Chrome Beats Internet Explorer On Any Given Sunday 212
tsamsoniw writes "Over the past three weeks, Chrome has beaten out Internet Explorer as the No. 1 browser in the world — but only on Sundays. In fact, according to data from StatCounter, Chrome usage is higher on weekends than it is during the work week, whereas IE usage drops on Saturdays and Sundays. Evidently, end-users prefer Chrome at home, which might be helping the browser get a foothold at work." (So apparently it's not just a freak occurrence.)
Chrome vs IE (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Chrome vs IE (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Chrome vs IE (Score:5, Interesting)
Which makes Firefox's share quite impressive considering that it was acquired on merit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it was the other way around. Firefox promoted Google by making it the default search engine and that's how they got paid. I never saw Google promote Firefox. Do you have any references to that?
Re: (Score:2)
The other way around? Google started promoting Firefox because they were the default search engine in Firefox, and it was a way to combat IE. Then Firefox started growing thanks to, among other things, being aggressively pushed by Google.
For the $1 thing, I found this [toprankblog.com] with a quick Google search. And from the horse's mouth [mozillazine.org], so to speak.
Re: (Score:2)
That's Google promoting Google Toolbar for Firefox. Google isn't promoting Firefox. Where have you seen an ad paid by Google promoting Firefox?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't forget what ever the hell the FF Devs are smoking as I just upgraded to 11.02 and they decided that if you don't trust a root C/A then you can't add exceptions to accept any certs. This completely fucked my security policy as I don't trust any C/A and am willing to add exceptions for those few sites that I absolutely have to trust such as my bank, merchants I frequently use along with several websites that offer https connections like Google and my ISP. Because of this change, I'm forced to use IE as
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
Anybody who gets this upset about a browser has got serious issues. Really man, breath.....
Apparently you never had to write code for IE 6.
If you do not have serious issues before hand you will very quickly
Re: (Score:3)
where is your bug report with a test case?
in the past i also had several problems, specially with flash, but right now FF is better than chrome, except on startup speed and when you have only 1 to 4 tabs
Re: (Score:2)
It's a funny issue. I have it on Firefox, but not on Iceweasel. Same version, 10.0.2. Mighty weird.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting point. I don't even notice this for the most part, using noscript.
I've found the vast majority of javascript on any page is superfluous at best and useless/damaging at worst. Most pages work fine without it, and if not, I can usually get away with only allowing the TLD and maybe their CDN domain. This has helped keep my 2ghz dual-core pentium computer feeling plenty fast on the internet. Without adblock and noscript, the poor thing feels downright sluggish.
Re:Chrome vs IE (Score:5, Insightful)
Beat me too it. I'm still using Firefox 4, but it's ridiculous I can't run it on a 1/3rd gig laptop without having to reboot firefox every hour (memory leak). .
So you're complaining that an old version has a bug which they fixed in the future?
Update.
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox 4 gradually grows from 90 to 200 meg of RAM (forcing me to exit and restart). From what I've heard later versions like Firefox 10/LTS are even bigger memory hogs.
Re: (Score:2)
http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/firefox_portable [portableapps.com]
Try it yourself and see if it is better or worse.
Re: (Score:2)
And some of us use Firefox, which doesn't push anything and has the best add-ons of any browser.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, FF is up to 11, Chrome, on the other hand, has been under development for far less time than FF and is up to 18 or something. So, I find it really bizarre that anyone would use FF version numbering scheme as a downside vis-a-vis Chrome.
Firefox gets in your face every time it updates, and only recently stopped constantly telling you that some of your plugins wouldn't work with the latest version.
Chrome doesn't have, and never has had, either of these problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox gets in your face every time it updates, and only recently stopped constantly telling you that some of your plugins wouldn't work with the latest version.
Chrome doesn't have, and never has had, either of these problems.
Well, yes, Chrome doesn't tell or ask anything - it just updates. And occasionally breaks stuff. Silently.
I have seen at least one update to new major version which broke several extensions. (One which I wanted precisely at the time to install. Top comment, few hours old, was: "do not install, Chrome would crash!")
