Ah yes, why not? The last time we did this, it was March 2009, so it's been two years since we offered a little insight into what kind of operating systems and browsers you, dear readers, are using. In those two years, a lot has changed. I will also explain why in the few cases that OSNews does host video, I will host it in WebM.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2010-07-13
I use Flash block and this page: http://www.codegeek.net/flash-version.php correctly determines the version with it turned on. So it does correctly send that I have flash, at least with FlashBlock for FF
Member since:2006-01-26
It makes sense that it would report it - since FlashBlock doesn't block flash permanently, it's just a default to not load/show/run the flash - but give the user the option to click in the "space" and do so.
If the browser reported no flash, then the server would optionally prevent sending any HTML including flash widgets that the user *might* want to interact with.
Member since:2005-11-02
Member since:2006-02-19
Member since:
2006-01-04
I do visit osnews on my brand new archos 43 internet tablet. There is only one reason why I wouldn't do it though: the mobile version is just plain ugly. It looks like 1996... A plain RSS reader might even be nicer...
Maybe some love to the mobile theme increase its usage count? Just a suggestion 
Interesting numbers nonetheless.
Member since:2005-06-29
Does that have a decent browser? We only serve the true mobile version to things like feature phones and such. This is probably a detection issue on our end. You can use the link at the bottom of the page to get the full version of OSNews.
iPhone/Android/WP7/etc. get OSNews regular.
Member since:2009-02-11
Opera Mini for iPhone also gets the true mobile version, despite being perfectly capable to render the full version. Not a major annoyance, since there's a link for the full site, but we were promised a fix about a year ago:
http://www.osnews.com/story/23150/Opera_Mini_Admitted_into_App_Stor...
Member since:2008-09-12
"I did notice that the OSNews' mobile browser detection thingamabob redirects Opera Mini on the iPhone to our mobile site, which I think classifies as a bug. I'll talk with Adam and Eugenia to see if there's a way to fix that.
http://www.osnews.com/story/23150/Opera_Mini_Admitted_into_App_Stor... "
I fail to see a promise anywhere in that quote.
Member since:2006-01-04
I don't know how decent it is... I haven't had any problem with it though. I use the either the built in navigator or Dolphin HD. Both report "Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2.1; fr-ca; A43 Build/FROYO) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1" as their user agent.
I do like the formatting of the mobile version (http://mobile.osnews.com/) as I don't have to zoom in to read anything (it's a 4.3 inch screen). And as oppose to an RSS feed, I can easily see the comments. But I still consider the colors as ugly, sorry They do feel 1990-ish.
Member since:2006-06-22
Member since:2005-07-20
Member since:2006-07-14
No, not true to my experience.
I use my captivate to view the site daily with the stock froyo browser and opera mini. I always get shunted to the mobile site and have to click the link at the bottom of the page.
I am really close to installing dolphin as it allows you to change your browser string to get around such problems.
Member since:2006-05-09
Member since:2007-09-06
Member since:2006-05-18
My useragent on a Samsung Galaxy S:
Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; en-us; GT-I9000 Build/FROYO) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1
I also get the mobile version, although I wish I didn't. The comments are not threaded and thus useless on that version, and the looks are kind of dated.
Member since:2007-02-17
iPhone/Android/WP7/etc. get OSNews regular.
Possibly relevant:
Mozilla releases Firefox 4 for Mobile
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Mozilla-releases-Firefox-4-f...
The mobile versions of Firefox are built on the same browser engine as the recently released Firefox 4.0 for desktop, version 2.0 of the Gecko rendering platform, and include several elements from their desktop counterpart, such as built-in support for Firefox Sync, add-ons and the "Awesome Bar" smart URL bar. The mobile browser features support for IPv6 on Android, tabbed browsing, and for copy and paste in all form fields on web pages, as well as modern HTML5 technologies.
The Android version of Firefox 4 for Mobile, which is said to be up to three times faster than the built-in browser, requires version 2.0 of the Android OS or later, A list of supported devices is available on the Mozilla Wiki – users running Android 2.2 can move the Firefox 4 for Mobile app to their SD card to save space on their device.
