Mozilla exec calls Apple's Safari plan 'duopolistic'

Mozilla's chief operating officer, John Lilly, is calling Steve Jobs' plans for building Safari's market share "out of date" and "duopolistic."

Lilly made his comments following the Apple CEO's keynote speech last week at the Worldwide Developers Conference, where the Mac maker unveiled a version of the Safari browser designed to run on Windows Vista or XP.

In the speech predicting how Apple would expand its market share, Jobs showed a slide with Safari dominating almost a quarter of the market--a market shared only with a single other browser, Internet Explorer.

Lilly says he doesn't believe that this was an omission or simplification, but instead an indication that Jobs is hoping to steal people who use Firefox and other smaller browsers in order to run a "duopoly" with Redmond.

"This worldview...betrays (Apple's) thinking: it's out-of-date, corporate-controlled, duopoly-oriented...It's not good for the Web. Which is sort of moot, I think, because I don't think this two-party world will really come to be," Lilly said in his blog.

A browser market split exclusively between two companies is the "wrong thing to do" and would cause a dip in end-user experience, as well as ruining participation and engagement, the Mozilla Foundation executive said.

Still, Lilly went on to welcome the latest addition to the browser market. "Another browser being available to more people is good," he said. "I'm glad that Safari will be another option for users...We've never ever at Mozilla said that we care about Firefox market share at the expense of our more important goal: to keep the Web open and a public resource. The Web belongs to people, not companies."

Lilly, however, cast doubt on whether Jobs' two-browser state would come to pass, saying the rise of Wikipedia and Linux suggests that people are no longer content with the "monopolies and duopolies and cartels of yesterday's distribution" led by the big software vendors.

Since Safari for Windows debuted on June 11, it has notched up 1 million downloads. It has also seen a number of security vulnerabilities unearthed, resulting in Apple issuing three patches.

Jo Best of ZDNet Australia reported from Sydney.

[skipperpma]

OH PLEASE!

How can the head of such a cool company, be such a baby? Reading a bit much into a slid-show aren't we? - Oh yes, I'm sure that Steve's evil master plan is to destroy all other browsers so that there would only be Safari and IE - Today browsers, tomorrow the world!!! (Que the evil laugh) - <br />Come on, are you serious? Are you honestly that scared of a little competition? Let's be real for a minute. The only reason IE has the dominant market share is because most computer users aren't that computer savvy. Those who are, aren't going anywhere, and will continue to love just about anything other than IE.<br />Personally, I think this guy needs to sit down and stop making the company that many of us love, look like a little kid throwing a temper tantrum.

[mattumanu]

He said he welcomes safari...

What he pointed out was that the graph pretty accurately reflected IE market share, then had Safari and only Safari as the other competitor. I would have point it out too, although I wouldn't have tried to coin a new term like "dualopoly"... <br /><br />Firefox works too well at the moment for me to give it up. There are lots of me, and I'm not interested in Job's "safari".

[DraconumPB]

I'd rather know...

...what your deal is. I think he's got a valid point, really. Steve Jobs CAN get pretty overzealous. Sure, they got lucky with the iPod, and the iPhone looks to be a solid product, but for Jobs to think for a moment that Safari will reach the saturation of even Firefox on the Windows platform, I think, is rediculous and self-indulgent.<br /><br />There's ulterior motives, too, because Jobs plans to have third-party app support on the iPhone STRICTLY through Safari web applications, which naturally won't be compatible with anything else. Devs will be more likely to code such apps, I think, if there's more people using Safari (i.e. who wants to code something that'll only work on a Mac or an iPhone? Waste of time.)<br /><br />If anything pushes Safari though, I think the iPhone will be it.

[ssmiroldo]

Exactly!

Thank you for your comments... I thought this article (or rather <br />the Mozilla guy) is TOTALLY off-base! What a paranoid <br />schizophrenic view of Apple's Safari for Window's introduction.<br /><br />Primary reason for Safari going to Windows: iPhone developer <br />support and growth.<br /><br />Look at the venue and timing of the announcement. WinSafari <br />was announced minutes before Steve Jobs talked about iPhone <br />3rd party apps using Safari and Web 2.0. It's a no-brainer.

[Hardrada]

I have to agree with John Lilly...

What kind of Apple strategy relies on building market share for their browser? Personally, I am going to go with vendors who support open standards and I am not going to support anybody who seeks to subvert them.

[mattumanu]

They can all just screw it...

