Internet Explorer use collapsed on TechCrunch web site

TechCrunch computing technology news blog web site published usage statistics for various web browsers today.

IE has plunged to the number 4 position, coming in behind even Safari now.  Yes, fewer people visit the site with IE than Safari.

Here are the ranksings, from most frequently used to least.

1. Firefox (2-in-5)
2. Chrome (1-in-5)
3. Safari (1-in-5)
4. Internet Explorer (1-in-5)

The Firefox, Chrome, and Safari web browsers share a high degree of compatibility because they all strive to adhere to W3 standards for HTML, CSS, SVG, etc.  Microsoft does not, as its very low Acid3 compatibility score shows.

The lack of support for things like SVG and so on is starting to take its toll.  The other 3 browser makers will likely introduce WebGL 3D graphics API support next year.  Microsoft does not have a road map announced yet for WebGL or SVG.

Stop using Internet Explorer

If you are looking at this web page in Microsoft Internet Explorer, you must not have figured it out yet.  It is dangerous.  It has a backlog of critical security flaws.

Small team of experts outside out Microsoft can find a deadly bug, the one that stole the source code from 34 Silicon Valley high tech companies for example - in a couple of weeks.  Fixing just that one bug takes Microsoft 5 months.  There are lots of those small teams all around the world. You do the math.

Some of those teams are good.  Some are evil.  In the case of this bug, at least one of each of them found that bug.  One team turned in a report of that bug.  Nothing happened.  Until another team, and evil one, figured out that bug and hacked over 30 companies including some very huge ones.

 This week was a mass of contradictions.  Basically, Microsoft was saying things - all the experts were proving them wrong.  Not just saying they were wrong, proving it.

Microsoft indicated they had just found out about the bug recently.  Actually, that is not what they said precisely, that is what it sounded like.  But it was false.  They announced they had started working on the bug in September.  Again, deceptive.

Someone else in Israel announced they had found it, and turned in a report to Microsoft.  Microsoft waited a couple weeks to start working on it.  Couple weeks is the same time it took to find it.  So it was inevitable someone else would be finding it.  They did.  You know the results.

Microsoft indicated they had protective measures built into IE7 and IE8 that would prevent this flaw, which was in them from becoming a problem.  That was false

Their security and privacy manager said that in the UK Monday. The next day researchers announced they had gotten the exploit working in IE7 and published the source code to do it!  That forced Microsoft's hand

All right, upgrade to IE8 they said.  The next day, French researchers announced they had the flaw exploited in both IE7 & IE8 on the newest Windows operating systems.

Even with Microsoft's security measures turned on. In other words, the emperor had no clothes.  The security of IE7, IE8, Vista, and Windows 7 was an illusion.

In the midst of that mess, Google tossed a surprise of its own.  The kernel of Windows - that is like the cereberal cortex, the center of the brain in a person, was flawed.  All versions of 32-bit Windows from 1993-present have this flaw.

The same researcher reported a serious kernel flaw in Linux 5 months ago (a couple of months after he reported the Windows kernel flaw to Microsoft that was ignored).  Red Hat did not ignore the Linux kernel flaw report.  It called the affected parts of Linux to be disabled.  They responded immediately. The disclosure was made August 13, the mitigation recommendation from Red Hat was published on August 14.

Now, we look at Microsoft's response to the the same researcher's announcement about their kernel flaw.  All Microsoft announced was two things.

One, that the flaw exists - and in a roundabout way said if the attacker has a user name and password (or yours) and someone who is logged into Windows executes the code, they can run any code in kernel mode.  The second thing they said, was what the original report sent to them 7 months ago said: disable 16-bit Windows emulation mode.

Maybe I missed something, but it sounds like anyone who can has a username, password, and a program that includes the published code they can do basically anything on that computer.

If so, that basically means no data is safe on any 32-bit Windows computer.  Sure, if someone bothered to set up logs and stuff, and the attacker does not obliterate them, their actions will be recorded or something.