Edited 2011-03-30 12:31 UTC
Member since:2005-09-08
Member since:2005-08-17
Member since:2006-10-18
Amiga is bigger than you think. Remember, its AmigaOS 4, MorphOS and AROS. Also using OWB on osnews.com doesnt show always its MorphOS, because you can spoof as Chrome or other browsers. Really. Amiga is ahead of all of you which think its dead. Its alive and stop bitching with saying that Amiga isn't alive. It is! Just look at Aminet, worlds biggest archive. Gets daily updates, amigaworld.net, amiga.org, morphzone.org etc is updated too. The community is very alive. More than you ever think. PC marked have always wanted to ditch Amiga, even when Amiga was superior between 1985 and 1994, PC marked fooled people in that PC marked was the best, most serious and most powerfull.. Reality is that Amiga was and will always be. Every system have its own good and bad points. AmigaOS too, but please STOP thinking that Amiga is dead, because its not. Its very alive, and the Amiga Community is a proof of that. It is! Really!
Member since:
2009-08-14
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2009-08-14
Member since:2010-03-30
Oh Lord, that's so laughable!
But to be fair, are both versions from the same generation? I doubt it, IE6 sounds pretty old. So testing it against a more recent test wouldn't be really fair.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2006-07-14
Yes, Thom's evil plan to bring Apple to its knees is entering its final phase. Oh! How the dominoes have fallen so predictably from the intricate pattern outlaid with such subtle genius.
Well either that or he's just a cheap bastard that doesn't want to pay to breed an army of accounting lawyer hybrids to calculate licencing fees.
Member since:2006-02-15
Right. OSNews is SUCH an important news outlet on the Internets that Apple is forced to take them into account and OSNews can thus force Apple to things they don't want. I mean, OSNews generates huges amounts of traffic daily, they have enormous income from all the subscription fees and schemes, and their gigantic staff spanning the whole globe provide insight into every little thing imaginable so it's verily obvious why Apple would want to stay on their good side.
...or not.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2006-02-15
Your lack of faith in my power is both unsettling and comforting. "
Oh, I do sincerely acknowledge your dark powers which you surely have inherited from your father, Cthulhu himself. But alas, everyone knows your powers don't work in the vortex of the Reality Distortion Field(TM).
Member since:2011-02-11
Member since:2005-08-02
Member since:2007-04-23
The two biggest browsers accessing the site are Firefox and Chrome, both of which support WebM out of the box and neither of which support h.264 (chrome is due to remove support for it soon)...
Also since this site caters to users of alternative OS's, while commercial applications like flash will only ever cater to the big well known systems that's not a good choice either.
Everyone *can* support WebM, and the majority of osnews viewers already use a browser which supports it by default... It's a no brainer.
Member since:2007-06-22
Member since:2006-01-16
Member since:2007-06-22
Member since:2008-09-11
And both support flash and ie suppurts flash, too. And flash is hardware accelerated on windows and os x, while webm is not.
Member since:
2005-11-14
Can you give stats by country/continents ?
It would be interesting see how OSNews users are distributed in the world and what they use to browse OS News.
In my country (Brazil), for example, linux is more popular than mean as desktop and macs are less popular.
I use Google Analytics
http://www.google.com/analytics/
in my sites and it is free (as beer) and give powerfull stats.
Member since:2005-11-02
Member since:
2005-06-30
Since I keep screenshots of my desktop over the years, I looked up what I was running March 2009. Debian Lenny running KDE 3.5 with Opera 9.5x @ 1200x800 as the default browser on my laptop, and Windows XP with Firefox 3.x @ 1024x768 on the desktop. KDE 3.5 was fantastic.
Today I'm running Windows 7 with Opera 11 on my laptop @ 1024x768, and Windows Vista Business with Opera 11 @ 1440x900 on the desktop. Oh yeah, forgot to add: I have a Nokia phone that has Opera Mini on it that's used over Wifi sometimes.
Edited 2011-03-30 02:04 UTC
Member since:
2011-03-30
THATS ME!
its minefield, the nightly build pre-release of whatever firefox is working on currently =]
actually i contributed all over this graph... I'm on a mac currently, and i use chrome, minefield (firefox4.2), and safari interchangeably... and even Lynxlet when i'm bored!
I also log on via opera on my linux box, or sometimes chrome, or sometimes from my Haiku partition!
oh boy!
Member since:2005-10-19
Member since:2007-09-22
And me. :-) I also run the nightly builds.
I heared in a presentation, their are about 60.000+ people regularly running nightly builds.