I have seen at least one breakage in HTML rendering. (Some form elements + label tag were dysfunctional in some cases.)
Oh yes, the problems disappeared week or so later. But heck, that's
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Chrome vs IE (Score:5, Interesting)
I work at one of those places and I'm one of those IT control freaks. There's a good reason for it - we don't have the time or the people to troubleshoot five different browsers. Just because a user prefers Chrome over IE doesn't mean they know how to use it. Even the simple stuff, like displaying a PDF in a browser. I wasted a half hour trying to teach a user how to print a PDF from Chrome because the buttons were slightly different than they were in IE (which she was already familiar with). It'd be great to standardize on Chrome or Opera, but then there would be more retraining involved and IE has a lot of (admittedly artificial) advantages, such as vendor support, AD control, etc. Then there's the fact that even if we did standardize on Chrome, some people would want Firefox. If we did Firefox, some people would want Safari. So in the end, IE is by far the easiest, cheapest and least time consuming option whether or not it's your favorite browser.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm also one of those IT control freaks and we're changing from using IE as the company browser and going to Chrome, the biggest drivers for this are commercial and IE lets itself down by being single platform and also locked into the OS upgrade cycle.
Why we require IE (Score:5, Interesting)
My workplace requires IE for one specific (but very important) reason. Everyone here uses Powerpoint (way too much, IMHO, but that's another issue), and Powerpoint has a built-in tool for converting presentations to webpages (meaning they can be posted on our intranet with forms and other pages). But those webpages only look right in IE. Pretty sneaky on MS's part. The alternative would be trying to convert tens-of-thousands-of-slides worth of presentations into html by hand. So it's a lot easier to just force people to use IE rather than having to deal with either the conversion costs or 2,000 phone calls with conversations like this:
Caller: "These slides don't look right"
Tech: "What browser are you using?"
Caller: "I'm using the internet"
Tech: "What is the picture you click on to get to the internet look like?"
Caller: "I don't know, JUST FIX IT!!!"
Re: (Score:2)
Print the presentations as PDFs. They're much more compatible than the crap HTML output by your plugin, and can be saved and read anywhere.
Re: (Score:3)
But you can't animate flashing text and add fireworks and other stuff that's crucially important for the presentation to a PDF. ~
Re: (Score:2)
"You can install what you want, but we only support IE".
Problem solved. That's how we do it. Users get approval for all kinds of crazy stuff, on the understanding that IT doesn't support it; and if anything breaks, weird stuff gets uninstalled/turned off for troubleshooting. I'm the Unix/Linux support guy so it's not really anything I worry about, but it seems to work fine for our desktop support guys. Hell, my "Corporate workstation" is a Mac with Parallels running Windows in a VM. The Mac is not a su
Re: (Score:2)
That's the policy we had at my last job. When it comes to non-technical users, that's a great recipe for spending your time removing malware and reinstalling Windows.
Re:Chrome vs IE (Score:5, Interesting)
There's ways around that too. At Boeing we had an interesting setup. No one had admin access to their own computers, but we had a piece of software on that allowed installation of a wide and varied library of vetted software with sudo like privileges. You opened this tool, and it took you to a library of software: pretty much most of the popular web browsers, a large number of useful free (or Free) tools, and a few licensed tools that we had site licenses for. You clicked on the software you wanted to install, and a privileged installer process started up and installed it. it was pretty cool. You couldn't exactly stay bleeding edge up to date with it (not exactly a bad thing), but you could get a lot of useful tools and software without IT having to worry about infection vectors (obviously they vetted anything that went into the library).
Lots of software (like Firefox, maybe Chrome?) can be installed in a non-privileged mode anyway. It puts all the files in the user's directory and doesn't write anything to the registry. Hell Firefox has a portable mode that you can just install on a Thumb drive and run without even installing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of software (like Firefox, maybe Chrome?) can be installed in a non-privileged mode anyway.
Which doesn't help in even more secure setups that use AppLocker (formerly Software Restriction Policies) to disallow most user accounts from running any executable not whitelisted by the IT admin.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hell Firefox has a portable mode that you can just install on a Thumb drive and run without even installing it.
