iOS Passes Linux to Become Third-Most Popular Internet Browsing Platform

[KnightWRX]

I disagree with you. Are you trying to state that Linux is mainstream? What markets? Certainly not with consumers. And certainly not with corporations. Windows dominates corporate Servers and End User machines. Unix would be 2nd place for corporate servers. Linux would be 3rd place.

I'm sorry to say you have absolutely no clue. In my company, it's Linux 1st, Windows 2nd, Big-Iron Unix 3rd as far as corporate servers go. And the only reason for that is that we need regional file&print servers for performance and backbone bandwidth concerns, which drives up the Windows box count higher than we like.

Linux is very big in the enterprise, it's being pushed by the likes of Oracle, IBM, Novell, HP and other big industry names. It is very much "mainstream". Not to mention all the Internet infrastructure that runs on top of Linux (think DNS, e-mail and Web) is some of the highest percentages out there.

Then you have appliances/embedded, which is more and more owned by Linux as vxWorks is losing massive ground... Heck some TVs nowadays run an embedded OS and guess which one made its way there ? That's right Linux. This segment is probably where most folks get their use of Linux, and I'd wager a large portion of the population uses Linux without even knowing thanks to these appliances/embedded devices.

All in all, a big misinformed comment on your part there. About the only market Linux isn't big in is desktops, which makes this whole "iOS surpasses Linux for web browsing!" article a big non-news.

 

[petvas]

so Apple controls 2nd and 3rd place. Time for iOS and Mac OS to take on Windows!

Well, you can see it that way if you really want to. Microsoft controls more than 90% of the market and there are no signs that this will change any time soon. Even with the iPad I don't see Microsoft severely losing market share.

 

[inkswamp]

And become the top target for malware writers? No thanks!

Click the link in my sig. I wrote it 2-and-a-half years ago and was told by people back then that the Mac's freedom from viruses wouldn't last much longer.

Refute every argument in that article and then you can worry about Macs becoming the top target for malware.

 

[inkswamp]

Finally I would not expect to see the Android numbers this low for very long. IOS has had a couple of years head start against Android but Android has surged ahead of iPhone this year and I expect it to continue to do so. Like Android or not the fact is there are 10x more Android devices and multiple carriers out there and after a year or two of sales I expect Android to surge past IOS.

I suspect Android's growth rate has been greatly exaggerated (and the stats in this article don't contradict that) but let's assume Android really is selling fast....

According to the customer surveys we've seen in the last few months, a full 25% of Android users are planning to buy something other than Android for their next phone whereas only 6% of iPhone owners are planning to jump ship. It seems that Android buyers lose a lot of enthusiasm for the platform once they're using it day-to-day. My wife has an Android phone and, while it's not terrible, she's constantly getting annoyed with it and has already decided she would jump to an iPhone if Verizon gets it.

I don't hate Android nor do I want it to go away, but I think speculation about its future success is misguided. It just had its "honeymoon" with consumers and as that comes to an end, I think we'll see its growth rate slowing considerably.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

*Yawn*

Your experience must be a couple of years old. Download Ubuntu 10.04, burn it on CD and then boot that CD on your Mac and see that magically everything "just works" - faster and more stable than Snow Leopard.

Installing and running Ubuntu Linux on COMPATIBLE hardware has become as painless as installing and running Mac OS X on COMPATIBLE hardware. And amazingly enough, Apple Macintosh hardware is fully compatible with Ubuntu Linux. It's actually easier to get Linux running on a Mac than it is to install Windows on it.

Yawn back at you. I'm writing on Debian with > 10 years experience running Linux and even greater with NeXT->Apple. No, not everything just works and is faster and more stable than OS X 10.6.

And yes, you do know w/o Debian there is no Ubuntu.

I love Debian as my second platform, but no, OS X is not behind Debian Linux, or it's Desktop Environments [KDE 4.4.5 presently and GNOME 2.30] aren't any where close to OS X for ``it all just works.''

The endless rants between Nvidia's proprietary binary blobs and the Nouveau driver will save us are just one example of a the battle of Xorg [X-Windows] which is a far superior Windowing client/server model than WindowServer. How AMD isn't fast enough with it's open source driver initiative is another humorous waste of time.