And when Firefox 4.0 was in beta, people running beta are obviously a lot more than people running nightly builds.
Actually, more people used the Firefox 4.0 beta than people currently running IE9 (judging by the statcounter stats).
Member since:2011-03-30
Thats pretty awesome, i love the nightly builds. They are still the fastest thing i've ever encountered, and everytime a friend uses my computer i get the same questions "whats this minefield thing? its awesome!"
also the crash reports and stuff just male me feel more productive
Member since:2005-07-20
Member since:2007-09-22
Mozilla is awesome anyway. ;-)
When I do notice a problem, I make a bugreport and within a few hours it is debugged and fixed. And when I get the next daily build it is fixed already.
They even send me a free t-shirt because I reported a few bugs. :-)
Please when you notice a problem, report them. Some are hard te reproduce, so if you know how. Please do report them.
Member since:2007-09-22
Ohh and I haven't decided which I'm gonna follow:
Nightly, experimental or beta
http://downloadsquad.switched.com/2011/03/17/mozilla-details-new-ch...
Member since:
2006-12-05
I'm one of the visitors who have, at least since 2006, been using Firefox with Linux (Currently 3.5.16 in Debian Squeeze). Blocking both scripts and ads, too (though I do allow scripts on OSNews.com domain for convenience of certain script-based features). Before then... if I came here then... it was probably Firefox on Windows XP. With or without AdBlock, can't remember, but I certainly didn’t use NoScript back then (did it even exist?).
I would like to use Firefox 3.6.x, but Debian doesn't support it... but I do not like the forced twice-yearly upgrades of many mainstream distros and their tendency to use Firefox 4 (I just don't like the changes made in that version). So I'm kind of stuck right now. I might still switch distros for something more supporting of the nVidia drivers, but it'll still be a Linux distro with Firefox... unless I'm forced to go with Firefox 4.0 and choose to look into alternatives.
Similarly, I revolted against the changes in Firefox 3, and although I still don't really like them... here I am, typing this in Firefox 3.6. I'm getting sick of Firefox these days, been driving me nuts with instability in the 2.x days, and pissing me off with their changes with basically every version since 3.0 for the most part... but the problem is, all of their competition seems to be doing similar things since the introduction of Chrome. Trying to rip off the Chrome interface, and IMO, that's a bad thing... I just don't like it, and if I wanted to use Chrome, I would just use chrome.
Am I the only one having browser woes here? I will admit, the competition's good... but what good is the competition if it means that everyone tries to rip off the newcomer's interface and not much more?
Edited 2011-03-30 04:57 UTC
Member since:2009-12-25
I totally agree with you about Chrome. I do like Firefox 4, though. I became a fan of the Midori browser about two years ago. Also, I really like Arora. I've been using Midori a lot lately, but the problem is that certain websites recognize it (and Arora) as a mobile browser and I get redirected to their mobile website version. It's very easy to switch the user agent, though.
Member since:2010-03-30
I say hallelujah to your gospel.
Am I the only one having browser woes here? I will admit, the competition's good... but what good is the competition if it means that everyone tries to rip off the newcomer's interface and not much more?
You're not alone! Seems like they haven't learnt the lessons despite all features they've copied from Opera... and look where it is as far as market share goes...
I've been using Opera for the last 10 years and found myself unable to use anything else; the last version (11.0) infuriated me because of what they did to locked tabs: shrinking it to just the favicon (best dumb idea of the web 2.0 era) and shifting it to the left side of the tab bar. And we have no way of reverting to the previous behavior and no configuration at all. Don't like it, too bad! The website has no favicon at all, too bad! You have several locked tabs on the same website, too bad! So until that changes, I'm on 10.6x
I've seen in the FF 4.0 video in the news item that it exhibits the same behavior, which, apparently, originated in Chrome (correct me if I'm wrong).
FF 4.0 has exactly the same look, with that Firefox menu and the new tab theme, as Opera 10 with it's "O-menu".
At some point, all browsers will look alike, and I don't mean it in a positive way.
Member since:2007-09-22
I do know Firefox 4 can be transformed back to Firefox 3.x with 3 options, one customization and if you want to have a status-bar an extra add-on...
The options are:
- "Tabs on top" (right click on the bar where the address-bar and so on lives)
- choose show menubar and show add-on bar from the Firefox-menu preferences-item.