So does Chrome [portableapps.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I wouldn't want the IT department to waste their time on it either. If you permit other browsers, my support routine would be:
1. Start over from scratch using "Internet Explorer", the one with the blue "e" icon.
2. Try whatever you were doing again.
3. If it works, keep doing it from IE. If it doesn't, only then contact us for help.
We have intranet systems that only work in IE, when I run into them I switch to IE. IE is the only supported browser. If it works in IE, then per definition there is no
Re: (Score:2)
... I'm one of those IT control freaks. There's a good reason for it ...
No there isn't a good reason for it. You have good reasons for not supporting Chrome, but not a good reason for scouring it off.
The freaks in control of my work machine turned Java off in IE, pushed that little rule to -every- workstation. I have a deadline that requires me to connect to a work-mandated site that uses Java applets. See the disconnect there?
I suppose you might imagine that you are way too smart to allow your restrictions to hinder job performance or even make tasks impossible. You're no
Re: (Score:2)
Not to sound to harsh or anything but your users that can't figure how to print are allowed to install arbitrary software?
Also, if you are resource constrained then I assume you are still primarily on XP. Which caps your IE version at 8. Though an improvement on 7 and a huge leap from 6, still very long in the tooth compared to any modern browser including IE9.
If of course you have migrated to Vista or 7 then it sounds more like resource misallocation rather than limitations.
Re: (Score:2)
ok, its somewhat valid (you should also simply say that you DONT support that browser and leave it to the user), but then why are you choosing a broken browser (IE) over better and safer ones (firefox and chrome)?
you have for some some MacOSX, so no IE in there... to standardize the browser you would choose again firefox or chrome, or safari
you are right now choosing for your users, people wanting other browser would be in the same place as now: "you cant" or "its not supported"
the support and AD features a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>>>I work at one of those places and I'm one of those IT control freaks.
Probably still using IE6 or 7 too. (Like my company's control freak.) I understand not having time to test firefox or chrome compatibility. I don't understand voluntarily choosing outdated IE6 or 7 with security holes in it.
Re: (Score:3)
Nah, we're on IE8/9 here and rapidly phasing out the XP/IE8 clients, and we used to support Firefox, Chrome and Opera on the machines but we ran into too many compatibility issues and user issues so we're continuing to phase all of the PCs to only have IE when we upgrade them from XP to Win7. So it's really a case of "we tried it, it worked really badly." Maybe in a few years we'll try something other than IE again, but right now it's the best game in town for our purposes.
Re: (Score:2)
AD/GPO control isn't an artificial advantage, it's (IMO) the only advantage IE has.
In contrast, imagine how much time you waste through malware infections directly caused by IE.
Re: (Score:2)
I work at one of those places and I'm one of those IT control freaks. There's a good reason for it - we don't have the time or the people to troubleshoot five different browsers. Just because a user prefers Chrome over IE doesn't mean they know how to use it. Even the simple stuff, like displaying a PDF in a browser.
Lesson Number One for you IT people: Don't confuse
"support" with "allow." Granted 95% of your users are too damn stupid to learn how to open two tabs, let alone use ctrl-C ctrl-V, so tell the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with IE9 and IE10 - well, IE10 is not even released yet, and it's far far behind Firefox or Chrome in HTML5 support - which is becoming more important as time goes on.
Re: (Score:2)
Keep in mind www.html5test.com test things not even in the proposed w3c spec. It just what some people in mass emailings would think would be cool and what the authors would like to see.
With that in mind IE 9 was made in 2010 where it rivals Firefox 3.6 and my Andriod 2.2 browser with a score of 141. Not too bad, but behind FF and Chrome of 2012.
IE 10 consumer preview scored 370 if I recall which places IE above FF and just below Chrome. Not too shaby considering it was a HUGE PIECE OF CRAP in versions 6
Re: (Score:2)
Of course neither does Opera, iOS safari, or android. I wouldn't call not supporting resizable a terribly bad thing at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
Too late, MS lost me as a customer in 2002 when I bought and installed XP and half my programs would no longer work. I'm forced to use MS's inferior junk (yes, inferior, buggy and unintuitive) ate work and I'll really be glad when I retire in 2 years.