That is one crazy bug.  Have you seen some of the places that are running Windows?  Seems like today, Windows is running on the honor system.  Not a security system.

I harbor a lot of doubts a virus or Trojan will be unable to get someone to give their credentials, or find them Conficker-fashion.

Run any web browser than IE to access the Internet.  Give Microsoft 6 months to clear out their queue of security flaws in IE, and then wait until they have at least 6 more months with no security flaws in IE.  At that point, it might be safe to try it again.  Do not relax before then.   About 30 people in Silicon Valley trusted Internet Explorer.  Look what happened to them.

Firefox 3.6 came out yesterday.  It is very fast.  Has some improvements.  Has been hacked a lot less than Internet Explorer.  Try something other than IE for a while.  Be smart, like the French.  They switched - in the nick of time.

Washington Post pans Microsoft release of IE8 today

The Washington post wasted no time exclaiming that Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 ignores one-third of the market.

That may be true, but for the past few years IE has not been about getting what you can out of the web - it has been about the web getting what it can into your computer.

Google has written about this and so have others.

Developers, both good and the ones that are evil miscreants get a certain convenience out of you when you launch Internet Explorer on your MS Windows desktop.

For Microsoft's developers, it has spared them the effort to write a stand-alone desktop OS updater, the way all the other operating system companies/groups have done. It would be nice to have one but one cannot overlook the desire of developers to cater to their own convenience.

On the other hand, it has made it so, so, so easy for so many hackers from early teen ages on up to wreak global havoc.

Nothing on the horizon is set to change in that regard - software-wise.

However, companies like Google and Apple have really turned a corner to go up safe and standard avenue. Microsoft, for its part has remained almost exactly the same in its attitudes, deliverables, and its pronouncements for 8 years.

However, you do not blame a monopolist for not wanting to change. You blame their customers, basically.

In this case, you do not blame the customers because they are being punished enough. Some have actually bothered to try out other browsers. Many say they like them and none of them are ignorant of the alternative ones anymore.

I hear monthly about other people getting stuff on their computers and computer accounts ripped off. I usually ask them what browser they use. I always know what the response will be, but I ask just the same.

When new web browser versions come out, you have to look at it this way: some things change, some things don't - which one is the story on this "new" version?

Microsoft web browser share peaked years ago at ninety percent. It is back off its peak now - down to just 2/3 of the web browser market.

However, it is not Microsoft that has lost out. For the most part, they have not suffered the billions of dollars of losses that individuals and organizations who could ill-afford it have.

Even if their market share and other things deteriorated down to forty percent, it is not really Microsoft that would get hit in the pocketbook.

Google has expanded into the web browser area just to raise the bar on how much safety developers put into their product in order to "get by" and be accepted by users. That is expensive but of course it does light a fire under the guy who is in the tail end of that race to pick up the base and get on the ball.

Apple has had some issues but surprisingly no major wildfires. IE retreated from that venue because it could not secure a monopoly position on it.

On the other side of the hill, the wildfire never stops burning. It is a 24x7 flame fest.

Microsoft has a great, historic opportunity to address their OS issues and improve the lot of their OS users simply by dropping development of IE and just easing it into retirement.

There are already several excellent third party browsers for their desktop. Standards are being followed, by other browser vendors. Lots of companies would call such a retirement a "win" - for the company and its users.

Such a win would be great for everyone. The web is supposed to interoperate. Having a browser playing catch up from far behind does not suit anybody when there are cross desktop browsers of such high quality running on 2 or 3 major desktops - not floundering on one, trying not to sink it.

It is a fact. Microsoft Windows is stronger without Internet Explorer. Everything else is just smoke and distraction. The biggest threat to MS-Windows market share ... is Internet Explorer. IE is the biggest problem for it. Everything else can be fixed over time. IE is the albatross around MS-Windows' neck. The thing dragging it down - and holding it back.