Internet Explorer: A Browser Breaks
 Joe Wilcox
News Analysis. Enterprises aren't loving Internet Explorer 7, so how can its successor do any better? |
[Editor's Note: This is the second of two posts pulling data from the Forrester Research report, "Enterprise Desktop and Web 2.0/SAAS Platform Trends, 2007."]
Enterprises are holding onto IE 6 and giving Firefox some love. IE 6 usage is going to be a problem for Web developers, because of the browser's weak standards support. If there were a Web equivalent to Frankenstein's monster, IE 6 could be it.
The monster is driving away customers. Enterprise IE adoption dropped from 88.7 percent to 78.7 percent in 2007 with gains mainly going to Firefox, according to a new report. Forrester published the data on March 27, but only released it publicly today. Forrester surveyed a whopping 50,000 users at over 2,300 large to very large enterprises throughout 2007.
IE 7 and Firefox 2 were released around the same time. Firefox's overall enterprise adoption nearly doubled, to 18 percent, in 2007. IE 7's share climbed from about 10 percent to near 30 percent during the same time frame.
Forrester analyst Thomas Mendel's indictment of IE's development is chilling. "Microsoft is not innovating," he wrote. That's quite the statement considering how much hoopla Microsoft has created about IE 8.
Where there is innovation, enterprise users are migrating. Mendel explained:
"Even with Microsoft spoon-feeding users high-priority automatic updates, enterprise apathy is proving extremely difficult to overcome. In contrast, Firefox's current version (2.0), released in concert with IE7, had almost completely replaced version 1.5 in the same 15 months—by the end of 2007, 95.7 percentage of Firefox users in enterprises were using version 2.0."
Mendel doesn't go through Microsoft's laundry list of IE problems, so I will:
- IE 7 security changes break applications.
- Unnecessarily complex security features make the browser more difficult to use, and that's a headache many IT organizations don't want.
- IE is part of the operating system, complicating potential compatibility risks.
- IE 7's best benefits require Windows Vista, adoption of which is poor among enterprises.
- Inertia—it's easier to use what's in production and working.
IE 7's difficulties add some credence to the U.S. Justice Department's antitrust case against Microsoft. During the 1998-99 trial, government lawyers argued that Microsoft's bundling of the browser with Windows impeded Netscape distribution. The theory: Consumers would be more likely to use the browser found on their PCs rather than download another. A decade later, big network and Internet pipes make downloading alternative browsers fairly easy. But Microsoft also has given enterprises tools that allow them to block IE downloads. The IE 6 default already installed on Windows is doing much better than the downloadable IE browser.
IE 7, or its successor, may not see real enterprise uptake apart from Windows adoption. When factoring in Forrester's Vista adoption figures, enterprise IE 7 adoption via download only increased by 13.4 percent in 2007 compared with 8.2 percent for Firefox. The closing the gulf in enterprise adoption growth is attainable for Mozilla, particularly considering Firefox 3 is slated for June release.
But Mozilla will need to do more. Mendel observed that "large-scale, companywide deployments are not yet typical," and he blamed Mozilla for continuing "to expend little energy on wooing IT managers to formally adopt Firefox. There is still no official MSI package, and risk-averse users have no recourse to paid support services."
The point: Firefox adoption could be a whole lot better, if Mozilla made more effort, particularly given IE 7's enterprise acceptance and recommendations like Mendel's: "Businesses that do not already have migration plans in place should consider a major rollout with the more standards-compliant version 8." Right now, Microsoft's unofficial development schedule puts the release of IE 8 in 2009.
For businesses looking for a standards-compliant Web browser, Internet Explorer won't be the choice in 2008, with IE 6 entrenched and IE 8's release as much as a year away—or more, if closely aligned with Windows 7. For Web developers, the standards headaches will continue as long as IE 6 enterprise adoption remains high.
