[Wsuug] Browser Market Share

[Dan Swaney]

I agree that Windows 2000 is not only old, but newer devices coming out
aren't providing device drivers for it.
I used Windows 2000 for years -- and mainly switched to Windows XP for the
improved wireless device support.

Like with Windows 2000, I avoided Windows XP until I started using Windows
XP Professional.
Now I'm using Windows XP and avoiding Windows Vista until there is no choice
but to load Linux. :)

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Zach Young <young.zach at gmail.com> wrote:

> No one is saying Windows 2000 is bad, just that its getting a little
> old. With the market share getting smaller and smaller, less is going
> to be developed on it.
>
> It would still be nice to see a backport to Windows 2000.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:02 PM, Kelley Walker
> <kelley.walker at dominionenterprises.com> wrote:
> > Well, we always went with it because we worked with clients
> > and needed that extra bit of security that, at the time, XP
> > didn't offer. Same reason we don't use Outlook. Same reason
> > we use a landline for the business. Some clients looking for
> > security vendors will only allow landlines.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Kelley Walker
> > Lead Developer, RV Trader | Boat Trader
> > www.rvtraderonline.com | www.boattrader.com
> > T: (757) 351-8615 | F: (757) 282-2491 | C: (757) 717-9969
> > E: kelley.walker at dominionenterprises.com
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wsuug-bounces at list.wsuug.org
> > [mailto:wsuug-bounces at list.wsuug.org] On Behalf Of Reese
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 3:18 PM
> > To: Web Standards and Usability User Group
> > Subject: Re: [Wsuug] Browser Market Share
> >
> > Andrew Jaswa wrote:
> >> Why Win2k first? Its old and out of date. (though I still
> > think its
> >> one of the more stable windows...)
> >
> > Because it still has strong market penetration, I'm not the
> > only one still using it. You say "it's old" as if it's a bad
> > thing, I prefer "mature and more secure."
> >
> > Reese
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Reese
> > <reese at inkworkswell.com> wrote:
> >>> Ryan Brunsvold wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Seriously though, that is incredible for any 30 day-old
> > browser.
> >>>> Just goes to show how complete Google¹s sphere of
> > influence really is.
> >>>
> >>> What I've read is, it hit 1% of market share almost
> > immediately on
> >>> release - since then it's been mostly stagnant after
> > backsliding a
> >>> bit.
> >>>
> >>> I do think it should be made backwards-compatible with
> > Win2K and
> >>> other platforms - Win2K first, then Linux, then Mac. And
> > no "but Mac
> >>> is a Linux" objections, there are important differences
> > and we all know it.
> >>>
> >>>  ;)
> >>>
> >>> Reese
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Wsuug mailing list
> >>> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> >>> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wsuug mailing list
> > Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> > http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wsuug mailing list
> > Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> > http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Zach Young
> 757.462.0045
> http://zachyoung.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wsuug mailing list
> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.thelinuxlink.net/pipermail/wsuug/attachments/20081006/1818d505/attachment.html