One example of a common technology vastly implemented differently and to what extent on Linux vs. OS X:

The lack of system-wide OpenGL 2.x enabled Desktop Environment [KDE 4.4.x/4.5.x and GNOME 3.x are not system-wide OpenGL 2.x enabled, but are 1.4 enabled for compositing of windows and more with plans to move everything to 2.x and eventually 3.x for KDE 4.7 time frame--within 2 years from now. http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2010/07/next-generation-opengl-compositing-in-4-6/ ] will grow even farther apart when OpenGL 3.x is system-wide within OS X when it's OpenGL 3.x compliant.

The average consumer rightfully complains about not having 3.3 or 4.1 OpenGL drivers installed, but don't grasp that Apple is the only vendor for OpenGL that is hardware accelerated system-wide, not just at the game or other application specific level.

As LLVM 2.8 is upon us a much greater rate of switching even in Linux from GCC to LLVM will take place. With Clang 2.8 on the verge of C++ parity and C++0x features almost complete [w/ their own libcxx to replace libstdc++], more and more projects across the industry are porting their applications and platforms to build against LLVM.

Even Debian FreeBSD is happening at a solid pace to offer the latest FreeBSD as an alternative to Linux.

Options are great. In proper context makes them even greater.

Primtime

Is Linux ready for prime time consumer consumption? Yes and No. Does it have the ``just works'' of OS X? No and never will. Does it `almost just work' for a seasoned engineer, developer, multi-systems knowledgeable user? Yes.

Whether it's OS X, Windows or Linux, if you bring into the equation being able to work with developer tools, manage your network beyond point and click by requiring multiple systems with a DMZ, etc., you are no longer a Consumer, but a Professional.

Knowing both systems is a must for a Professional. Those systems are both OS X and Linux.

 

[waloshin]

I thought Android is linux in which Android phones are out selling iPhones, so this graph really doesn't make sense.

 

[RedReplicant]

Windows: 91.3%

MAC OSX: 5%

iOS: 1.1%

Linux: o.85%

Android: 0.2%


just shows that most people still use a Desktop, laptop or netbook to surf the web. I'm not sure what consumer hardware comes with Linux right now, I remember some netbooks with it, but they all windows now.

Add Android to Linux and you get 1.5%

 

[aristotle]

Add Android to Linux and you get 1.5%

I think you mean 1.05%.

 

[sachxn]

Android will easily surpass iOS

I think in the coming weeks (not months) Android will easily surpass iOS in most of the countries and I have a gut feeling that all over the world in coming months.

 

[ktlx]

I'm sorry to say you have absolutely no clue. In my company, it's Linux 1st, Windows 2nd, Big-Iron Unix 3rd as far as corporate servers go. And the only reason for that is that we need regional file&print servers for performance and backbone bandwidth concerns, which drives up the Windows box count higher than we like.

He's hardly clueless. If he's combining the SMB and enterprise markets, Windows Server is #1 by a massive margin. Even if he's only looking at enterprise markets, reports indicate he's still correct if you're looking at revenue dollars. Linux only becomes #2 if you look at units shipped and that's a distant second.

Linux is very big in the enterprise, it's being pushed by the likes of Oracle, IBM, Novell, HP and other big industry names.

Linux is talked about a lot in the enterprise, but push back on HP, IBM and Oracle and *none* would prefer you go with Linux over their proprietary OS. Oracle's services arm recommended Solaris for large database systems even before they purchased Sun. Linux is being pushed by these vendors only as a way to keep the application software in house. If you're running Oracle or DB2 on Windows Servers, then there's a good chance that business has the potential to be lost to SQL Server. If Linux, then it's one less competitor to worry about.

It is very much "mainstream". Not to mention all the Internet infrastructure that runs on top of Linux (think DNS, e-mail and Web) is some of the highest percentages out there.

Again, not true except for Web. The Internet's DNS has *always* been on a variety of hardware and software platforms intentionally to ensure a bug in a particular implementation doesn't bring everything down. SMTP servers have only recently began significant migrations because sendmail scaled better on older proprietary UNIX hardware until only recently. Web, of course, is true because LAMP has been a great stack for years, but primarily in the hobbyist arena. Once you start looking at enterprise portals based on ASP, BEA or WebSphere, then the picture shifts considerably.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Dell Streak Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)

Windows: 91.3%

MAC OSX: 5%

iOS: 1.1%

Linux: o.85%

Android: 0.2%


just shows that most people still use a Desktop, laptop or netbook to surf the web. I'm not sure what consumer hardware comes with Linux right now, I remember some netbooks with it, but they all windows now.

