Google Chrome: The Fast Browser With Slow Adoption | Hacker News Reader

Google Chrome: The Fast Browser With Slow Adoption

pcworld.com

11 pointskakooljay29 comments

I don't think Google's primary goal here is to have the largest market share in the browser market but to be able to drive innovation in the other leading browsers through competition.

Google Chrome drove Firefox (and others) to improve the speed of their javascript engines/interpreters which is hugely beneficial for Google meaning their web apps now run faster across the board.

In my opinion, Google Chrome exists to help Google push other browsers to introduce new features that make their web applications more accessible to everyone else.

That's why they have television commercials for chrome?

If they wanted to make the web better, why didn't they just contribute to the Firefox project itself rather than inventing their own browser?

Releasing, yet another browser only complicates things for existing web developers.

Well the other browsers aren't going to make their product better if no one knows of anything better hence the tv commercials.

They didn't contribute to Firefox instead of inventing their own browser because if they have a browser of their own their contributions and improvements don't have to be approved (or denied) by a 3rd party.

Chrome also does not make things more complicated for existing web developers as it is based of webkit so it renders pages very similarly to Safari.

I hear this all the time and as the builder of multiple AJAX web applications I know for a fact that it does not behave the same way Safari behaves.

To be fair to Google, they tried to contribute to Firefox back in the Firefox 1.x timeframe, but they realized that Mozilla is rather dysfunctional open source project. It is incredibly hard to get feature work into Mozilla as an outsider, so they decided to go their own way. In a way they got what they wanted in the end, now with Mozilla copying stuff from Chrome wholesale now that someone else has made them look bad.

The main things holding Chrome back adoption-wise is a stable Mac version, and extension hooks to support popular functionality like AdBlock and Noscript. With those you'll start seeing geeks and tech influencers switch, which will probably start eating at Firefox's market share. It's a testament to the power of Google's brand that it's got as much market share right now as it does, which is mainly at the expense of IE.

I am a mac user (primarily) and I find this funny. How is Mac version holding back Chrome in terms of adoption when mac represents roughly 9-10% OS market?

Chrome already supports extensions, Adsweep works on Chrome as an alternative of ABplus. Noscript is used by a very small niche users, I seriously doubt noscript users are holding Chrome back on mass adoption.

I think switching browser is always a difficult choice for non tech savvy users. Personally it was a hard choice for me 4-5 years ago to leave IE for FF, but it was easier for me to make the switch to Chrome after I used it and liked it. I think my view towards a browser changed over the last 4-5 years and I see a "browser" as a tool as opposed to a gateway to the internet. I think most of the early adopters of Chrome are fairly tech savvy users and for chrome to be really mainstream they need to push chrome bundled with new computers (I think they already do that).

Chrome is awesome and it can only get better. I hope Google Chrome OS will be just as good.

> How is Mac version holding back Chrome in terms of adoption when mac represents roughly 9-10% OS market?

Because Mac usage among early adopters and other tech influencers is a much higher percentage, and they're the ones who recommend software to use to the less savvy. That's how Firefox's marketshare got its initial big boost.

> Noscript is used by a very small niche users

Again, Noscript usage incidence is higher among that same market.

> I think most of the early adopters of Chrome are fairly tech savvy users

Most alpha geeks I know (including myself) use Firefox as their primary browser rather than Chrome, mainly because it's not quite there on Mac/Linux, and/or favorite extensions don't exist. Nearly all Chrome users I know are Windows users, and don't care about extensions, and like the perceived speed compared to other browsers. Nearly all alpha geeks I know use Chrome on Windows, when they have to use Windows, which isn't very often.

Get more of those alpha geeks using Chrome as their primary, more recommendations trickle down to their less geeky friends. That's what happened with Firefox, and that's what will happen with Chrome once a stable Mac port and support for the popular extensions show up.

A more impressive example: Chrome's multiple-process rendering system has spurred Mozilla to work on a similar system to Firefox - and not just copying the idea, but wholesale importing code from Chromium:

    https://wiki.mozilla.org/Content_Processes

Ah, very interesting. Didn't think of this in relation to my point above but it explains why Chrome is open-source too.