The customization is:
- choose customize from the same menu as 'tabs on Top', move the reload and stop button a little to the right, away from the address bar and they won't combine again with the addressbar.
There is a add-on called the: status-4-evar which restores the statusbar (my guess is it combines with the add-on bar).
Member since:2005-11-02
Member since:2006-03-13
...
Am I the only one having browser woes here? I will admit, the competition's good... but what good is the competition if it means that everyone tries to rip off the newcomer's interface and not much more?
Linux Mint Isadora comes with Firefox 3.6 configured to look and act more like Firefox 2. It's a long-term release. You have another two years of desktop support on it.
I have never used Iceweasel on Debian. It's a pretty simple task to install Firefox in whatever version directly. Use the Mozilla.org FTP site to grab a copy.
Member since:
2006-01-01
If you want to be efficient about hosting you can use Vimeo (or similar) which will provide HD video for less that $100 a year and automagically format it to meet the requirements of the user agent so rather than supporting 59% of your users you would support 100%.
An additional bonus would be the global CDN's for faster delivery and lower res video for your mobile users.
But lets be honest it's not about time and cost Thom, it's all about tilting at those ideological windmills.
]{
Member since:2007-02-17
Actually, given that the majority of Firefox users and Chrome users update to the latest stable versions, WebM will be natively supported by 47%(FF4)+26%(Chrome)+6%(Opera) = 79% of users.
Given the WebM Media Foundation codec written by Google for Windows Vista and Windows 7
http://blog.webmproject.org/2011/03/introducing-webm-in-internet-ex...
perhaps a third or more of IE users might eventually be able to render WebM.
So 82% of users, not 59%.
I believe Google will eventually also release a WebM codec for OSX that will help out the Safari users (10%) also. That would leave only those IE users staying with XP, and iOS users. This would surely be a tiny subset of OSNews users.
Member since:2005-07-06
Since when did Vimeo do WebM? Sod them and their 'You need a HTML5 browser' message in my Firefox 4.
Member since:2007-09-22
I heared their is also some people that offer services for conversions ?:
http://hacks.mozilla.org/2011/01/simple-html5-video-encoding-with-v...
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2007-09-22
To be honest, I haven't had a very detailed look, but if I understand correctly the javascript is only needed when the outer-video-tag is not supported. I was kind of hoping it would work a bit like:
http://camendesign.com/code/video_for_everybody
Member since:2007-02-17
An additional bonus would be the global CDN's for faster delivery and lower res video for your mobile users.
But lets be honest it's not about time and cost Thom, it's all about tilting at those ideological windmills.
]{
Vimeo doesn't provide WebM, and WebM is required to support Opera, Chrome and Firefox 4 - that amounts to 79% of OSNews readers!
Member since:2006-09-22
Assuming that it works.
http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/questions/796279
Vimeo is notorious for breaking video playback on Firefox.
Member since:
2009-12-25
Member since:
2010-09-23
OSNews actually has a pretty decent mobile site that reads easily on mobile Safari, and putting a link on the home screen is a matter of two clicks.
But it doesn't really matter. The default way of accessing material in iOS is through the dedicated app, not through the browser. You may like this or you may not, but that just is the way it is.
Member since:2010-03-30
Wasn't that true in the beginning of the iphone era because virtually no site had a dedicated mobile-friendly version? Things have changed and evolved since then and the usage patterns have probably changed as well. With the current trend of moving things to the web and the shift to mobile browsing, it would be weird to drop an app now for a (number of current) platform(s) when one can tailor a mobile version that would work on any (old, current, and possibly future) portable/mobile device. Just saying...
Member since:
2008-06-16
Member since:
2007-08-07
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2007-09-22
Member since:2005-11-02
I'm another user in that boat. I mostly read osnews from work where Windows is my only option, because I prefer to be paid while I waste time on the internet. But, I also read from home where there's no Windows to be found anywhere and from my n900 on some occasions (where the browser is correctly fed the non-mobile versions of the site).
Member since:2005-07-06
Good point! Yeah we don't want to pretend there are more people who view OSnews than there really are! (just kidding! 
) I use Mac OS X sometimes, and now my WP7 on occasion. I don't have a linux box running at the moment (gave it to a friend). I do have my OLD G4 mac mini I could use with linux or morphos.