I used internet explorer for my standard fare sites, my blog, and other things, and I use firefox for youtube and other video related stuff. I don't need safari.<br /><br />I think the real reason Jobs wants to do this is so that more apple software will get into the hands of users, making them more amenable to apple computers in general. Stevie boy, let me tell you... If it weren't for the fact that for some reason or other there are people offering quicktime content, I wouldn't have that thing on my computer. With each update it hijacks my settings, reinstalls itself into my startup folder, the list goes on... Why would I want safari? So it can hijack my preferences too?<br /><br />I do want to get a mac in the near future. But mac stuff on my XP machine? Nah, not happenin'.

[Penguinisto]

You're only half-right:

[i]" I think the real reason Jobs wants to do this is so that more apple software will get into the hands of users, making them more amenable to apple computers in general."[/i]<br /><br />The first part you got right - Jobs wants Safari spread far and wide. BUT... the second half is only a side benefit. The main benefit is to provide a platform for iPhone development and interaction.<br /><br />HTH a little,<br /><br />/P

[Phillep_H]

Quicktime

Thanks for the warning. I was about to install it on my home computer. It has not gotten any better, eh? (Klonk! Trashcan time.)

[ewelch]

Sour grapes

Lilly doesn't get it. Jobs is not out to kill Firefox, he's out to make it <br />easier to program for the iPhone. Lilly's paranoia betrays his anti-<br />buisness attitude. Pretty lame.

[gggg sssss]

firephone

why not just support firefox on teh iPhone? Now that would have made sense - even better, IE

[justice007]

Deliberate charting

I specifically noticed the chart and Mr. Jobs' mannerism -- the chart showing about 15% of Firefox installed base now and Apple Safari completely replacing and increasing it to 25% and with IE at 75%. Apple is smart enough to know their increased market share for browsers (most of it) will come from reduction in the number of IE users rather than reduction in Firefox users. There are two big reasons for it (1) Users who know anything about alternate browsers will install not only ONE alternate, but look at different alternate browsers and (2) Even though Safari is good, Firefox is has significantly better customization capabilities by use of extensions (e.g., Safari doesn't even have an option to delete cookies on exit).<br /><br />I believe the reason for Mr. Jobs showing the chart with Safari market share cutting into Firefox and leaving IE "as is" is meant to not offend Microsoft overtly and give them a reason for retaliation. But Microsoft marketing is smart enough to notice that. Safari's entry into the MS Windows boxes is good for web standards adoption and for the average consumer -- besides also providing a develop/test environment for iPhone applications for third party developers. The announcement was made the the World Wide DEVELOPERS Conference after all.

[murphtall]

ummm, private browsing, yo!

in ref to "Even though Safari is good, Firefox is has significantly <br />better customization capabilities by use of extensions (e.g., Safari <br />doesn't even have an option to delete cookies on exit)." i have to <br />say you missed private browsing feature .... here, from safari help, <br />oh uninformed n00b "Cookies are deleted when private browsing is <br />turned off"<br />`km

[oldbookhunter]

it would never be "duopolistic"

It would never become "duopolistic". The thing it's probably <br />going to do is just shift IE a little down the rung for home users. <br />I don't think it would ever touch the business users.<br />I work on a Mac at home and I run two browsers depending on <br />my requirement. Safari is good, but it has it's limitations. <br />Firefox is amazing, but even it has it's limitations. I use the best <br />features in both of them. When I worked on a PC at home, I <br />hated using IE but reluctantly there were still a few things I <br />found it could do better than Firefox. IE was my last resort for a <br />few things. If I had a PC at home now, I think using Safari and <br />Firefox in combination would be a great setup, the same as with <br />my Mac. I would never use IE again.<br />The thing is that at work it's a different story. I have to work on <br />a PC because it's the company standard. I have to use IE <br />because it's the company standard. A free version of Safari <br />wouldn't make them want to change that standard, since even <br />the dependability of Firefox on PC over IE hasn't changed their <br />minds in all the years it's been available. I don't think my <br />company is a unique situation. Since the work world seems to <br />be heavy into Windows, I seriously doubt that Apple is going to <br />hurt Firefox's percentage of the market in that area. If anything <br />they'd end up getting the full Mac replacement of the PC before <br />they'd get the browser market from either IE or Firefox.