There is huge competitive opportunity for Mozilla, and even Apple, to exploit Microsoft's browser problems. Both organizations have highly standards-compliant browsers that can be deployed at lower risk. Browser-to-operating system integration makes IE deployments more risky. While Microsoft has now released IE 7 through WSUS (Windows Server Update Services), enterprises can still block the download, and download installation makes for more level competition among the browsers.
IE is vulnerable to aggressive competition right now and likely still will be through early 2009. Only Mozilla's unwillingness to act—to make Firefox deployments easier—would prevent the browser from making even greater enterprise gains against Internet Explorer. Mozilla, are you paying attention?
Create, Communicate, Collaborate with IT Professionals at Ziff Davis Enterprise IT Link.
Comments (34)
If Firefox were to support NT Challenge/Response authentication and were able to be managed/deployed through Active Directory, I'd roll it out in a heartbeat. Until then, it will just be a curiosity here and in most organizations.
Posted by TomH | March 31, 2008 3:52 PM
Once Firefox 3 is finished, I am sure you will see an MSI as well as more support for corporate installs. They are working on the core parts of the browser at the moment.
Rushing buggy unfinished software to enterprises is Microsofts job!
Posted by billybob | March 31, 2008 3:52 PM
I remember watching the Mix '08 Keynote via Webcast.
In the context of discussing IE8 a slide was produced with some surprising stats on how IE7 performed on pages with a heavy amount of scripting. It looked as if the response times on IE7 were about 4-5 times what they were in Firefox and Safari. Anyone who uses Yahoo mail know this; performance is great in Firefox- terrible in IE.
Not sure what the reasons are architecturally- it may have something to do with the fact that with IE you can zoom in on the canvas, and the tradeoffs associated?
I was shocked when I saw this slide- think it was about 30 minutes into the keynote. Basically MS was conceding that IE7 is a second-tier browser in the area of scripting performance.
Posted by Jason | March 31, 2008 5:46 PM
Most of the gains by IE7 are due to people who buy Vista on a new computer, as IE7 is installed by default. The gains by Safari, are due to the increase of Mac sales, and the fact that it is now ported to Windows. The Firefox gains, in spite of the Vista sales, are just due to a vastly superior product.
IE7 has to be one of the most major bug ridden programs of all time.
Posted by sam | March 31, 2008 6:05 PM
I don't have any problems with IE7. The main reason I'm not deploying it where I work is the changes Microsoft made when using it for FTP. FTP is kinda hit/miss in IE7. I wish Microsoft would also move the refresh/stop next to the back/forward buttons.
Posted by GaryM | March 31, 2008 7:44 PM
Dear Joe, how come I don't have all the problems you mentioned.
I like IE7, I am now awaiting the upcoming IE8
Mozilla and Safari introduce more problems in Windows environment
Posted by Peter | March 31, 2008 9:27 PM
Wow, end of the world again... Microsoft breaks, IE breaks, sales are lowering and everyone is happy with alternatives.
In reality, I don't see any of these happening. Go and get a life Joe, you seem overly frustrated these days.
Posted by Moon | March 31, 2008 9:59 PM
It looks like much of the IE6 losses went to IE7. I use Firefox on my work machine, but IE6 is required to browse the corporate intranet. I don't see IE going away anytime soon. Even though I prefer Firefox for its features, I haven't had any big problems with either IE6 or IE7.
Posted by Greg | March 31, 2008 10:22 PM
Totally agree with Greg above.
It's always easy to cross things off your list, rather than pick an option from a list.
What's compatible with Microsoft Sharepoint?
- Cross off Firefox
- Cross of Safari
What's compatible with Windows Update?
- Cross off Firefox
- Cross off Safari
What's compatible with MSN email, AutoCAD license site, the soon to be OOXML web?
- Cross off Firefox
- Cross off Safari
Yea, Microsoft doesn't innovate.
Bundling and ecosystem are greater than innovation.
Posted by ZzarkLinux | April 1, 2008 1:26 AM
Usability in IE7 is a joke.
