymous Coward
    IT Angle

    Using Catalyst with Chrome and IE?

    "Browsium said every discussion it's had in the last six months with its customers has been about using Catalyst with Chrome in addition to IE. Not one discussion involved Firefox"

    Maybe it's because they are using Firefox, Chrome and Opera without using Catalyst?

  22. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    Not the same strategy...

    Not really the same strategy. There's a very significant differences between Microsoft's past browser strategy and Google's. That is, when Microsoft "recommended" IE, they were at times making pages that did not follow industry standards, or even attempt to. They were in fact trying to use non-standard behaviors and addons and extensions to lock people into the use of IE specifically, making pages that in fact did not work properly except on IE. They then made no effort FOR YEARS to improve their standards compliance, expecting people to accomodate the limitations and bugs of IE. See the complaints of businesses that still have IE6 for their custom site for the remaining examples of this.

    Google is making Chrome conform to HTML5, recommending people use HTML5, and (by specifically supporting recent IE and Firefox), making sure they are not using some odd corner case of HTML5 that only Chrome supports to lock out other browsers. Also, in reality I haven't come across a google product that actually *needs* newest firefox, they just don't want the support nightmare of providing *formal* support for browsers that the browser vendors themselves aren't really supporting (they support it by recommending getting the newer version.)

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019