×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Chrome Becoming World's Second Most Popular Web Browser

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the now-stop-hijacking-my-middle-click dept.

Chrome 511

redletterdave writes with news that Google Chrome is in the process of surpassing Firefox to become the second most popular web browser. Pinpointing the exact time of the change is difficult, of course, since different analytics firms collect slightly different data. The current crop of media reports were triggered by data from StatCounter, which shows Chrome at 25.69% and Firefox at 25.23% for November. Data from Net Applications shows Firefox still holding a 4% lead, but the trends suggest it will evaporate within a few months.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

511 comments

Yay (0, Offtopic)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238194)

First post with Chrome!

And still... (5, Insightful)

bwintx (813768) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238196)

And still Mozilla doesn't get a clue that some of the recent changes are driving away users. Amazing.

Re:And still... (-1, Redundant)

ThinkDifferently (853608) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238238)

I haven't used Firefox in a long while, so I wouldn't know. They already lost me. Too slow and too unstable.

Re:And still... (4, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238296)

Version 11 is due out next week and is supposed to be faster.

Re:And still... (4, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238574)

Version 11 is due out next week and is supposed to be faster.

Yeah, sure, if you want to use an obsolete version, go ahead, Consumer McSheep. All the cool development work is now being done on version 15... uh, I'm sorry, while I was typing, attention shifted to 17. Ooh, shiny.

Re:And still... (1)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238678)

Version 11 is due out next week and is supposed to be faster.

Yeah, sure, if you want to use an obsolete version, go ahead, Consumer McSheep. All the cool development work is now being done on version 15... uh, I'm sorry, while I was typing, attention shifted to 17. Ooh, shiny.

I use nightly [mozilla.org]. That's right, the version that came out this morning. Every day.

It works pretty well actually, but it means more updates.

Re:And still... (2)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238854)

Well, it does work nicely, albeit a) more slowly than Chrome and b) it tends to crash for stupid reasons (most often while typing up a comment on Facebook; then again, maybe the universe is trying to tell me something).

I do wish Firefox would implement Chrome’s method of auto-updating in the background (thus eliminating the wait at startup) and finally stop one tab or extension from crashing the whole browser.

Re:And still... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238828)

You guys are such hypocrites. When versions aren't released fast enough and you end up with memory leaks for months, you whine. When Mozilla takes a pro-active stance and decides to do faster release to get more stable code out there faster, you whine because .. the browser updates? WHO GIVES A SHIT? It's a number you never see unless you actually look for it, and it gets you a better product in the end. Seriously, what the hell?

Re:And still... (2, Informative)

NSash (711724) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238886)

It matters because when they increment the major version number unnecessarily, it breaks extensions (which are the main reason to use firefox).

Re:And still... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238818)

I heard that about version 10... and 9... and 8. And using any version of FF after Chrome feels like walking through mud and starting fires with a few twigs after the speed and power of Chrome...

Re:And still... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238424)

If you haven't used it for a long while, how do you know it's still slow and unstable?

Re:And still... (5, Interesting)

SomePgmr (2021234) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238802)

There's truth in this.

I use chrome on my windows machines... have for a long time. I was using either chrome or chromium on linux for some time too. But as it turns out, very basic functionality in the linux builds has been broken for as long as I can remember and your patience eventually runs out. For instance, bookmarks have never worked right in Chromium or Chrome. There are something like 20 related bug tracker entries for the same issues and they've never been fixed. And I just can't get by without working bookmarks anymore... they're kinda essential to a decent browser.

So I put firefox back on those machines, and I was impressed that everything just works, and it's plenty fast. I'm sure it's because I've only got two extensions installed but I'm happy with it. Now I'm considering moving the windows machines back.

Either way, you've gotta love having choices.

Re:And still... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238240)

You don't like the hourly updates? You don't deserve such an awesome browser!

Re:And still... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238308)

Actually, Mozilla is updating the browser a lot less often nowadays then they did during 3.X time, don't confuse major version increments to mean progress, the actual development has slowed down.

Re:And still... (1)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238760)

Actually, Mozilla is updating the browser a lot less often nowadays then they did during 3.X time, don't confuse major version increments to mean progress, the actual development has slowed down.

