IE Died at v6 SP1, Netscape Died Today
Ron Green asked Scoble. Scoble presumably knows but can't really say, which is understandable given his assimilation. DonXML thinks
it's as dead as COM. I don't agree with the point of comparison (COM, like the rest of us, is definitely going to die--it's just not dead yet), but I do agree with the fundamental conclusion.
There is no IE7. A friend pointed me at some of the few published words even touching on the subject where
Brian Countryman from the IE team basically says so earlier this month.
Host: Brian (Microsoft)
Q: when / will there be the next version of IE?A: As part of the OS, IE will continue to evolve, but there will be no future standalone installations. IE6 SP1 is the final standalone installation.(snip)Host: Brian (Microsoft)
Q: Why is this? the anti-trust? (no further standalone)A: Although this is off topic, I will answer briefly: Legacy OSes have reached their zenith with the addition of IE6 SP1. Further improvements to IE will require enhancements to the underlying OS.
I think everyone is connecting the dots the right way about what the roadmap looks like... I've just been debating how well-conceived this is as a business strategy.
From my obscured viewpoint, it looks like nothing happens with browser technology from Microsoft until Longhorn. One possible alternative would be a future XP SP, but, in terms of likelihood, that looks unlikely to improbable.
I'm no Gregory XIII, but that's roughly 18 months-plus of status quo ante. September 2002 was IE6 SP1. Again, string my past, present and future Kurt Cameron desktop calendars (the truly initiated buy them by the decade) and I get at least 28 months of market and mindshare ceded to the competition. This presumes Longhorn ships by Jan. 9, 2005. So add your own margin of error in months or (hopefully not) years.
I can't speak to the technical basis for this long break in progression--I'm actually more than willing to trust that the technical strategy makes sense. From a business standpoint, if we don't kid ourselves about overall market share, I think it probably makes business as well. Sure, alternate browser use will most likely soar among early adopters over the next two years or so. It's already a horse race in this niche in anectdotal terms.
But early adopters are a niche (unfortunately), and the real market is located among the millions of undercapable/captive users. WebSideStory
put overall usage at 96% IE to 4% Netscape as recently as last month. Mosaic launched in 1993, assume roughly 100% market share at time zero. It took more than 5 years for IE to replace it as the most popular browser. There are many mitigating factors involved with the historical adoption timeline. Nonetheless, I don't think it's unreasonable to look back into Browsers I and conclude that a game-changing shift in market share isn't going to happen before Longhorn has a top 40 theme song leading it onto retail shelves. I say this because the original shift involved something called "tying", I've heard it was kind of a big deal. ;)
Mozilla is a better browser today. I know it, you know it, anyone capable of making the moderately subtle distinction knows it. But the practical facts are that the real market doesn't really make any subtle distinctions at all. More importantly, there are no external forces at work which will help Mozilla gain adoption in the part of the market that really doesn't care what browser they use. Since that portion of the browser market is arguably the overwhelming majority in numerical terms, what this all really means is IE6 will remain the dominant browser until Longhorn ships--and it's going to do that without any of the myriad enhancements we'd all like to see in the browser from Microsoft.
Pragmatically speaking, if this is how it's all going to play out, I can understand the underlying calculus. I don't see any indication otherwise but I think more definitive information might just find it's way out into the open before October's PDC. At the same time, as someone who likes to see internet technology evolve at something faster than a glacial pace, this conclusion saddens me a bit.
Postscript: Today's Microsoft-AOL settlement obviously impacts the foregoing. Absent dramatic reversal, Netscape as a product and company
died today. The settlement included AOL re-upping with IE for another 7 years, so there's one potential catalyst for accelerated developments off the board. Not much changed in practical terms, it's one less possible reversal. Of greater concern is what happens with Mozilla. I'm not well-versed enough to say how much of the code is internal to Netscape proper on a rolling basis. Is it competitive enough as an open-source organization to be self-sustaining, is there another corporate benefactor out there that can take some sting out of Netscape likely demise? Who knows, the product's good, there's enough value to monetize somewhere along the food chain.