[nicmart]

Not to worry

As a Mac user who primarily relies on Safari, I don't think Mozilla <br />has much to worry about. If Safari for Windows is as incompatible <br />with as many web pages as the Mac version, Windows users will <br />quickly toss it. Apple is proudly unwilling to bend Safari to <br />accomodate Explorer-centric sites. This is widely recognized by <br />Macoholics, but they deny reality and shift the responsibility from <br />Apple to web designers, defensively calling the problem "Mac <br />marginalization." Firefox should be distinguished by its <br />capabilities, not by the political attacks of Mozilla executives.

[BrandonEubanks]

Really?

I am an avid mac user and I have found few sites that Safari will not <br />work with. And often, those sites don't work with Firefox either <br />because they are completely IE based. Hell, even Yahoo! Music now <br />works with Safari. I don't know if you have a bunch of specific web <br />sites that you use but, this is far from my experience.

[sebastianlewis]

Another Example of how to look like a Fool, courtesy of Mozilla Corporation

Todays Topic: Reading too much into a chart on a keynote.<br /><br />First, the story in summary, paraphrased of course:<br />"Oh look! Apple completely wiped out Firefox and other browsers with Safari in their <br />keynote today, gentlemen, run for the hills! They're plotting an evil duopoly (which is <br />unbelievably enough, an actual word) with Microsoft."<br /><br />The reality:<br />Steve Jobs was editing his keynote and decided it made more sense to wipe out the <br />small guys with Safari than to try and guesstimate what the new market share values <br />might look like or to completely wipe out IE from the chart which still has the largest <br />market share of them all in order to make his point: Apple's browser market share will <br />go up if they launch on Windows.<br /><br />Sebastian

[BrandonEubanks]

Agreed

Although I do agree that Job's keynote was a little misleading, I also <br />agree that people are making too much of this. Leave it to CNet to <br />make a mountain out of a mole hill. Do you expect the <br />presentations to not be a little Apple-centric at the Apple Wold <br />Wide Developer Confrence?

[Penguinisto]

Oy, vey...

Okay.<br /><br />Safari works great on the Mac. I don't have/use Windows, so I have no Earthly idea if it will work well there or not.<br /><br />That said, even if the Mozilla camp is right, a duopoly beats the hell out of a monopoly. Personally, I think he's miffed that Safari and Mozilla's own spin-off, Firefox, is eating Mozilla's lunch.<br /><br />/P

[BrandonEubanks]

Pig Latin?

Great way to make your point.

[Phillep_H]

Pig Latin - right

Great way to make /your/ point, responding to the story instead of the comment you are criticising. Whichever one that is.

[donny111]

It doesn't matter anyway....

I installed Safari on my Windows XP PC, and started testing to see how good Safari is. <br /><br />I didn't like the way things showed up on the browser, and the first time I used it, the browser crashed within 5 minutes. <br /><br />I un-installed it right away. <br /><br />If you want a good reliable browser, just go with Firefox. It's easy to use, and rarely crashes.

[skipperpma]

Repeate after me, "Beta"

"Beta test<br />DEFINITION - In software development, a beta test is the second phase of software testing in which a sampling of the intended audience tries the product out. (Beta is the second letter of the Greek alphabet.) Originally, the term alpha test meant the first phase of testing in a software development process. The first phase includes unit testing, component testing, and system testing. Beta testing can be considered "pre-release testing." Beta test versions of software are now distributed to a wide audience on the Web partly to give the program a "real-world" test and partly to provide a preview of the next release."<br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://searchsmb.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,290660,sid44_gci211654,00.html" target="_newWindow">http://searchsmb.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,290660,sid44_gci211654,00.html</a><br /><br />Opinions on which you like better is just that, you opinion, and your entitled to have and share it. However, I don't think it's fair to slam a beta release. <br />In fairness, I'm sure that you'll test out the final version when it's released as well, and I'm sure you fully understand that it's a beta release. I just didn't want people who didn't understand the concept of "beta" to come to the conclusion that Safari is no good based on your personal experiences with the beta release.

[skipperpma]

Repeat after me, "Beta"

"Beta test<br />DEFINITION - In software development, a beta test is the second phase of software testing in which a sampling of the intended audience tries the product out. (Beta is the second letter of the Greek alphabet.) Originally, the term alpha test meant the first phase of testing in a software development process. The first phase includes unit testing, component testing, and system testing. Beta testing can be considered "pre-release testing." Beta test versions of software are now distributed to a wide audience on the Web partly to give the program a "real-world" test and partly to provide a preview of the next release."<br /><a class="jive-link-external" href="http://searchsmb.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,290660,sid44_gci211654,00.html" target="_newWindow">http://searchsmb.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,290660,sid44_gci211654,00.html</a><br /><br />Opinions on which you like better is just that, you opinion, and your entitled to have and share it. However, I don't think it's fair to slam a beta release. <br />In fairness, I'm sure that you'll test out the final version when it's released as well, and I'm sure you fully understand that it's a beta release. I just didn't want people who didn't understand the concept of "beta" to come to the conclusion that Safari is no good based on your personal experiences with the beta release.