Add Android to Linux and you get 1.5%

And add iOS to OSX and you get 6.1%

 

[nelmat]

And become the top target for malware writers? No thanks!

They're already a top target - what makes you think they aren't? The lack of successful attacks?

 

[skeep5]

and in other news, a lot of people are surfing the web with their phones. has the world gone frickin mad?

 

[notabadname]

Well, you can see it that way if you really want to. Microsoft controls more than 90% of the market and there are no signs that this will change any time soon. Even with the iPad I don't see Microsoft severely losing market share.

Apple doesn't sell the OS to other hardware manufacturers. They are not a software company trying to take Microsoft Windows market share. They are a hardware company that makes the software for their hardware products (including even Final Cut and Logic, etc.). Apple does not market their software as an option to install instead of Windows on an HP or Sony computer product. So how can they be losing in that market. Microsoft, however, is losing market share in markets they actually compete in with Apple. Zune players for one. And they withdrew prior tablet PC offerings, and chose not to release a pending tablet when the iPad was released.

So just because analysts continue to (wrongly) measure Apple's success or lack of, by comparison of market penetration of respective OS's. They are comparing Apple in a race that they are not even running. If Apple provided its OS to Samsung, Motorolla, LG group, HTC Corporation among others and was now losing share to Android or Microsoft on those same platforms, then the comparison be statistically relevant. Comparison of Microsoft market share versus iOS 4 is really not very relevant. Apple is not in a license race to distribute its software to take market share from Microsoft, or Google. Apple is in a race they are winning to sell more MP3 players, and more Tablet style computers than anyone else. Microsoft is losing the race against Apple in every race that Apple is actually running in.

 

[nelmat]

While it may be nice to see a larger "marketshare" of iOS Devices on the Internet one should realy consider the consequences of this. On the pro side there will be a lot more sites being optimized iOS but so will be malicious sites.

If the comparison of OS X and Windows has shown anything it's that malware, viruses and the likes will most likely be targeting the larger players on the field... so I am pretty happy with the way things are now.

Again with this - do you think that there apple is not a target for malware because it has a "small" marketshare? Apple is a huge target, they might as well paint a target on Steve Job's ass. People are trying, people are failing...

 

[Malithion]

Lots and lots of people browsing using IOS, Lots of people not seeing Flash ads. Thats what I see here and I like it.

 

[KnightWRX]

He's hardly clueless.

He called Linux "not mainstream, even in enterprise". I'd say he's pretty clueless if he really believes that, your post doesn't even contradict me on that.

And DNS is not just ccTLDs, gTLDs or Roots. There are a lot of hosting services out there that host authoritative DNS servers on Linux using BIND. I know I did for a while there back in 2003-2004. Same for e-mail, and seriously, the industry moved past sendmail a decade ago . Postfix is probably the #1 SMTP platform out there now, which is what I used from 2003-onward. When working at the local cable co 10 years ago, sendmail was already old news and classified a big risk. We had switched to SIMS then, which got renamed to iPlanet.

The percentages are very high, and the big portal names you drop as far as Web go are few and far between. Even SMB sector uses Linux, because those tend to go for outside hosting services that are on the cheap for their Internet infrastructure (DNS, e-mail, Web) and most of those providers don't even dare look at HP Integrity or Sun platforms or even IBM POWER stuff. Beige boxes or Dells with Linux is what rules that industry. Intranet File&print and Directory/Mail services ? I won't argue MS rules there.

 

[ericinboston]

He's hardly clueless. If he's combining the SMB and enterprise markets, Windows Server is #1 by a massive margin. Even if he's only looking at enterprise markets, reports indicate he's still correct if you're looking at revenue dollars. Linux only becomes #2 if you look at units shipped and that's a distant second.