Ugly, clunky, badly designed UI, that breaks things that actually worked in IE6.
One example:
I use the ctrl+wheel shortcut in IE6 to zoom text, all the time.
Until they give me back that function (or fixed the useless IE7 zoom), it will be a cold day in hell before i switch over.
Adding new functions is ok, but you should NEVER ever yank functionality out of users hands.
Posted by Mats Svensson | April 1, 2008 3:23 AM
lol
Posted by puppet | April 1, 2008 4:54 AM
70.1 + 29.8 + 18.0 + 2.4 = 120.3
:)
Posted by Carlos | April 1, 2008 7:43 AM
@Mats - Ctrl+Scroll wheel works fine in IE7 for me. Just checked it.
@Carlos - I noticed the same thing, but you beat me to it. Kinda blows his credibility yet again, doesn't it?
Posted by aep528 | April 1, 2008 9:00 AM
aep528 -
Nope, in IE7 Ctrl+wheel zooms the whole page like a big rigid blob, breaking among other things liquid designs.
In IE6 Ctrl+wheel just changes the font size.
Same shortcut, different functions.
Lost a useful one, got a useless one in return.
Posted by Mats Svensson | April 1, 2008 9:47 AM
Carlos wrote: "70.1 + 29.8 + 18.0 + 2.4 = 120.3."
Hi, Carlos,
As you probably guessed, enterprises use multiple browsers.
Joe
Posted by Joe | April 1, 2008 12:10 PM
Why hasn't this blog been renamed The Anti-M$ Blog yet? Oh yeah, cause then Joe would just be another Microsoft basher in the bandwagoning parade. The worldwide leader in any field will always have the most loyal fans fans AND the loudest detractors. But guess what? They are number one for a reason! For a blog called Microsoft WATCH to be used only as a soapbox for how they didn't listen to you when you were a consultant for them, is pretty bush league.
Posted by JPH | April 1, 2008 12:40 PM
The UI in IE7 is a hideous monster. What is up with MS revamping the UI in every iteration of every product? Sometimes the UI is much better in a previous version.
Posted by JM | April 1, 2008 1:10 PM
@TomH
set network.automatic-ntlm-auth.trusted-uris to a comma separated list of hosts/domains
Posted by dnk | April 1, 2008 5:23 PM
Jeez! April's 1st has fooled everyone... again :D
Posted by Behrang | April 2, 2008 2:45 AM
Most companies use XP. I've worked in 2 large coporations of > 40,000 desktops over the last few years. It's not easy to deploy new software to a company of that size. They have a if it's not broken don't fix it mentality. If IE6 works for their corporate sites then they'll stay with it until they move to Vista or the next version of Windows. They don't care about IE7s or IE8s new features. They just want their intranets to work and while they do on IE6 they won't move off it.
And Behrang, just because you read the article on April 1st doesn't mean it's an April fool. It was posted on March 31st.
Posted by Michael | April 2, 2008 4:37 AM
all this talk and your web designer can't get your page to display properly in firefox...
shame on you, calling yourself an it savvy site...
Posted by leslie | April 2, 2008 4:44 AM
"[Microsoft] are number one for a reason!"
Actually, JPH, I think the reason was the subject of various antitrust trials.
Posted by James | April 2, 2008 4:56 AM
@ZzarkLinux
Please stop lying...
What's compatible with Microsoft Sharepoint?
- Cross off Firefox
- Cross of Safari
*** Not true!
What's compatible with MSN email, AutoCAD license site, the soon to be OOXML web?
- Cross off Firefox
- Cross off Safari
So the Microsoft based OOXML is IE only? Well f*ck me who would have thought that. MSN, another Microsoft product that doesn't support other browsers. Those are both the fault of MS not the browser manufacturers who follow standards.
As for the AutoCAD license site, again down to bad or uneducated programmers and not specicially the browser itself.
You are the worst kind of fanboy. The type that turns around MS problems as being features and complains that others are to be blamed.
