Re: [rtcweb] Browser update rates
Wolfgang Beck <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.com> Fri, 21 October 2011 16:04 UTC
Return-Path: <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BF41F0C7A for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:04:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1biENk+xbV+W for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:04:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F791F0C76 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:04:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gyh20 with SMTP id 20so4820392gyh.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=KP54qKkVMJ/cxQVLrLEX/CWpHiPpnOfUbih26OQJQWM=; b=QK8erkkS4CcM6ZvWHI6JxjQzESBzQ3Tb2TAD4U99d+2ZYTiDbKIf0ADXKW+hTHmGLN b2hFirpBImX5igd72Dt2a7PKHO6JmjMc1XaTqjdkH/MIyRCOo3qodnA9UE/U3x/LtJEM zGxPukZ0/UNmkp+rIzu/+cHl1ZoRlPjXtc4xY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.9.2 with SMTP id v2mr28727149pba.101.1319213057599; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.55.230 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4EA195B1.4010705@alvestrand.no>
References: <4EA195B1.4010705@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 18:04:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAJUQMi-v1EXU0vU+a+amaeeYdsQiFhfcLGWBRjghO5sxfKpmw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wolfgang Beck <wolfgang.beck01@googlemail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Browser update rates
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:04:19 -0000
The differences in adoption rate between IE and Chrome are interesting. On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote: > I found this webpage. No idea of how authoritative it is. > > http://www.netmagazine.com/features/developers-guide-browser-adoption-rates > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb >
- [rtcweb] Browser update rates Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Browser update rates Wolfgang Beck
- Re: [rtcweb] Browser update rates Hadriel Kaplan