Linux is talked about a lot in the enterprise, but push back on HP, IBM and Oracle and *none* would prefer you go with Linux over their proprietary OS. Oracle's services arm recommended Solaris for large database systems even before they purchased Sun. Linux is being pushed by these vendors only as a way to keep the application software in house. If you're running Oracle or DB2 on Windows Servers, then there's a good chance that business has the potential to be lost to SQL Server. If Linux, then it's one less competitor to worry about.


Again, not true except for Web. The Internet's DNS has *always* been on a variety of hardware and software platforms intentionally to ensure a bug in a particular implementation doesn't bring everything down. SMTP servers have only recently began significant migrations because sendmail scaled better on older proprietary UNIX hardware until only recently. Web, of course, is true because LAMP has been a great stack for years, but primarily in the hobbyist arena. Once you start looking at enterprise portals based on ASP, BEA or WebSphere, then the picture shifts considerably.

KTLX basically beat me to the punch.

Look...I'm not saying Linux sucks...nor am I saying it is non-existent. Appending to KTLX's comments are some more of mine:

-Sure, Linux may be "in" your IT center somewhere...but as mission critical app servers? No way is that mainstream. Still Windows and Unix. Does it exist in Linux SOMEWHERE in this world? I'm sure...and I'm sure it's for a <100 employee company and/or for companies who have some kind of underlying Linux love (maybe a software firm).

-Linux is open source...which means companies have to have the warm and fuzzy feeling that when something goes wrong, they can call "Support" and get an answer and fix within hours...not days or weeks...or waiting for some "developer" to get back to them. I work in a gigantic company and my role is Enterprise software sales...to SMB and larger sizes spanning all industries (mostly non-government) and have numerous peers in other companies who are CIO/CTO level. Linux is great on paper...dirt cheap and all that fun stuff. But when your multi-million/billion dollar business is riding on what happens when the Server dies after the latest patch, you've got to think REALLY seriously about your SLA (Service Level Agreement). Are you going to put your butt on the line to be fired Mr. CTO? Doubt it.

-Infrastructure. IT organizations are not fond of having lots of "platforms" to support...both in terms of hiring/paying employees to maintain the system as well as too many vendors with SLAs as well as too many "integration points". It's all risk. Most companies (I mean like 80%) will standardize on 1-2 OS platforms for mission critical stuff and possibly add a 3rd for someone's pet project or intranet web server or file server, etc. There are typically "Windows shops" and "Unix shops" in this world. "Linux shop" is a term that is extremely rarely heard...if ever. Higher Ed is probably the only place I've ever seen Linux in any kind of rollout of more than 4 servers...because Higher Ed places are penny-pinching cheapos...and because Higher Ed has all the technical resources (many free...thank you Mr. Student) of the university to work on the stuff 24x7. Higher Ed isn't going to lose $1 million/hour when their email system goes down...or when their Alumni website is offline. Private sector places will...imagine a company not being able to access email for 4-8 hours...or their website goes down for a few hours...or their Seibel system is down...or their Partner Portal is down. That's serious, serious money we're talking about in lost sales as well as employee/partner productivity.


Again, I'm not bashing Linux...I'm simply stating that it is no where NEAR mainstream as some on this forum promote. Call me in 10-15 years.

-Eric

 

[KnightWRX]

KTLX basically beat me to the punch.

Look...I'm not saying Linux sucks...nor am I saying it is non-existent. Appending to KTLX's comments are some more of mine:

-Sure, Linux may be "in" your IT center somewhere...but as mission critical app servers? No way is that mainstream. Still Windows and Unix. Does it exist in Linux SOMEWHERE in this world? I'm sure...and I'm sure it's for a <100 employee company and/or for companies who have some kind of underlying Linux love (maybe a software firm).

We have 22,000 employees. Linux is used for our front facing e-commerce solutions and for some of our critical Intranet applications. Mission Critical in some cases.

This is not just my firm. To pretend this is not mainstream is blatantly ignoring the market and not really knowing what goes on in the Data centers.

-Linux is open source...which means companies have to have the warm and fuzzy feeling that when something goes wrong, they can call "Support" and get an answer and fix within hours...not days or weeks...or waiting for some "developer" to get back to them.

