i have a website what can be used by 50 users at the same time. Those users will be in the same room.
My problem is to know how much bandwith (in Mb/s) do I need to rent for that room so that they can access my website comfortably (speed up and down) ?
The average page size of my website is 1MB.
I searched for answers on the internet and all I got was bandwith used in a month (for servers).
Sorry if my question is "vague", I did my best to make it clear.
Thank you in advance for your answers.
Using https://gtmetrix.com/ you can test your websites speed, page size, and load times
There are several alternatives you just have to do the research
The more important issue you should focus on is why your page is 1Mb that should be your first priority to resolve and using tools like gtmetrix can help
I recommend load testing your site to figure that out. If you're at all familiar with JMeter, you can use it to create a script that simulates a user navigating your site, then run multiple instances of that user (in your case, 50) to see how the site holds up under load.
You can learn more about JMeter here:
https://jmeter.apache.org/
If you're not familiar with creating JMeter scripts, you can record and auto-generate basic scripts using the Blazemeter Chrome Extension, here.
For low-load testing (50 users is pretty low), you can upload your JMeter script to Blazemeter, and with a free tier Blazemeter account, you can perform some basic tests to see how your site holds up. If you go that route, I recommend focusing on avg. response time and hits/second in order to determine what your bandwidth need truly is under load.
I'm getting ready to start work on a new web project for a fairly large corporation.
For all their users, something like 17,000 people, they are all stuck with IE6. They plan to have everyone transitioned to IE7 by the end of the year, however the IT department is starting to push this promise back.
What I've been asked to do is to give the project sponsor some more ammo push back on this. However, my charismatic politician button seems to be broken. I've only been unable to come up with simple phrases, such as "IE6 is teh suck" or "it will take me a million more hours to make it work in IE6 too" and all of this may be true but it doesn't really feel like a very mature statement to be making.
I guess what I'm looking for, is some kind of laymen's way of explaining that yes we can support IE6 but I'm going to need some hazard pay, and support that fact with some kind of hard evidence it does indeed take many more hours to make something look right and work in both IE6 and IE7.
We often have the need to persuade non technical users that IE6 is a very bad idea for any company to be still running and so have a document we are working on to educate home and corporate users here is a summary if it helps:
Why is IE 6 a problem?
Much less secure than other browsers
The internet has changed a lot since IE 6 was released and there are more threats to data security than ever before including phishing scams, script injection attacks, key logging viruses, identity theft and bot-nets (machines which have been taken over for criminal activity).
It is well documented that IE6 is less secure than modern browsers when surfing the internet:
“..the most compelling reason to upgrade is the improved security. The Internet of today is not the Internet of five years ago. There are dangers that simply didn't exist back in 2001, when Internet Explorer 6 was released to the world.”
Sandi Hardmeier, Microsoft MVP
“Older browsers are a swiss-cheese of security holes, allowing black-hats out there to take over computers, construct bot-nets, and even steal their victim’s identity, most of the time without their knowledge.”
www.joelevi.com
IE 6 poses a security risk to any computer that it is used on for web browsing.
Any responsible IT team will upgrade to IE7 or later on all machines within a corporate network. Many now install the Firefox browser in order to increase security further.
It is not standards compliant
IE 6 does not render web pages in the same way that most browsers do as it uses a proprietary engine which ignores many of the standards set by the W3C (the World Wide Web Consortium). This leads some web pages to be displayed incorrectly in IE 6 and some not to display at all.
This also means that while web developers have to support IE 6 much of their work is taken up by fixing pages rather than developing better content and features. In short IE 6 is holding back the web’s development for all users.
Slower
During the last 8 years of browser development as well as improved security browsers have been tuned for better performance on all fronts including download speed, rendering speed and JavaScript/AJAX performance which is a technology used on most major sites to give a better end user experience (sometimes know as Web 2.0 technology).
Memory Usage
Internet Explorer 7 actually uses less memory than IE6 and uses less overall resources on a machine. So upgrading can improve the performance of older computers.