Wake up and smell that stuff you are shovelling.
Posted by AngryReader | April 2, 2008 5:29 AM
IE6 + IE7:
70.1% + 29.8% = 99.9%
Wow
Posted by Mac | April 2, 2008 5:59 AM
I was a hardcore IE user few years & never even thought about crossing over to anything else. Then one day I just tried FF with full intention of uninstalling it later. Had just read an article where the author claimed "you wont even realize when FF would become your preferred browsing tool" & I was like "oh really!"
But those exact words turned true for me. First it was jus one site, then the tabs, then the embedded Google search, then the extensions..........now I have to make myself remember IE is sitting somewhere in the corner. It has been relegated to the unused corners of my hard disk.
FF.....FTW...all the way!
Posted by Crisender | April 2, 2008 10:19 AM
IE8 + FF3 = Opera (5 years ago)
Posted by Christopher | April 2, 2008 10:50 AM
@Christopher
You seems to be right =)
Posted by Tobbi | April 2, 2008 11:03 AM
Internet Explorer blows. Anyone who says differently is retarded.
Posted by Kevin | April 2, 2008 11:28 AM
I've been an MS web / app. developer for going on 10 years now, and I've been using FF exclusively for the past 2 years...What a HUGE difference - head and shoulders beyond anything IE has ever been capable of. And for anyone who thinks they can't use FF for SharePoint, Windows Update, etc., I have something for you: a plug-in called IE Tab (http://ietab.mozdev.org/). This is absolutely indispensable, and is the #1 reason I haven't even had to THINK of opening IE for the past couple of years :)...
Posted by JRN303 | April 2, 2008 12:20 PM
Kevin says:
"Internet Explorer blows. Anyone who says differently is retarded."
@Kevin:
Actually, I think Internet Explorer sucks rather than blows. Does that make you judge me to be retarded? ;-)
Posted by Philosopher | April 2, 2008 1:07 PM
@Mac: Dude, Windows won't work without some recent version of IE installed, call it a feature if you'd like if "bundling" gets up your goat... Difference being, someone has to make the effort to download and install alternative browsers like Safari, Firefox or Opera, particularly in the Enterprise space.
Posted by bugeyedcreepy | April 2, 2008 1:24 PM
The bug for an MSI package is painful to read, it's many years old, and not any closer to a patch being submitted than it was a year ago. Until that is in place, Firefox is lucky to be as high as it is. Disappointing that IE6 is still so high; IE7 is a big improvement in standards support and IE8 will be even more so.
Posted by Michael Newton | April 2, 2008 8:42 PM
The percentages (and other numbers) presented in this article are inconsistent! For instance the second paragraph mentions percentages that are likely actual market shares, not 'adoption rates', whereas the rest of the article mostly refers to the latter. The quotation right below the chart refers to growth percentages that are completely out of context since they don't even refer to the same span of time.
Worst of all is that the numbers mostly used and referred to as 'adoption rates' in the chart are not explained anywhere - what is the metric being used to arrive at these numbers? What was the question Mendel asked to get these results? And more importantly: Who did Mendel ask, and how relevant are these entities in the global market*?
I do appreciate your effort to dig through an article and interpret the findings, but if you care to provide some numbers to emphasize your point, please do so in a consistent and comprehensible way. It is very difficult to follow a reasoning based on numbers that are not in comprehensive relations to each other!
*: check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers to get some different results...
Posted by Stefan | April 3, 2008 12:03 PM
Stefan wrote: "The percentages (and other numbers) presented in this article are inconsistent!"
Hi, Stefan,
The numbers are consistent. They don't add up to 100 percent, because businesses use multiple browsers.
The quotation two paragraphs below the chart does cover a different time frame. That's intentional in my presentation. The text and charts are complimentary, not exclusive. The charts present information not necessarily in the text and visa versa.
The fourth paragraph identifies who he asked.
Joe
Posted by Joe | April 4, 2008 11:22 AM