Uh, we have SLAs with our vendors that covers all that. You think we're running this stuff off of Gentoo ? Again, big industry names are behind Linux, with fast turn-around. We get the same level of support for our Linux problems that we do for our HP-UX problems, and I've been in contact with several kernel devs paid by the vendors on both sides for issues with system panics or memory leaks and received patches to push to production systems according to our SLAs from them in record time.

This more than anything shows that you do not know what you are talking about when it comes to Linux. This isn't 1996 when Redhat was about the only game in town and their support services were more in tune with a hippie gathering than an actual vendor. Things have changed massively.

I work in a gigantic company and my role is Enterprise software sales...

And there is the reason why you should be ignored. You're simply repeating your manufactured scripts. Sales people. Yeah, listen to them, they know what goes on in the Data Center.

"Yeah, our backup solution will work fine on your systems!" during sales pitch.

becomes

"Uh, their backup solution works on an EOL'ed version of the OS and won't even install on the current supported version. We either have the choice of installing it on the EOL'ed version which has a massive kernel memory leak that is forcing us to reboot every week or not having systems backup at all".

True story lived a short while ago. (If you need to know, the vendor is still working on trying to live up to his promises and ship us a version of his crap that will run on the current supported version of the OS).

Again, I'm not bashing Linux...I'm simply stating that it is no where NEAR mainstream as some on this forum promote. Call me in 10-15 years.

I use it everyday. My ex-collegues who work at financial institutions use it everyday. My GF who is a programmer for one of the biggest firms in Montreal uses it everyday. Linux has been corporate mainstream for a decade now. You're late to the party with your broken sales pitch.

 

[marksman]

The tiny Android share compared to number of phones sold is interesting.

I suspect it mostly has to do with people treating android phones like typical cell phones and not necessarily utilizing all the features/benefits.

Also when carriers are giving them away, buy one get 5 free or whatever deals they offer... People just take them... They may have no real interest in browsing the web.

People who buy an iPhone are more likely to understand what it is, what they are getting and what they can do with it. For a lot of Android owners, I suspect they think it is just a phone.

Of course if you take in account all the IOS devices, there are a lot more of them out there than Android devices, so maybe I am wrong. Not 600% more... but a bit more.

 

[parapup]

Look...I'm not saying Linux sucks...nor am I saying it is non-existent. Appending to KTLX's comments are some more of mine:

-Sure, Linux may be "in" your IT center somewhere...but as mission critical app servers? No way is that mainstream. Still Windows and Unix. Does it exist in Linux SOMEWHERE in this world? I'm sure...and I'm sure it's for a <100 employee company and/or for companies who have some kind of underlying Linux love (maybe a software firm).

The latest IDC numbers show that in the first quarter of 2010 in terms of units sold, Windows had a 75.3% market share, (1,379,487 units) compared to 20.8% for Linux (380,429 units) and 3.6% (65,451 units) for Unix.

Also RedHat, Novell are Linux companies providing enterprise grade support for mission critical applications.

Amazon.com, various big time financial institutions and trading companies, NYSE etc. all run Linux - for mission critical stuff. IOW you sounded like you were talking from 1999.

 

[ericinboston]

Uh, we have SLAs with our vendors that covers all that. You think we're running this stuff off of Gentoo ? Again, big industry names are behind Linux, with fast turn-around. We get the same level of support for our Linux problems that we do for our HP-UX problems, and I've been in contact with several kernel devs paid by the vendors on both sides for issues with system panics or memory leaks and received patches to push to production systems according to our SLAs from them in record time.

This more than anything shows that you do not know what you are talking about when it comes to Linux. This isn't 1996 when Redhat was about the only game in town and their support services were more in tune with a hippie gathering than an actual vendor. Things have changed massively.

1)Looks like you can't have a normal conversation/debate with someone without the constant insults. How many times now have you told me that I am clueless or not know what I am talking about? Give yourself a round of applause for looking so immature.

2)Just because YOUR employer may have Linux deployed...and deployed in mission critical apps doesn't mean THE WORLD follows suit. And I mentioned that. My idea of "mainstream" is like 40% or more servers deployed in a given IT shop. And I really don't count (but if you want to, fine) a Linux box sitting in the IT Shop as a development server because some guy in Cubicle A3 wants a Linux box for testing. But I'm not going to write a book on this entire thread/topic.