Re: (Score:2)
IE may be "cheapest" until you realize that Chrome makes the computer seem so much faster that you can skip an upgrade cycle. IE is dog slow, so are Firefox and Safari.
Well after a quick search online "dog slow" doesn't seem to be true. fastest browser tests [newrelic.com] According to that, which was done recently, IE9 is fastest on windows, with chrome/firefox tied. If you go by mac speeds then yes chrome wins out. At this point it is much more the UI experience and the particular plugins that get me to like one browser over another. So I stick with firefox.
Re: (Score:2)
Spare PCs (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been computing for 30 years and have seen very few hardware failures. My PC at work is over ten years old, and so is everyone else's here.
Printers and photocopiers, otoh...
Re: (Score:2)
Switching them back to IE is still a waste of time for an IT staff that's already overburdened. It's much easier just to now allow it anyway. We haven't actually restricted it technologically, so users that can support it themselves slip by under the radar and we don't say anything if we notice it. However, anyone that calls for support for any non-approved software has it removed and is warned not to reinstall it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a perfect example of this supposition. I work in a highly standardized environment that services a large number of employees (well over 10,000) where although not all have their own computer, nearly all are computer users at some point during the day. My office group has elected not to use the standard-issue systems and software, and roll our own instead. The IT people are reasonably undertanding folk, especially when I tell them we're using Linux and willing to self-support on *all* issues, except t
Re: (Score:2)
Politically speaking, that does not work in most places. People will complain, Management will hear about the complain and you will have to waste time justifying that those complain were not justified. You will have at best waste meeting time that could be use to address your real issues. At worse, you will anger some PHB, or some other PHB will understand that the fact that you allow people to use another browser is not a feature but a sign of incompetence, ...
Really, if the company is a tiny bit dysfun
Re: (Score:2)
Tell your users that Outlook is the supported email client and ie is the supported browser.
How well will that go over with the design department, which uses iMacs? What's the supported virtual machine in which to run Windows in which to run IE?
Re: (Score:2)
It would be nice if we had a choice, but my company goes a step further - they make everything depend on ASP/.NET due to an HR "Windows Only" mandate, so you can't do a f**king thing without IE. Except we need to validate our consumer products on multiple browsers and multiple platforms, so I always need 4-5 browsers up, and it's really fun when I need to work on the Linux or mac boxes, which means actually sit on them in some cases because hardware accelerated graphics don't work over remote desktop and VN
Re: (Score:3)
If only that were possible. We had Novell's email client for over ten years, and then they decided to go MS-only. Christ but I HATE Outlook. PDFs sent as attachments often are delivered broken and have to be resent, emails to someone down the hall can take an hour to be delivered, you have stupid limits on mailbox size, you have to enter a password for Outlook even though you had to log into the network itself, and you have to log in to a damned web page to change that password.
Novell connected the email cl
Re: (Score:2)
how is that different from the boss wanting to use firefox and you dont allow it?
if a management asks for a browser, if its important/powerful enough, you will install it, if not, you can say no...
if you allow user installed browsers, if the management is its important/powerful enough, you will support it, if not, you can say no...
see... no difference at all!!
Re: (Score:2)
If management wants to up my salary to account for an extra 10 hours a week fielding calls about non-supported software, then by all means let them install it. But until then, I'm controlling the environment so I only have to work 9 hours most days. Face it, 95% of end users fuck up installing and supporting their own software, which costs the company and the employees a lot of lost time. Next time I have to reinstall Windows because a user decided to install software that happened to have a rootkit or two,
Re: (Score:2)
If I had the extra time to write up my findings and create an unneeded procedure then I would.
If we had doc guys, then they would.
Unfortunately, there's these things called budgets that require us to try to get the most done in the least time with the fewest people.
Unless you're willing to pay for it?
Didn't I work with you? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
One other app works in all browsers, however, it also generates a lot of help desk calls because it launches a Java app. In IE, a dialog prompts "Block unsafe content from appearing" and most users automatically hit "Yes" which causes the page to fail.