Upgrading to Firefox or Chrome
Firefox
http://en-us.www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/firefox.html
Chrome
http://www.google.co.uk/chrome
Upgrading to IE 7 / 8
Home users
Internet Explorer 7 http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=9ae91ebe-3385-447c-8a30-081805b2f90b
Internet Explorer 8
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=341C2AD5-8C3D-4347-8C03-08CDECD8852B&displaylang=en
Corporate Users
Internet Explorer 7 Resource Page
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/ie/bb381619.aspx
Internet Explorer 7 Deployment Guide
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e41d8800-d134-4356-a2e7-c01bee790908&DisplayLang=en
Internet Explorer 8 Resource Page
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/ie/bb219517.aspx
Internet Explorer 8 Deployment Guide
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc985339.aspx
Quite a difficult task to do, as there might be other reasons why they are using IE6 until this date (other, conflicting software which relies on IE6).
The first thing to do would be to identfy the problem that stops IT from doing the migration - if it's not lazyness.
Maybe it is easier to ask them whether they would consider an "alternative browser" to be installed (which wouldn't affect the IE6 installs). But most administrators don't like that idea, because Firefox doesn't share data/configs with Windows Servers, but trade-offs might be made in favor of money.
Should there be no real obstacle, you might show them a real-life example how an average day for an IE6 developer would look like.
Choose an UI-feature (combine all merits of IE6 to create one) that will work to cause the required issues for the next few steps.
Show them how everything looks fine in ALL Browsers.
Show them how it doesn't look fine at all in IE6.
Make it IE6 compatible.
Show them how every other browser now produces a different/unwanted result.
Fix it (with heavy workarounds) so that it now looks "ok" in most of the browsers.
Tell them that you will have to put this effort into ALL of your components/features and that they will have much higer production costs.
Make sure to point out, that this would even happen if you would just compare IE6 to IE7. They may not ever switch to Safari.
What I have gone with an been successful with is the following.
IE 6 is an application that is almost 8 years old, and as part of this doesn't support current technologies as easily as most others. Creating AJAX enabled rich UI's with IE6 is a very tedious task, and typically requires substantial, browser specific work to accomplish as it carries its own level of "Standards".
In addition to all of this there are security and performance implications.
On the whole topic of IE6, whenever you get to that point of moving IT out of the past, you could use this:
http://code.google.com/p/ie6-upgrade-warning/
http://www.stopie6.org/
make them read it
All the IE6 experts are out of work and enjoying their pension.
It's 8 years old and two versions behind the times. What are people afraid of?
I do work for an unnamed company with 160000 employees where IE6 is the only company approved browser. For me, to suggest they "just switch browsers" is futile, since I realize they have millions of dollars worth of applications now working with IE6, and that to port these apps would cost tens of thousands of dollars and many thousands more in fixing the ported versions. I typically add 5-10% to web development just to address IE6 issues, depending on the interface.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Keep in mind that I'm not looking for a list of current browsers to support, I'm looking for logical ways to make that list, backed by some kind of hard statistics.
Since it's been a while since my last web job, I decided to do this latest site up from scratch. Now I have to decide again what to support in terms of browsers. Certainly I have a list of what I'd like to support, but the decisions that went into that list seem to be a little arbitrary to me. Where can I go to get a reliable picture of browser usage and what seems to be a good point at which to cut off an old version of a browser from support?
Browsers don't die out completely for about a decade. The first thing you must realise is that you will have some visitors that are using a browser you don't support. The question is not which browsers are not dead, but which browsers are worth supporting (the benefit) relative to the work it takes to do so (the cost).
I've never seen browser statistics I'm comfortable recommending, they all seem to be snake oil. A rule of thumb I feel is appropriate is that a browser isn't worth supporting if somebody using that browser is going to regularly run into problems on other websites as well. In other words "stick with what everybody else is supporting". To that end, Yahoo's graded browser support is useful.
Ultimately, the best choice depends on your individual circumstances and will change over time. For instance, 37signals have recently dropped support for Internet Explorer 6 and Facebook are slowly heading in the same direction. This isn't a decision that most organisations can make yet, but give it a year or two and you'll see a lot more organisations follow suit. Right now, it's a bold step that you probably can't justify, but give it time.
