Posted on 08/26/2005 6:31:03 PM PDT by Bush2000
Firefox's 'retreat' ensures Microsoft excels
Open source web browser Firefox has lost the momentum it has steadily gained since it was unleashed last year, according to Web analysts at Net Applications.
The online portal’s unique Hit List service reveals a slump in the Mozilla browser’s market share, falling from 8.7% to 8.1 % in July.
Coinciding with its demise, was the advance of Microsoft's IE that has gained some of the ground surrendered in June, climbing back from 86.6 % to 87.2% last month.
The revival for the dominant browser comes on the back of average monthly losses of between .5 to 1% for Redmond, as Firefox started to gain acceptance among a wider audience than just tech-savvy users.
When asked by Contractor UK whether Microsoft’s sudden gains were from the unveiling of a new IE, Net Applications said a re-launch tends revive industry interest, and could have bolstered Microsoft’s market share of the browser market.
When a company launches a new product, there is always renewed interest in what the company has produced and it would also be fair to say that this may have had an effect, said a member of the Hit List team.
Although, there have been browser issues with Windows 2000 in the news, so it is possible that again you may see a dip [in Microsoft’s market share]. Right now, people are looking for security and whenever there are issues with the security of one's system, they will use what they feel will be the most secure.”
Besides Net Applications, web developer site W3 Schools, confirms that adoption of Firefox is falling, just as IE is reaching its highest share of the market in 2005.
According to W3's data on specialist users, Microsoft IE (6) enjoyed a 67.9% share in July, improving to 68.1% in August matched against Firefox’s top share of 21% in May, which has now dropped to 19.8% for the last two months.
Observers noted that both sets of analysis concur that Microsoft’s loss, up until now, has been Firefox’s gain, but over the last month roles have reversed.
Security fears concerning Mozilla and its browser product have recently emerged, coinciding with Microsoft’s high-profile trumpeting of its new safer browser product (IE 7), complete with glossy logo.
Experts at Net Applications said they were surprised at Firefox’s sudden retreat, saying they expected a slow down before any decline.
Yet they told CUK: “Whenever there may be problems with security, there always is a decline with users changing browsers.”
Data from the Web analytics company is based on 40,000 users, gleaned from their global internet operations, prompting some commentators to question the so-called ‘global decline’ in the Firefox market share.
The Counter.com reportedly finds that between June and July, Firefox actually increased its share by two points, and overtook IE5 for the first time ever.
The Web Standard Project suggests webmasters should treat data from web analysis providers with caution, before rushing to make service changes.
So what can we conclude?” asks the WSP, a grass roots project fighting for open access to web technologies.
“Not much: Mozilla-based browsers are probably used by just under 10% of the web audience and their share is growing slowly. IE5.x is probably used by somewhat less than that and its share is declining slowly. IE6 is roughly holding steady.”
Meanwhile, Spread Firefox, which measures actual download rates of the browser, reports that it took just one month for the Mozilla Foundation’s showpiece to reach 80 million downloads in August – from its July total of 70 million.
At the time of writing, Firefox had been downloaded 80701444 times, meaning adoption rates of over 10m occurred one month after Net Applications says Firefox bolted in light of the dominant IE.
Then why'd you mention wireless? But either way, hacking a closed system is a lot tougher then a system that's on the Internet. But yes, I'd get them off NT4. It's not even supported anymore.
That's like running your network with which flavor of Apple OS? Or which build of Linux? Microsoft is a victim of their own success.
I only mentioned it because it's what I was doing and how I ran into it. I mentioned it because I was doing a wireless assessment when I ran into the box. I had bypassed their MAC address filtering, cracked the WEP key, and accessed the system.
I also compromised it while plugged into their hardwired network.
They know they should migrate off of it, but their app doesn't run on anything newer. I created a strategy for them to use to harden this deployment until such time as they can migrate.
Ok, so you cracked wep. You know that's pretty simple, right?
" Ok, so you cracked wep. You know that's pretty simple, right?"
You're changing the subject, but whatever.
Cracking WEP can be simple or not. There are different ways it can be implemented, such as rotating keys, and even stuff like WPA/TKIP can be cracked.
You have to be able to capture enough packets to crack WEP. In the absence of a lot of trafic, you have to wait a looong time. Or you used to, at least. That was the assumption their network was built on... their only devices were handheld price scanners, which don't generate enough traffic. This is a national retail chain that you've certainly seen if not visited, not a bunch of yay-hoos.
I had to map out their MAC filtering scheme, spoof MAC addresses, cause wireless devices to reauthenticate, capture packets, and reinject them. I used aireplay, airodump, aircrack on Linux, along with Kismet and some other goodies for the wireless piece. Also had to map out firewall trust relationships to get inbound access, and do a number of other fun things.