3)You are correct...it is no longer 1996 or even 2001...the Linux community is IN THE PROCESS of getting real-world SLAs together...and listening to the business community ABOUT ALL MY POINTS OF RISK. And from you inference, yes, there are like 900 flavors of Linux. How many do you think there are of Windows? What about Unix. Yea. Lovely. Now the companies have to research those 900 flavors and choose one.


Your company embraces Linux. Fine. Great. It's 2010 and SLOWLY companies are embracing Linux. This thread/topic has been more than just about the year 2010.

If Linux is mainstream in the business world, as you claim it to be, then it would have been mainstream for at least the past 6-12 months. If that were the case, every human on the face of this planet would have been reading all sorts of news headlines in every magazine that relates to business (Newsweek, Time, Fortune, CIO, etc) stating how Linux is mainstream and Microsoft is freaking out and how MS has lost 30% marketshare and 45% stock value. Have you heard of those Microsoft headlines? Yea, neither have I. And neither has the world.

-Eric

 

[jz1492]

(...the sound of linux fanboys releasing an onslaught of web-surfing bots...)

The post from an apple fanboi posting stupid accusations

Yep, I agree, as an accusation that'd be stupid, I mean, making jokes at the expense of other people isn't funny.

Even though it evidently was meant as a joke, the possibilities are there for hackers on any platform to actually do it --a botnet instructed to perform a light DOS attack on a section of the 40,000 web sites used by Net Applications would render their data useless. And the botnet doesn't have to be on linux machines ftm.

Lighten up! We love the underdog

 

[swagi]

'Mozilla/5.0 (SymbianOS/9.2; U; Series60/3.1 NokiaE71-1/500.21.009; Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 ) AppleWebKit'

That's the UA from an E71 using Nokia's browser, based on Webkit. I'm pretty sure NetApplications would be able to work out the difference between that and Safari.

Speaking of which I noticed Android is below Symbian and way below JavaME which kind of shows the lack or relevance Android has in the mobile market.

Just found on the next page:
"Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Dell Streak Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)"

You cut out the bit about Mobile Safari or is it really not showing? I mean, I remember my phone had the "Mobile Safari" moniker in it when posting.

But rethinking about your post: Yes, it really dazzles me that Symbian is still that prevalent in the mobile stats. I always thought Symbian has gone the way of the Dodo since Android evolved.

And I also think it has an awful lot to do with the structure of mobile contracts. I really had to look hard to find a rather convincing contract with good bang for the buck that bundles unlimited data in Germany. I don't know about the US. But I guess it really depends on the contracts.

To put a long post short: I think we can agree on the fact that Android phones seem to have a much lower prevalence than we expected by the sales data.

But I personally attribute this to the fact that most nerdy Android users rather use their netbooks to go online - which then would result in Windows being counted.

 

[blackcrayon]

can you elaborate on this please? Exactly what makes the browsing experience on android so inferior to the iPhone. I thought the scrolling and multi-touch gestures with the chrome browser would put it on par with the iPhones.

I have every generation of iPhone, and the Motorola Droid 1 (I know, it's not the fastest Android phone, but it is newer than the 3GS, less than a year old, and it is running Froyo). For me, web browsing is a better experience on the iPhone 3GS or even 3G for a couple of reasons. One, scrolling on the Droid is extremely choppy. To the point where it's frustrating sometimes navigating around a page without over shooting the target, etc. I'm sure that's much improved on the newer faster Android phones but again, it's slower than an iPhone 3G running iOS 4. The other thing for me is tap to zoom. When you tap to zoom on an iPhone, it zooms and centers on the element. An image for example. Or a block of text. Froyo doesn't seem to do that. It zooms in on where you tapped, but if that's on an image, the image is usually cut off from the screen, so then you have to manually position and pinch to zoom/unzoom to see it. Then when you zoom back out, it sortof snaps back to a different part of the page. iOS smoothly zooms back out to where you were before you zoomed. Thus i find it harder to browse on the Droid using just 1 hand.

Not *major* screaming issues, but they happen to be things I do a lot and I just find them better on the iPhone (granted the Droid screen is much better than pre iPhone 4, but the general choppiness makes it worse overall for me)...