Don't fall into the trap of thinking that supporting as many browsers as possible is automatically the best choice - it may be that you are doing your visitors a disservice by wasting time working on compatibility with a browser used by five people when you could be improving the experience for the other million users you have.
Also, it's worth considering that you can "officially" not support a browser. For example, one thing I've done in the past is use JavaScript served only to Internet Explorer 5.5 and below (via a conditional comment), to automatically remove stylesheets, JavaScript and replace images with their alt text. Without those measures, the site would be unreadable due to Internet Explorer's many layout bugs, but with it, the site at least works, even if it's too much work to "support" it.
The easiest way to do it is sign up for Google Analytics and add their tracking code to your site (there are a number of similar services, but Google's one is the best I've found). It gives you detailed statistics as to what browsers people who visit your site use.
Once you have a couple of months data, you can start making decisions as to which browsers you will support. I work for a mainstream web company who want to make our site work for as many users as possible, so we consider any browser with above 0.5% market share to be within our testing matrix. However, other sites may choose to only support and test on major browsers such as IE and Firefox.
As a rough guide, the major browsers you'll see are IE 6 and 7, and Firefox 2 and 3. This should cover well over 90% of your audience so is a good starting point for the first couple of months. Then use your analytics data and make a business decision as to whether the potential revenue (or whatever you're trying to achieve) is worth the additional effort it will take to support other browsers.
Added 2008-09-18:
Admittedly one issue with this method is that if your support for some browser types is so bad that your site is unusable with them then it will potentially skew the statistics as those people will stop coming back, and thus those browsers will appear to have a lower percentage of users.
To determine whether this is happening, you can use Google Analytics' detailed breakdown of behaviour for each browser type and version. This gives you the bounce rate, average time on site, pages per visit, and percent of new visits. If the figures for a given browser type and version are significantly worse than others (i.e. the bounce rate is higher, time on site is lower, pages per visit is lower, or percent of new visits is higher) then it's possible that your site isn't supporting that browser sufficiently well and that you might get more users with it if you had better support.
At this point the figures will still give you a reasonable feeling for how important the browser is (i.e. if it you don't support Google Chrome and it is being shown as 2% of your traffic, then it wouldn't jump to 20% just because you added support) so you can use that browser to see how bad your site is, and make a judgment call as to whether you add support; sometimes this may involve fixing only the worst issues and leaving the site imperfect but usable until the browser gets to a higher percentage of users, or out of beta status.
You could take a look at the way Yahoo! supports browsers at Graded browser support.
The browser is dead when (a) a very small percentage of people use it and (b) you don't care about (selling to? educating? whatever your business is) such a small percentage of people.
Unfortunately, you won't find a good answer to this; even if you found some hard statistics on browser versions for visitors to your website, that almost certainly doesn't tell you what you need to know.
What you need to know isn't "what percent of my visitors use Browser X", it's "what percent of my revenue comes from visitors who use Browser X". That one guy visiting your site using an ancient copy of IE might be the managing director of a big company wanting to buy a site license; the 10k visitors you had last month using Firefox 3 might be college students wanting to plagiarize your documentation for an essay.
Really, you need to know your market - not just the raw browser statistics. If you pay the bills by selling stuff to graphic designers, then rock solid Safari support matters a lot more than if you're in the job of selling Visual Studio plugins. Not helpful, I know!
There are 2 main groups to target. (There are plenty of others though)
Group #1 is browsers that use Webkit (Safari for example), Presto (Opera for example), KHTML (Konqueror for example) or Gecko (Firefox for example). These browsers should all get the same markup, CSS and Javascript code (as they're all in the same group of standard-compliant browsers). Only work around bugs in one of these if you absolutely have to and have the resources to do so. Instead, test in the latest stable versions of each (as you're developing so they can keep each other in check as to what the expected behavior is) and (after checking in the nightlies for the bugs) file bug reports. Again, avoid workarounds for a specific browser if you can. Instead, plan a cross-browser compatible solution from the beginning.
With Group #1, you don't have to worry about older versions much, if it all.
Group #2 is browsers that use Trident (IE for example). Target IE versions you care about and still only workaround the most severe bugs.
Also, don't deny browsers you don't officially support. Let them fend for themselves instead of blocking them (either intentionally or through crappy browser detection).
