Will Work For Golf
I love golf, a lot. And this summer I’ve done more of it than ever, and I still feel deprived. You see, at $40 a round, it can add up quickly for a freelance developer like myself. I’ve decided to try to pull out all the stops and hunt down for a trade agreement.
My Will Work for Golf page outlines the trade agreement I’m hoping somebody, somewhere will want to take advantage of.
Safari For Windows, Inevitably Yours
When Apple recently announced a Windows release of their Safari web browser, my first reaction was thinking “Thank goodness.” (If you are still using Internet Explorer, I think you may need to wake up to much better technology and how up to speed you are.) On Digg and other web sites, tech wizards are asking, “Why should Apple enter the browser wars?”
Well, cause they’re going to win.
Here’s why. They know that making a large release of Safari won’t take much market share from Firefox. Firefox users are already way too committed to their browser to move over to Safari. A lot of them vocally denounce Safari anyway. But market share will come from IE users (cause IE is a significantly inferior product). Steve Jobs himself even said that the method of distribution will be to bundle Safari with iTunes downloads. So there will be quite a lot of exposure.
Firefox has shown how IE’s market share can only go down. Year after year they have made some slow growth in the overall browser share and will keep eating away at IE regardless of what Apple will do with Safari. The other less-well-known browsers don’t have a large enough user base to do damage to IE in a significant way. But Safari already has a host of Mac users, and who knows, with more and more Windows users buying Macs, if they’ve already used Safari, they’ll likely stick with it on their new Mac. At any rate, Safari can add to Firefox’s pull on IE share. The two will mutually bring over tons of users away from IE, without a doubt.
The iPhone has also created more demand for Safari. It’s the first serious attempt at making web pages appear as they are, no downsized version of the web. And, of course, the way that it happens is through Safari. Already, folks have begun to predict the rise of mobile web. With the iPhone setting a trend of web browsers doing both mobile and full-screen web rendering, Safari certainly has a chance at a niche market in ways that Firefox or IE haven’t.
With just a little bit of market share, Safari could be in a position to make a move for IE. But of course, it would need a boost.
My prediction is this: as soon as Safari + Firefox’s combined market share gets above IE, Apple will buyout Firefox. Then that will clinch the browser wars in Apple’s favor. And because of the superior technology that both Safari and Firefox have over IE, it will be a step forward for the world wide web. Right now, Firefox’s largest contributor is Google, representing well over 80 percent of its profits. The money’s in the search engines for both Safari and Firefox. Well, there’s no doubt that Apple has more pull with Google than Mozilla, and Google has bundled Firefox in its desktop software package. I think the relationship Apple has with Google could add some significant negotiating muscle to the table. (And if you are skeptical, remember how Jobs was able to negotiate “impossible” deals with the RIAA and DRM-free music…) Heck, if I were Mozilla, the whole point of Firefox would be to sell it eventually, once it had gained enough share. Regardless, why shouldn’t Apple come knocking? All that market share would be worth it. And for Apple it’s more than search engine power: users of Safari have much more exposure to Apple’s key products, which means better conversions to Mac.
So, Windows users, if you feel no motivation to begin using Safari, don’t worry. You’ll likely be using it in a couple years against your will.
Other Web Sites’ Traffic
Being able to measure another web site’s traffic, or even better, a lot of other web sites’ traffic, can mean the difference between 1% market share and 10%. In offline operations, most companies do moderate to high levels of research trying to identify one’s position compared to market competitors.
Online Tools
Some tools have popped up saying they’re doing just that: measuring site traffic and making the data public. The most well-known is probably Alexa. There, you will find traffic estimations and rankings for millions of web sites. The problem with relying completely on Alexa, however, is that it is only and estimation, and in my own measurements, I have found Alexa to be off in significant ways. (Specifically, my work on BYU’s School of Education web site has shown Alexa to be way off.)
To offset these problems, here are a couple of competing tools that, in my book, do a better job.
Quantcast
Quantcast.com is much like Alexa, but it provides demographic data as well. Site admins can verify their own sites to enhance the accuracy of the data, and the layout is much more aesthetic than Alexa’s clumsy design.
Compete
Compete.com also provides useful data much like Quantcast and Alexa, but it also has a toolbar for Firefox or Internet Explorer that makes accessing the data simple, without having to browse to their site (a feature I, personally, enjoy).
My favorite feature of Compete is its Trust Score. They’ve added the dimension of credibility, a measure that is only increasing in importance as the web grows. Yes, it is estimated in some cases, but the trustworthyness of a web site is at least expressed in some form, essential for when you’re trying to identify a credibly source.
Making the Data Work
Ideally, the traffic scores from these three sites would be averaged when trying to get an idea of a competitor’s traffic load. As Quantcast and Compete both grab data from more accurate sources than Alexa, either one of those are preferred over the latter.