A couple of pieces of software I've seen randomized the order of buttons in important requesters precisely to make the users read before they click. Ignoring what warnings say is like ignoring the oil light on your car - a great mix between ignorance, stupidity and carelessness which costs individuals and society a lot of money and grief.
Of course, randomized buttons won't help if the users don't understand what they read, but then the question is whether they should be using the software at all.
Perhaps ad
Re: (Score:2)
1. You have those non-IT supported apps that IT now has to support. Apps installed before IT had enough corporate strength to push down an edict. Each departments would have installed their own software with little if any consideration on if it will be scale or cross compatibility. Approved and purchased and installed without
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you don't build web sites for your prospects and customers to look at?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I maintain several internal websites for a parent company and it's 9 child companies, and somehow I seem to manage to test for at least IE7,IE8,IE9, Chrome, Safari, Firefox. I just consider that good practice for the industry that I am in, and as a web application developer. 99.9% of the fixes I have to do are for IE not the other browsers. Our company is pretty standardized on IE, but I still take pride in my code working in all browsers, it might take some upfront work, but every site I have kept that
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a software engineer for a medium sized internet site and I routinely ensure that the application works in and looks correct in all browser, and it doesn't take that much extra time if you know what you're doing in the first place....
Re:Chrome vs IE (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I push Firefox ESR on all desktops at work, using lovely Ninite, but I've been having a debate with myself as to switching to Chrome. The latter has a built-in PDF viewer that seems to be more responsive on lower-end machines (P4, Atom) than Acrobat viewer.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Firefox nightly has a very fast pdf reader built in, so if you wait long enough it will make it to the ESR.
Re: (Score:2)
Good to know. Thanks!
Re: (Score:2)
I found that interesting as well. Even safari has small bumps up on the weekend. I do know that Firefox has become a lot more accepted in work environments probably because it's been around so long that IT trusts it by now. I wonder if the fact that Chrome usage increases more on Sundays is because enough people are still working on Saturdays that IE wins.
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome is a new player in the game. It takes companies a long time to change.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you considered Chrome is just 'better'? (Score:5, Insightful)
After the initial speed thing, it was the UI that's kept me. Dragging tabs to windows, pinning tabs, scrolling tabs, bookmark sync, add-on/app sync, background update etc etc. Also simply installing Chrome on a new machine, simply giving it my google login and the Chrome that appears on the new desktop immediately resembling the version on my home machine.
Reading through the above, it's probably the background update that was the killer bit. I genuinely have no idea what version of Chrome I'm currently running. I installed it years ago and it's just been there ever since. My entirely subjective opinion is that the features and improvements silently appear before I ever even realized I need them - so I remain 'happy' and 'content' (and would have to see some utterly novel, ground-breaking feature advertised on another browser to even bother to download it)
By auto-update I don't mean like thunderbird or itunes, where an attempt to launch it suddenly triggers update popups, delays and release notes. I mean I don't even know it's happened. If this approach could just be extended to OS, drivers as well as apps, I'd be happy as Larry.
Re: (Score:2)
And we all know just how happy Larry Page is!
Re: (Score:2)
Flamebait? Redmond has lots of mod points, it seems. However, I certainly wouldn't have modded you up and might have modded you "overrated" because you're missing it completely.
IE is king of the browsers in the enterprise workplace for many reasons (none of which have to do with quality or useability). I'd say this story is from the "well DUH" dept. Nearly everybody uses IE at work, relatively few do at home.
Most workplaces have policies specifially forbidding anyone but IT from installing anything on work
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome also automatically installed itself on my computer when I upgraded my antivirus. I was simply amazed that an antivirus program had the audacity to install a third party application, make it the default browser, and then automatically launch it. And you thought useless browser bars were annoying when they installed themselves.
Is Google pushing this mafia style of marketing or was it done without their knowledge? I think Google knows because I've seen other complaints of the same thing happening via
Don't worry (Score:2)
Asa Dotzler will design a Firefox for five billion users!
Re: (Score:2)
Or (Score:5, Informative)
Evidently, end-users prefer Chrome at home, which might be helping the browser get a foothold at work.