Member since:
2006-01-01
Member since:
2009-04-12
Probably the oddest browser I've been here with was the Opera browser that comes with my Wii (First time I encountered the site's mobile version). I was actually shocked the first time I tried it back in '08 that I could watch flash content on YouTube (Bravo Opera).
Last time I used it though (a couple months back) I could tell that even though they have done software updates to the browser that it was hitting the performance ceiling of the hardware and was giving me lots of low memory warnings. PPC cores at 729Mhz with 88MB of RAM just ain't what it used to be.
Edited 2011-03-30 09:08 UTC
Member since:
2006-06-09
Member since:2005-10-23
Member since:2006-01-26
Member since:2005-11-02
Member since:2011-01-14
Member since:2007-06-29
Member since:
2006-12-24
Member since:2008-11-27
Member since:2011-02-11
Member since:
2011-02-11
Member since:
2008-09-11
I try not to use Flash, because it is simply not the best choice performance-wise for 49% (non-Windows) of our readers (I'm not exactly thrilled about our Flash ads either, in case you're wondering).
First, there are many more people which have flash capable browsers than those who have webm capable browsers. webm is hardware accelerated on what popular platform?
Second, flash is hardware accelerated on both Windows and Mac Os X, that is your majority of users.
If I understand correctly, you chose to support a minority over a large majority?
Member since:2005-06-29
- Flash performance and stability on Linux and Mac OS X is not good. Hardware acceleration on those platforms exists, but is limited and very rudimentary, and is by no means anywhere close to the kind of performance delivered on Windows.
- Flash is a security nightmare.
- Flash is proprietary and cannot be freely implemented.
- Flash is a silo. It is not part of HTML. It cannot be made accessible.
Taking the above reasons into account, Flash is not an option. This leaves HTML5 with either H264 or WebM, and, well, you can read the article as to why choosing WebM makes a lot more sense for us than H264.
Member since:2007-02-17
WebM decoding is less computationally expensive than h264, so most popular platforms do not require hardware acceleration to decode it and play it acceptable rates at moderate resolutions.
Having said that, there is a Google Summer of Code project this year:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTI2OA
which if successful would bring hardware accelerated WebM decoding capability to all platforms with a GPU. This would mean that as long as a given platform had a GPU, it could play WebM at acceptable rates even for very high resolutions.
Flash is not natively supported by browsers. Flash uses h264 at this time, but it is not a requirement, and Adobe are supposed to be working on Flash with WebM. Flash is not a standard, and everybody is far better served if the standard becomes HTML5/WebM.
Currently, Opera, Firefox 4 and Chrome can play HTML5/WebM, and only that, out of the box. IE9 and Safari can play it also if the user installs a suitable codec under the OS, and Google have already released a preview version of a Media Foundation codec for Windows 7 and Vista.
It won't be long before browsers which can play HTML5/WebM are NOT a minority.
Member since:
2006-04-22
These trends are only meaningful in the context of overall traffic trends. Are more or less people coming to OSNews overall? By how much?
What we might be seeing, instead of an evolving demographic, is one segment (windows users for example) just spending less time on OSNews.
Member since:
2005-07-06
It's clear that Windows is in decline, and both Linux and Mac OS X profit from that. I'm very happy we have such a diverse audience here, especially since we know that the 2% "other" are all Amiga users.
Surely they're not *all* Amiga? What about other variants of Unix - the BSDs and Solaris - and things like Syllable which often get a lot of promotion here (or at least used to).
I must admit, despite having an Android unit and using the Browser app on there often, I've never read this site with it; I mostly read websites that are linked off my Twitter timeline. Does OSNews have a Twitter account? You might get more people reading on mobiles that way. (Then again, Android units would just register as Linux.)
Member since:2005-06-29
The Amiga thing is a joke.
As for Twitter - yes, someone set up a Twitter account posting our stories. He or she is not affiliated with us, as far as I know.
http://twitter.com/osnews
Member since:2006-02-15
http://twitter.com/osnews
That's odd. It looks like it's an automated system since it just posts the full header, doesn't even try to leave extra comments out or anything.
Oh well, atleast it's yet another acknowledgement that OSnews is somewhat popular among geeks!
(I know I would be seriously depressed if OSnews ever went away, it's the one site I check all the time and I actually enjoy discussing things here.)
Member since:
2005-07-11