Mozilla was working on an updated Javascript engine before Chrome was announced (actually, accidentally leaked via comic book). Chrome certainly lit a fire under Firefox and Safari to release their updated Javascript engines, but their implementations were in the pipeline before anyone formally knew about Chrome.

4% market share in a year seems pretty impressive to me. The last major browser to launch, Safari, had about 2% market share two years after its release. Three years after that it was at 6% (depending on where you look). In another year, Chrome will probably have a significant lead on Safari, which will be 7 years old. Never mind Opera.

"To date, Chrome really hasn't had the success that I suspect Google had anticipated for it," said Sheri McLeish, a Forrester analyst.

What sort of comment is that? One could create a quote like that about virtually anything in the world.

The article as a whole seems pretty bad. Looks like the author was looking for a reality to support his thesis...

Is the reason people get away with saying "There's no chrome for mac or linux" that chrome doesn't exist on those platforms but chromium does? I've been using chrome (or chromium, whatever) on linux for about 2.5 months and it's great. I use it on my macbook too and it's also really good. So what gives?

There's no non-developer release yet, and the browser isn't feature-complete on non-Windows platforms. For example, on Ubuntu I can't open links from other programs with Chrome, and asking it to restore tabs when opening the browser doesn't work.

I'm sure once they make official versions the situation will change, I've been happy having it as my secondary browser on all three platforms despite the hiccups.

I'm posting this from Chrome on the Mac. It works well enough to use for daily use. There're still some glitches, but in general I've found it better than Safari or Firefox (both of which I also have installed...web developers need everything).

I've found Chrome for Mac pretty stable so far, too - but this is my showstopper.

Any time Calibri is requested in text, it displays like this: http://u.phoreo.com/jy.png

The font works fine everywhere else, so I'm not sure what's up. Do you have this problem?

The site in your screenshot works fine for me. I can't tell whether that's because it's working or because Calibri's not installed. I'm using Chrome 4.0.223.11 (wtf is up with those version numbers) on a recent (~3 month old) stock Macbook Pro.

Yeah that's a good point. I guess they do make it a little hard to find because they don't want the masses getting hold of it. And I hadn't realized that about the opening links from other programs in Ubuntu, but now that you mention it you are right.

In Ubuntu 9.04, go to System->Preferences->Preferred Applications, and select Chromium. I'm using the chromium-daily PPA (https://launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa), and links from other apps work fine.

It's like Silverlight. Initially people were like "oh flash is already on 99% of computers" but failed to realize the fact that 99% (not really, but close enough) of computers come with Windows, and Microsoft controls Windows. Microsoft, when ready, can easily get people to use it.

And with Google, all it has to do is slap that browser on its front page if it really wanted the average user to switch.

Obviously Google chrome still has some kinks, so they won't want the average user to switch just yet (assuming that's even their goal).

I am waiting/hoping for NoScript-like functionality...

I want AdBlock and Greasemonkey. Once those things work properly on Chrome, I'll switch happily.

(If they already work, and I just missed the news, please tell me.)

Ask and ye shall receive -

Here's AdBlock (Adsweep): http://adsweep.org/

Here's Greasemonkey (Greasemetal): http://www.mychromeaddons.com/chrome-addon-greasemetal-greas...

The Greasemonkey clone has a lot of people warning of crashes when they installed it, so I think I'll hold off for another month or so. Still, I'm impressed that Chrome is this close. Thanks for the links!

AdBlock+ found here: http://www.chromeextensions.org/appearance-functioning/adblo...

First you need to update to the 4.0+ Dev Build: http://www.google.com/chrome/eula.html?extra=devchannel

if you want FlashBlock: http://www.chromeextensions.org/appearance-functioning/flash...

Both AdBlock Plus & FlashBlock work flawlessly in Google Chrome/Chromium for me

I had this wierd thing where I'd flip to Chrome, and it'd draw its screen line by line, like a broken Amiga. I switched to Firefox after that. [I was using Chrome because of wanting to use Google Wave).

I don't use Google Chrome because they haven't made an official version for Mac OS X. The current developer version for Mac OS X is very buggy and unreliable.

I have to disagree. I've been using it full time for a week and it hasn't crashed yet. It's faster than Safari, and it's open source. It has some UI quirks still, but on the whole it's a great browser.

relax. browser market share is about branding and building those takes time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com