Mozilla marketing actually wanted to drop version numbers altogether.

One of the reasons that open source development works because real developers don't value money above achievement.

Open source marketing. Listen, it's marketing, you're lucky to even get what you pay for.

Re:And still... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238258)

Chrome today is what the early releases of Firefix were: a lean, fast browser with a stripped down UI.
Firefox has become a bloated piece of garbage.

Re:And still... (1)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238272)

The marketshare bleeding seems to have accelerated with the accelerated release schedule.
Who cares about a few new features with each release when the extensions providing much needed functionality break? No to mention explicitly giving the finger to corporate usage.
Ubuntu with Unity and Firefox with this schedule seem to have their head in the sand. Just emulating OS X (in the case of Unity) and Chrome(by Firefox) doesn't make them automatically successful.

This is like a fox(pardon the pun) branding itself with a hot iron to get black stripes to look and become a tiger.

Re:And still... (5, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238276)

And still Mozilla doesn't get a clue that some of the recent changes are driving away users. Amazing.

Every time Chrome gains market share, the Firefox developers think they need to make Firefox more like Chrome, when that's exactly what's driving people away.

Re:And still... (4, Insightful)

Pope (17780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238342)

Every time Chrome gains market share, the Firefox developers think they need to make Firefox more like Chrome, when that's exactly what's driving people away.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Firefox devs' biggest problem is that they're duplicating Chrome's interface without any reflection or realization of why Chrome does things a certain way.

Re:And still... (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238458)

Its just not true that Firefox is losing "market share" (browser users). Just look at the data, Firefox isn't gaining or losing.
I can imagine that the inflow of Firefox users from IE is similar to what it ever was, and that Firefox users are going to Chrome. Surely, there are also IE to Chrome converts, but may be a smaller fraction. It'd be interesting to see a flow analysis like they do after elections.

Re:And still... (5, Insightful)

Millennium (2451) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238460)

Pretty much this. That's not to say that Chrome is bad: it isn't. But Firefox is trying to be Chrome, and no one is ever going to be better at being Chrome better than Chrome itself (except possibly Chromium, but that's something of an academic debate).

In the process, Firefox is rapidly losing its own way. This is a shame, because I found more than a few of Firefox's old ways better than its new ones, or Chrome's for that matter. We're losing choice in the browser market because it's coming down not so much to a choice between Chrome and Firefox as between Chrome and imitation-Chrome, and Chrome will always win that.

tl;dr version - Firefox lost its way when it started imitating other browsers, because it will never be able to beat the originals. It must instead become its own original, as it once was.

Re:And still... (5, Insightful)

cockroach2 (117475) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238550)

Yet the only thing they really need to copy to get me to come back and try Firefox again is to replace the 13-click procedure for broken SSL certificates with a simple pop-up window. As it used to be.

Re:And still... (2)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238770)

Google has funded the mozilla foundation for years, it is likely that they have become tied to them. So it's not FF vs Chrome, it's FF and then Chrome.

Which might explain the problems in FF leadership better than "They went nuts all of a sudden".

FF has the edge with extensions. IE with the OEM installation, Chrome with the speed and google brand.
FF is forfeiting extensions, that's suicide, if we suppose they are completely independent from google. My bet is they are not.

Re:And still... (5, Insightful)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238338)

I think Mozilla is very happy with the stats, because the real news is that the IE usage went down to almost ~50%, and we have today a diversity of browser (engines). Diversity ensures that we don't drive into a dead end, and Mozilla paved the way for alternative browsers, pushing websites away from IE-only design, and making the new technologies we have today possible (CSS, everything beyond HTML4, fast JS) -- although we have to give Microsoft credit for inventing Ajax.

Re:And still... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238346)

And still Mozilla doesn't get a clue that some of the recent changes are driving away users. Amazing.

Somewhere in the bowels of Mozilla:

Dotzler: This is proof that we're doing it right. By ignoring our users' UX and installation preferences long enough, we finally got them to go away!

