_That's_ why they "won" not because of fucking adverts.
Given that Opera was basically "Chrome without Google marketing" I heavily doubt that. (The first version of Chrome was such a blatant Opera clone, it was just funny)
Chrome did.
Most of the people who argue things like this seem to agree that Firefox and Opera were superior browsers to IE. If that was the case, why hadn't they eaten IE's market share long before Chrome was ever produced?
Could it be that Chrome being widely advertised on the most visited site on the internet helped?
Chrome didn't beat IE. Firefox fought an all-out war and was not going anywhere either. What beat IE is an antitrust lawsuit actually.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
It is true, however, that chrome came at about the right time to capture a large share of its users (as well as a good share of FF users).
You seem to have messed up the timeline, or disregard the importance of being the first alternative to IE spread by word of mouth in the public.
No idea why. Chrome seems to cope fine so I just use it for that. Since I want my stream in a separate window on my other screen anyway it works out pretty well.
Despite that, Firefox still leads in market share in Germany (though with current trends that will change this year).
IDK if that caused it to grow to become the biggest browser, but it sold it for me.
I know this sounds like RMS but with a problem the size of Google, then things gets political.
Similarly, Opera. People will still tell you with absolute confidence that Opera is terrible compared to Chrome. It's been a Chrome-clone since 2013. You'd think people would fact-check their opinions somewhen within almost 4 years, but unfortunately they don't.
Since it is not as visible as responsiveness, it is useful to have these discussions so people can decide what really is the "best" browser to them with full knowledge.
This is where regulation is supposed to come into play.
Microsoft was not broken down or fined to oblivion, but they did change their behavior a lot when they started hitting regulatory boundaries. Internet Explorer was practically put into maintenance mode for many years when it became clear that Microsoft would not be allowed to own the web like they owned the PC.
We cannot know the outcome of an alternative history where Microsoft was given free hand to leverage the stranglehold on the web a fully enforced Internet Explorer (e.g. enforced like Safari in iOS?) could have developed. For all we know the outcome might even be Microsoft driven phones in every pocket, with everybody else unable to innovate on their own because they would be completely preoccupied with chasing compatibility with an ever-changing "Microsoft Html".
You can't do shit these days without having to deal with Apple's ridiculously selfish and tyrannical business model or Google's all-knowing, ever watchful gaze.
Worse in which regard?
> You can't do shit these days without having to deal with Apple's ridiculously selfish and tyrannical business model
Actually I do shit every day these days without coming into contact with Apple's selfish and tyrannical business model. So do millions of other people. iOS developer is a choice, not a sentence. If you don't like it, don't do it. There are tons of other things to do.
Their respective business models?
> Actually I do shit every day...
OK, but we're on HN and we're talking about building software and/or webpages... So let me rephrase - you can't make software and/or a webpage without having to deal with Apple and Google in some way. You're either going to have to put it in the app store and do some advertising with Google or you're going to have to make that webpage work with crappy Safari or make it AMP compliant or something else in order to get ahead. Of course you don't HAVE to do that stuff, but then you'll just get left behind. Seeya!
I was expecting some details about why these business models are far, far worse.
> So let me rephrase - you can't make software and/or a webpage without having to deal with Apple and Google in some way.
If you exclude extra-vague words "is some way", yes you can. Of corse, you'd come into contact with software made by these companies from time to time, but that software would be just like any other you use, regardless of their business model.
> You're either going to have to put it in the app store
No I don't. I've been gainfully employed as a software developer for more than 2 decades now and never put anything in any app store.
> you're going to have to make that webpage work with crappy Safari
I've not have to deal with browser compat issues for many years now, but if they exist I'm pretty sure that a) there are toolkits to deal with them, and b) that has nothing to do with business model, every browser has its quirks, including Firefox (in fact, last 2 times I had to deal with browser compat issues the Firefox was the problem and it worked fine in Chrome and Safari - of course, nobody cared about IE).
Pretty sure I mentioned those in my initial complaint.
> If you exclude extra-vague words...
OK, is "the only search engine that matters" too vague? How about "the only app store that makes money"?
If you just want to build some software, then fine: you don't have to deal with Apple or Google if you don't want to. If you want to be successful and make money though? You're going to have to deal with one of them whether you like it or not.
At the very least, you need Google to search and you need Google to help people find your product. Good luck getting customers if Google removes your pages from their results.
I think we've seen throughout societal history that if you want to affect change you have to do it through the path of least resistance for consumers; this means creating a better browser experience that people use not because they want to revolt, but because they gain utility from doing so.
Even on desktop, I prefer Firefox (although mostly due to higher familiarity with it). Does Chrome really have some killer feature that I'm not seeing? I can't seem to figure out where exactly Firefox lacks.