[ethana2]

If they were to target the Linux platform,

which has about as many users as OSX, if I understand right, they would see a huge surge in downloads as everyone tried it out, and come back a month later to find no one still using it. I tried it out on windows. It was pathetic. I have 20 FF extensions, and there is basically nothing I can't do with it.<br /><br />I do hope they steal a huge chunk of IE users, though. That'd be sweet, to break up windows into 3 nearly equal browser market shares. It'd bring the emphasis back to open standards compliance. I also think it would be interesting to see Firefox come up with a webkit variant or add private browsing. We're living in exciting times.

[ethana2]

edit:

"with it" meaning with Firefox. Safari was powerless.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Do not taunt happy fun geek.

It's not wise for Apple to mock Firefox and the geeks who support it for they have a lot of spare time on their hands and Apple is giving them a juicy unsecured target with Safari, especially claiming it was secure from Day One of beta and that they will push Firefox to the side as insignificant.<br /><br />Geeks don't like to be mocked like that.

[sebastianlewis]

What's the worse that will happen?

Another Windows user is attacked by a virus through their browser? <br />What else is new...<br /><br />Sebastian

[LuvThatCO2]

Apple has a long history of being a control-freak

From not allowing the OS to run on computers they dont make, to this. Is anyone suprised?<br /><br />That being said, to mozilla, stop whining. It reflects badly on you. FF -AND- IE have nothing to fear from Safari. Just download the beta and see why. Its awful.<br /><br />(yes, they have a windows version now, and it blows chunks)

[mortega98]

Safari Internet Browser

What does it mean Safari has "notched up 1 million downloads"?<br />Does it mean Safari now has an additional 1 million users and the other browsers 1 million less users?<br />I am one of those who downloaded Safari.<br />I am also one of those who removed it from the computer within 24 hours of installation.<br />You see, Safari is not faster than Firefox, Safari is not more functional and not even equal to Firefox, and Safari is not better than Firefox in any way.<br />In other words, Safari is not Firefox.

[`````]

What 1 million downloads means is...

That there are about 1 million people that will not try Safari again for seven years. I abandoned Mozilla browsers (Firefox) for seven years after suffering with Netscape's hourly crashing fits on Windows 98. Unfortunately the mirror has already been broken because I played with Safari on OSX and I believe that a PC version is like Peter robbing Paul to pay Mark.<br /> Seems I heard that Intel based MACs can run a Microsoft OS. and PC's with Linux can run OSX (illegally?)... But after spending three months figuring out how to get sound to work for Flash on Debian Linux and being completely unable to get Linux running on my iMAC, and months trying to get MS Media Player for MAC to install on OSX Tiger, the mix and match game is too time consuming for my house.<br /> This dog Safari will not hunt. Poachers!

[JDavis19]

Firefox must support photographers...

To maintain its market share FireFox must become color managed <br />(ICC-aware), a key reason for photographers to run Safari on <br />Windows.

[t8]

Nothing will displace Firefox

Firefox is open like the Web and for that reason it will continue to see great innovations.<br /><br />Proprietary browsers are not about the technology rather they are just pawns in certain companies strategies. What benefit is it to me to use IE or Safari? I am just a number to them.<br /><br />Open is best and that is why Firefox is the best. Firefox is made by the people and for the people and it is the best of breed too.

[gsmiller88]

My Firefox experience

I don't know about you but my experiences with Firefox haven't <br />been so peachy! The Mac version of Firefox needs quite a bit of <br />work.

[flemingho]

Nothing will displace IE ....

...as the most used browser on the web, only because the majority (if not all) the computers sold by retailers like Bestbuy, RadioShack all come with IE as the default browser, and the non-geek user-base still outnumber the geek user-base.<br /><br />If Safari can strike a similar deal as IE on preloaded computers then it has a chance to increase its market share. And if the iPhone does take off, it too can help increase the Safari marketshare, especially if it is the frontend for any desktop synchronization.<br /><br />Out of curiosity, I did download the Beta of Safari. It did not hijack my preferences. But it was still too buggy.<br /><br />IE will continue to have non-geek market share, as long as it is the default browser on preloaded computers. Firefox will have the geek and converted non-geeks market share. Safari will have the iPhone market share.<br /><br />I still love my Firefox. Nothing can come close to it. It's innovative and lightweight. And it has lots to offer through it's extensions, and add-ons. Everybody I've introduced it to has converted to using it as their primary browser. It can't be beat.