Or, my employer won't let me install any software on my work machine so I'm stuck with IE(6).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or, my employer won't let me install any software on my work machine so I'm stuck with IE(6).
You mean that browser that MS itself rates as a critical security vulnerability and highly recommends upgrading (and even pushes a new version out as a critical update)? I fully understand the support for already in place legacy systems, but that browser had better not be on workstation with unfettered Internet access.
If you're browsing the web with that bad boy, your IT needs to take a good, hard look at its policies, or at least rethink their risk assessment.
I'm forced to use it at work. :( (Score:4, Informative)
One Reason - IE ActiveX Scripts (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:One Reason - IE ActiveX Scripts (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish ActiveX was dead, but sadly it is not, at least not yet. There are too many sites and applications that use it, making it impossible to switch browsers for this reason.
Its not a matter of if, its a matter of when they rewrite those apps to run on modern web standards...
I seriously hope CIOs don't think that 5, 7 years from now - they can keep their entire company on IE6 just because of some ancient internal infrastructure...
IE 9 also spikes... slightly (Score:3)
In linked three-month period by browser version, notice that IE9 also has the same corresponding spikes (albeit smaller) on weekends. Possibly that reflects no active choice on part of home users who just use the default install (while corporate continues to play catch-up). But it might also represent a segment that simply continues to prefer IE (the "web-compliant" kind).
Inflated Chrome stats because of page prerendering (Score:5, Insightful)
Does StatCounter take in account Chrome's page views inflation [google.com] caused by its Instant Pages [blogspot.it] prerendering feature?
I'd be surprised, since even Google Analytics itself is affected...
Anyway, please be careful before announcing "Chrome usage surpassed this or that" :P
Re:Inflated Chrome stats because of page prerender (Score:4, Informative)
Answer is here:
http://gs.statcounter.com/faq#pre-rendering [statcounter.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Does StatCounter take in account Chrome's page views inflation [google.com] caused by its Instant Pages [blogspot.it] prerendering feature?
I'd be surprised, since even Google Analytics itself is affected...
Anyway, please be careful before announcing "Chrome usage surpassed this or that" :P
Yup. This is correct. The stats are by page views.
Google fetches everything under the sun when you start typing, and only shows it to you when you actually want it. It's a terribly wasteful practice when you're just thinking of the increased burden on ISPs and servers, but it's even more absurd when you consider the bandwidth caps most people live under.
All of the web traffic monitoring sites only monitor a the top X most popular sites that have analytics or some other shit tracking engine layered on top
Re: (Score:3)
I doubt they measure number of pages when measuring market share here.
Wrong, that's exactly what they do: Why do you base your stats on page views rather than unique visitors? [statcounter.com]
And yes, [statcounter.com]they're aware of the prerendering Chrome stats inflation problem, even though they believe it doesn't significantly skew their stats, for some reason they're unable to explain themselves (sounds like "faith" or "we're too lazy to adjust our data even though we could").
Simple... (Score:2)
I am not aware of a SINGLE application, used in business, that is "Chrome Only".
However, for years at previous jobs (where linux desktops where uncommon) I have struggled with needing to maintain a windows machine for NO OTHER PURPOSE than to run outlook for mail, and ie for a few apps that will not work with anything else.
They are all over the place. Of course, not everyone can choose, many are locked in at work, and those who are locked in tend to be locked in to IE, for the same reason... a few apps. Tho
Evil Admin don't allow me to use $MY_BROSER (Score:2)
Troll disclaimer
Yes, some PC are properly locked, but 90%* can be hacked.
*The number is pure speculation.
Monday - Friday (Score:2)
Compulsory IE Usage (Score:2)
I'm sure this has been mentioned already, but IE usage in the work place is almost compulsory.
Network admins know IE, they think supporting other browsers will add to their work load so they don't support other browsers.
Additionally, many companies have, bought, make/maintain legacy webapps that were hardcoded to non-standard web tech in IE so to get work done people use IE at work.
Cue Loverboy (Score:2)
Spies like Linux (Score:2)
Spies like to use Linux because their security matters; they like you to use windows because that makes their job easier.