ENOUGH STUPID TODAY. kthxbye 2009-12-21 20:19:53
Mood: Daft Punk - Too Long
I get up at 7 AM, and don't get home from work until gone 6 PM, and still finish the day with one and a half hours of work left to make up at some point. How does that work exactly? I'm not entirely sure, but South West Trains and First Group might, between them, have some idea.
Anyway... I assume you've seen Idiocracy. If not, I'll wait. Go on.
Take a look at this Slashdot story about Firefox 3.5 being the most popular browser. Now, don't get me wrong, I like Firefox - when it isn't being cluster-f*cked by add-ons, a wonderful experience which today had me downgrading from 3.5.6 to 3.5.5 and eventually back up again, not a quick process on Gentoo - but I don't think it's quite time to celebrate yet. Take a look at these three graphs:
- Original line graph linked to by Slashdot
- Bar chart showing, presumably, average market share for the same time period
- Bar chart showing average shares for this week
So.. if we look at the first graph, we see that Firefox 3.5 has, indeed, overtaken any single version of IE in popularity. The kicker there is that this is any single version, not all versions. The combined popularity of IE versions 6, 7 and 8 still beats the combined popularity of Firefox versions 2, 3.0 and 3.5. If we look at the second and third graphs, we get a clearer idea of exactly how new a trend this is: averaged over roughly a year and a half, the Firefoxes have a combined market share of 29.27%, whereas the IEs have 61.07%. IE 7 alone beats the combined score of all Firefoxes in the second graph. The third graph shows that Firefox 3.5 has indeed taken the lead, but also by how small an amount - Firefox 3.5's market share in graph number three is still lower than that of IE 7 in graph number two. Firefoxes: 30.94%; IEs: 55.58%. Close, but no cigar.
Anyway, having curbed my enthusiasm for the actual "story", I made the mistake of following the second link in the Slashdot summary. Well, to be fair, it isn't that page itself which is the problem; in fact, I quite agree with their message. The problem is with two of the sites listed under the "Who?" section, specifically TwitLuv and Divvyshot. I kid you not - someone, somewhere, wants you to use a photo sharing app called Divvyshot. What utter d... well, I don't need to say it, surely? (In their defence, I can't quite tell how serious they're being; but even if it's tongue-in-cheek, it's still a stupid thing to call a company.)
TwitLuv is worse though. The name is bad enough alone, but if you actually go to the front page, and watch the auto-updating recent ratings box, the site appears to be (without closer inspection, which quite frankly it doesn't warrant) about giving people you've never met - and probably never shared more than 140 characters of conversation with - arbitrary ratings out of 10, which they won't care about anyway (if they have any sense), based on small badly-compressed photos. In the name of "Luv", no less.
I did however discover that Brawndo has been made real, and that this was done by a real-life company called Omni Consumer Products. Old news, but news to me nonetheless. However, I can't decide if this is actually awesome, or if someone somewhere has tried too hard, and in doing so has utterly missed the point.
1 Stu 2009-12-21 21:52:08
I haven't seen Idiocracy (yet), but I have seen the "Firefox is really popular if you squeeze the numbers hard enough" story.
What it really shows is that IE is more prevalent among the large quantity of people that would rarely consider updating their browser, never mind changing to a totally new one. This if anything shows Microsoft's unmovable foundations in the our-browser-came-pre-packaged market.
You must be logged in to post comments.