[daftkey]

Open Standards = Better?

Open Source is ABSOLUTELY better! <br /><br />Well.. I mean.. Other than the fact that after 20 years of development, the most common open-source operating system STILL can't install a simple driver for a graphics card without dropping to a command-line.. Or the fact that the most common open-source spreadsheet is still missing a non-linear solver model (but it's still as good as Excel - as long as you don't care about speed)<br /><br />Come to think of it, I can't really think of any open source software that actually works intuitively and has features users actually want that DIDN'T start off as proprietary software (Firefox is kindof included in that definition, y'know).

[open-mind]

Jobs Is Helping Lilly

And Lilly seems to need the help.<br /><br />Despite the fact that Firefox is tremendously better than IE 6 and has been for a long time, Firefox mind-share and market-share numbers are terrible. Most people don't even know about Firefox. In that respect, Lilly has failed. As a result, Microsoft can still use their IE market share to manipulate internet standards.<br /><br />Apple is good at marketing and can leverage iTunes. So they can help solve this problem by letting more poeple know that there are browser alternatives besides IE. Some of those people will migrate to Safari and some will migrate to Firefox.<br /><br />The result is more browser choice for users, and Microsoft will be required to again follow web standards. I don't see a downside.

[`````]

Microsoft says "Why I NEVER!"

And they'd be right; they have never honored standards of any sort, for the sake of speed at the expense of stability. Most of the time they have won, so why change now? Reminds me of a businessman's toast that orientals adopted when the Vietnamese economy first started to improve: "Whatever works!" Case in point: Microsoft ripped copies of XP Gold Version off the shelves when it performed more slowly on Pentium IV processors than on Piii.

[jonathanchambers]

Safari is still too crippled to make an impact

I don't know whether Jobs actually believes what he's peddling, but if he actually used the web outside of Apple's suite of tools then he might have noticed that simple things like Gmail's Talk/Chat features still don't work in Safari, and that Hotmail will only load the 'classic' version in Safari (thus far). Regardless of the speed argument, Safari 3 beta still doesn't have the goods. I'm a Mac user and I don't use Safari for more than 'light browsing.'

[murphtall]

lilly missed the point of the illustrative market share pie chart

lilly missed the point of the illustrative market share pie chart. it <br />wasnt to suggest that safari and IE be the only browsers it was to <br />ILLUSTRATE what percentage of market share apple wanmts. apple <br />doesnt want FireFox to die, apple wants 25% of the market share. it <br />was illustrative tool. end of story.`<br />Km

[phantomsoul]

Who Cares?

Fact of the matter is that most people really don't give a diddly squat about what browser they use; rather, they just care about actually being able to see the page they're looking for.<br /><br />Fact of the matter is that unless you have some kind of financial or emotional interest in the positions of Microsoft, Apple, or Google/Mozilla, chances are you could care less about whether you click on the compass, the blue E, or the firey globe. In fact, most people don't do any of those, instead accessing the internet by merely calling a URL to the operating system from perhaps some program they have open -- in which case the page opens in the default browser. Further, that default browser was probably not set by the person who is actually accessing the pages.<br /><br />Yes Internet Explorer has its security issues, and it probably doesn't load pages as fast as other browsers. But its not that much slower, and one thing remains an advantage for the big blue E over any other browser on Windows in that it opens way faster than Safari, Firefox, or Opera -- completely blowing the others out of the water. Same thing holds true for Safari on Mac OS.<br /><br />And when you get into clicking assortments of URLs for accessing webpages, it suddenly seems to blur the line between "going on the Internet" and "balancing your checkbook", and the company behind the browser suddenly doesn't seem as important as how long you have to sit there and wait for a browser window to open because you clicked on something that references a web URL...

[GGGlen]

Now I've heard everything

So IE is "not much slower" than other browsers, but because it <br />launches faster, I'm supposed to be impressed?<br />I don't know about you, but most human beings launch their <br />browser once, then spend the day browsing.<br />Maybe you're implying that IE is so unstable, that you need to <br />launch it several times each day?<br />Dunno, I can't stand it, so I don't use it, but the "faster launches" <br />bit is the silliest thing I've read all day.