Every one of them, best first

How to read these figures

The colour says what a bar IS, not how it scores: the accent is the one this page is about, grey is everything it is compared with, and the hollow bar is the web overall — the ruler, not a rival. Whether a figure is above or below the rest of the web is in the number and in the arrow beside it.

Every figure here comes from a sample, not from counting every site — so it carries a margin: how much it could move if we had happened to sample different pages. A figure measured on a thousand pages has a wide margin; one measured on a hundred thousand has a narrow one. It matters for one thing: two figures that differ by less than the wider of their margins are not one above the other, they are tied. That is why nothing here has a position number.

Every technology in this category the census can publish a figure for, including the ones above. A technology is here when it has all four dimensions and enough sample to publish; a technology that belongs to two categories is in both.

TechnologyAWCSMonth by month
FrontPage

FrontPage

Sample
n=123
Coverage
97.6%
Margin
±4.78
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±4.78 are tied, not ranked.

FrontPage scores 19.0%19.0%
—
CodeMirror

CodeMirror

Sample
n=343
Coverage
96.1%
Margin
±2.86
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±2.86 are tied, not ranked.

CodeMirror scores 14.1%14.1%
CodeMirror: 5 months, up▲ +4.7
Microsoft Word

Microsoft Word

Sample
n=121
Coverage
97.6%
Margin
±4.82
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±4.82 are tied, not ranked.

Microsoft Word scores 13.6%13.6%
Microsoft Word: 3 months, no significant change= +4.4
DreamWeaver

DreamWeaver

Sample
n=807
Coverage
97.5%
Margin
±1.87
The web overall
21.0%

Two figures closer together than ±1.87 are tied, not ranked.

DreamWeaver scores 12.4%12.4%
DreamWeaver: 5 months, no significant change= −1.6