Good for the goose, ignored by the gander?

Yes but may I suggest that your stats and mine may not refect the what happens overall. I don't know where the 21.5% stat derives from? But I am of the mind that we all attract certain types of visitors that have certain common characteristics that are not neccessarily the same as a broader sampling taken. You can see evidence in that with the examples you show, your stats are much different than http://www.thecounter.com/stats/200...ary/browser.php and their stats are much different than http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

So I think the source of the sampling is important. But the point of your posting is a wake up call to me

and is certainly noteworthy

My actual stats are very similar to yours

 

Here you go, Anthony -- I just posted this for your old buddy mu$hroom:

Is Linux Riskier Than Windows?

 

I don't disagree with anything you say, Homer, except that I do think if you look at a range of stats on different types of websites you'll find that it will be rare to see Firefox even close to 21%.

 

You do understand that report was sponsored by Microsoft, do you not Minstrel?

 

Yes, Anthony, Microsoft commissioned a research group to conduct the study -- that is clearly stated in the article and is fairly common practice. The article also states quite clearly that both the research methodology and the data are released to the public for scrutiny in case anyone wants to try to show that the research is flawed in any way.

 

OK Minstrel, this thread is making folks heads spin as to what it is really about, can you provide direction on where the subject matter is going here

 

try to keep up, Anthony -- see above:

 

OK.........