The only real safe way to deploy wireless is to tunnel. Open WLAN, and clients must VPN (no split tunnel!) in order to get network access. SSL vpn, client based VPN, doesn't matter.
Wireless is very tricky. It makes the concept of a network perimiter dissapear unless you do it right. Wireless signals can leak a long ways, too.
We all have our preferences. I'm using Norton "Internet Security" with its firewall and Microsoft's firewall and a router with most ports closed. I have Adaware, Spybot etc. I scan nightly, I purge the Registry weekly. I have been compromised three times, from different actions I took through IE. Two of which took me the better part of a day to straighten out. This maybe anecdotal evidence, but I have never been hit through Firefox. Maybe this will change in the future, I do not know, but for now I reccomend using something other than IE.
A lot of people had one. IBM had a previous relationship with Gates, buying his language product, so they asked him who they should use for their new OS. Gates suggested Kildall's CP/M, Kildall wasn't home, so they asked Gates to give them one. In that era, NO ONE negotiated with IBM from a position of power. It would be like a small software maker negotiating with Microsoft today from a position of power.
BS. They were running on faster hardware. Of course it was faster.
Nope, faster on the SAME hardware. You could boot directly into OS 9 or use OS 9 under OS X on the same machine. Using it under OS X was faster.
We were discussing Windows Server 2003. So name the ways...
I'll start with one: uptime. As for OS X, just use it. It's brain-dead easy to administer the server and network. Nobody does usability like Apple.
Macs are boutique computers. Suitable for people that buy plastic furniture, wear goatees, and drink lattes with soy milk.
Or for the military, which has quite a few, including in a supercomputer cluster. And what's this "platic furniture" thing about?
I've searched and have not been able to find. If you can't show a link, they don't exist.
I just thought since you're an OSS type that you'd rather create your own.
I like OSS as much as it can be useful to me. Beyond that I don't care about it.
But then you have ancient OSs like UNIX that created the Internet and has had 30 years to adjust to the attendant problems, as opposed to Windows, which was designed to run in a trusted environment.
There's a little program for Linux that will make every client authenticate with certificates to the server running the WAP so that spoofing and man-in-the-middle is no longer possible.
" There's a little program for Linux that will make every client authenticate with certificates to the server running the WAP so that spoofing and man-in-the-middle is no longer possible."
You can do the same thing with Windows, to be fair.
But... you must make sure theres no split tunneling, otherwise if you're plugged into a hardwired network, you are bridging the two... your wireless client can be attacked, and the attacker can use your pc to access the hardwires net...
Who was it that said the gov't is able to buy stuff because their local idiot said to buy it?
But seriously, Windows "owns" the military.
That's it I'm calling you out on this gross statement. Show me one server of Unix that's on the Internet today that was built 30 years ago that hasn't been upgraded and that is still serving a production purpose.
NT has evolved also. It's called Server 2003.
Right. Keep believing that. BTW: show me a link supporting everything you've stated so far on this thread. Otherwise it's just fantasy.
They pretty much do. I only know of two places where Macs are used outside of Army graphics and photo studios. One is the Army web site (moved to Mac because of Windows security concerns) and that recent XServer supercomputer cluster for modelling hypersonic flight, which was done on open bid, all platforms considered (no wonder Windows didn't make it).
You are suggesting we use it to improve security. It is useless in any security context if nobody can get their hands on it. Provide it please, otherwise I will consider your Windows high-security password system to be wishful thinking.
show me a link supporting everything you've stated so far on this thread.
If I ever mentioned a product on this thread and failed to provide you with a link to it, please tell me so that I can do so.
Wow, so Apple was the lowest bidder? Interesting. I wonder if anyone put a windows bid in?
I did provide a link to the technology. I never said product X. So it does exist and you can even create one yourself. Remember the OSS mantra of being able to do what you need to with code? Well, here's your chance. I can't disclose the nature of the other one, so I won't. However, if you have a hard time finding one to buy, just contract someone to write one for you (if you can't do it). Heck, I may be willing to write one for you for a large fee. Or ask adam_az. He's in the security scene. If he's more than a script kiddie, he can easily write one as well.
The reason they aren't that common is because the windows security is good enough. It's easier to just increase the password length to 15 than it is to replace the cryptologic routines.
The point is that UNIX has been dealing with the Internet for far longer than NT, and therefore the lessons learned from all that experience have been incorporated into it. UNIX was dealing with Internet worms before NT was even conceived. Linux was born on the Internet years before NT even hit the market. NT has only known the Internet since the mid 90s, and still has a lot to learn.
Not sure, but weren't you once touting Novell? That may have been N3wbi3,though so forgive me if I'm wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.