Also, remember that when looking at market share percentages, try to figure out the numbers they represent so you can see how many millions of potential visitors with that browser there are. 1% or 5% might not seem like a lot, but that could still mean millions.
Most of all, listen to the visitors. If you're getting multiple complaints about a certain browser, look into it if you can. Even if it's for a browser with low market share, if it's a trivial fix, you should just do it.
Ones that are definitely not dead are: IE6 (starting to push it), IE7, IE8, latest Opera 9.x, latest FF 3.x, latest Safari 3.x and others that have about the same capabilities. FF 2.x isn't dead either and is needed for Win9X users (if they don't want to use Opera)
See also this topic
You should use a good UI framework that solves most of the compatibility issues among browsers, like YUI!, jQuery, and so on...
Personaly, I recommend YUI!
Try to answer this locally, consider your audience. For example when I was developing my own Blog Engine, my appeal was mostly to .NET developers. I hope it stands to reason what browser I primarily develop for. From that point I consider the market share and try to ensure a "reasonable" support level for all other browsers. For example even .NET developers occasionally use Firefox, maybe even Opera. Safari and Chrome are possibilities too now. So my current level of support ranks in this order:
It MUST run perfectly in Internet Explorer 7. All features I intended to build are there
It MUST run reasonably in Internet Explorer 6, Firefox 3.0, Opera 9+ and Safari for Windows, not everything has to be flawless, but it can't look downright ugly either
Everything else I don't care about. I just don't have the time and willing effort to support everything.
How do I determine whether or not I want to even consider supporting another browser or continuing supporting one of the above browsers any more? Simply I look at the market share and the statistics of who is hitting my page. If someone is dying, or I just haven't seen them in awhile, then I consider support dropped.
So in short, I would simply make a statement to yourself about the browsers that must run your code perfectly then reasonably and update periodically as the browser world changes. For the first run of your website, just think about your audience, for subsequent updates, your statistics should tell you enough.
My (very poor) solution was to get stats from w3schools and base my decisions on that. While those numbers aren't really terrible, they are skewed because viewers of that site are more likely to be upgrade-conscious. Also, it doesn't give a breakdown of any browser versions except FF.
If you purely build to standards, some browser won't render correctly since no browser supports all standards. You have to pick a few browsers and test your site in those.
Don't try to be too bleeding edge. If you must use some cutting edge CSS, then you have to expect it not to work 100% of the time.
What are you really going to do with the list? Are you planning to block browsers you don't support? What if the user hacks the User-Agent response?
Like others, I would strongly suggest going with something like Yahoo's "Graded Browsers" and, if possible, leveraging YUI or other libraries so you don't have to do it yourself.
<1% market share isn't a criteria - esp if the browser is new.
For me, < IE6 is dead, and the HTML monkeys I work with WISH it was dead. < FF2 is dead. Opera is a nice to have. < Safari 2 is dead, tho most are designing for Saf 3 now.
So it's:
IE6,7,8
FF 2,3
Saf 3,4
Chrome (which is basicly Saf4)
But depending on your app, and how many people you think you are going to get wih hold machines, you COULD drop IE6, which would make your life so much easier.
I would say IE6 and below are dead... but many are still stuck using it.
This site has a nice live listing of each browser and its actual age.
http://webbugtrack.blogspot.com/2008/08/browser-life-statuses.html
I'd go with the http://browser-update.org/ defaults, which currently say the following are dead:
IE <= 6
FF <= 2.0
Op <= 10.01
Sf <= 2.0
My opinion (has always been) build it to the standards and leave it to the browsers to render it correctly.
Start with the browser with the highest market share and work your way down from there.
If you have existing metrics on browsers that visit your site, use those instead of the general market share.
Whichever has < 1% market share.
I agree with Unkwntech.
You should try to make the website compatible to both IE and Firefox
It's simple - most users keep using the browser that came with the PC when they bought it (think of your mom). The browser is dead when the machines that it pre-installed with are not longer used for Internet access... which is probably around 5 years. As prices of new PC's drops and they become more of a consumer electronics item then this period will drop as people will easily buy a new PC