I Could Be Argued That... (Re:And still...) (1)

EXTomar (78739) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238360)

A problem is that Firefox is adopting a lot of what Chrome is doing including look and feel and release schedule. It would seem to me the more Chrome gains the more the Firefox team wants to make it behave like Chrome but you are fundamentally correct that doing this isn't listening to users.

Re:I Could Be Argued That... (Re:And still...) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238468)

The problem is that if we wanted a browser that's just like Chrome, we'd use Chrome rather than a bad copy.

Re:And still... (2)

markdavis (642305) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238446)

+1000

You hit it right on the head. I have zero interest in Chrome, mostly because I simply don't trust it. Google has WAY too much access to stuff already. At least with Chromium, it is open.

But Chrome/Chromium follow a design that is exactly what I don't want- dumbed down, minimalist, single-user oriented. The more Firefox because like Chrome, the more angry I get.

Re:And still... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238876)

Wow. Chromium. I almost forgot about that thing. I haven't had a good go at it for years - I used to run it back in 2000 when it came out. I just installed it and forgot how much that harked back to the 1970's classic arcade games.

Good stuff, except I wish it would run in higher res. The resolution toggle thing won't go above 1280x960 for some reason.

Re:And still... (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238700)

Chrome deserves some kudos for what it's doing right as well. Their development tools build into the browser are quite good with no need to install extensions. Their javascript engine is also ridiculously fast and their support for the latest standards is quite good. Their security's also arguably the best out there, and they were the first to implement some of the sandboxing features. Even if firefox weren't committing suicide chrome would still be doing quite well because of what they're doing right.

Inevitable. (5, Interesting)

fantazem (466353) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238198)

I think this was inevitable given how much better Chrome is then all the competition. Once Chrome gets the breadth of plugins that Firefox has, it's game over.

Re:Inevitable. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238520)

You don't mean plugins; you mean extensions.

Re:Inevitable. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238804)

Also, once Linux gets the breadth of apps that Windows has, it's game over.

Comodo Dragon (2)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238202)

Does that include Comodo Dragon as "Chrome" since it based on Chrome?

I've been very happy with Dragon. Whether it really is more secure or not I don't know.

Used to use Firefox- prefer Dragon now.

Re:Comodo Dragon (2)

whereissue (2522564) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238298)

Thanks for the recommendation... Your post is the first I'm hearing of this "Comodo Dragon." About to try it out! This is sort of exciting? Yes!

Re:Comodo Dragon (1)

Ksevio (865461) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238774)

I doubt it - you could say Chrome is based on Safari since they both use the same rendering engine.

It's probably not statistically relevant either way though.

ff sux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238246)

lol.. it does

Re:ff sux (3, Informative)

swinferno (1212408) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238282)

it really does not. I still find the available plug-ins and interface reason enough to continue FF as my main browser even if it takes 2 second longer to load on start up...soit

Complete lack of surprise (4, Interesting)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238256)

With the way things have been going for firefox, it was a matter of time, not competition. The community said they wanted a swing and the firefox team has consistently provided a tire. I get that firefox is open source and they don't have the resources of google or microsoft, but still for a long time they were extremely competitive. What happened? My guess is they either stopped caring about anybody actually using firefox for anything reliable and began toying with the source, or senior developers left the project and were replaced by monkeys.

I actually had a chat on slashdot with a developer of ff. The guy was so disillusioned towards why would people ever have expectations of an open source project and he can do wtf he wants cause he's not getting paid to do it. Well he's right, but what will he do when nobody is using firefox anymore?

Re:Complete lack of surprise (1)

rtaylor (70602) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238350)

I actually had a chat on slashdot with a developer of ff. The guy was so disillusioned towards why would people ever have expectations of an open source project and he can do wtf he wants cause he's not getting paid to do it. Well he's right, but what will he do when nobody is using firefox anymore?

Continue to work on FireFox? If he's really doing it for what it gives him directly (a product tailor made for him) then the number of users needs to be 1 for this person to be happy.

I've certainly released things like that. If it works for you then great, but if not then find something else and don't bug me about it.

Re:Complete lack of surprise (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238528)

What your missing is w/e you created was used only by you probably. Firefox is used by millions, you seriously can't tell the difference? If you wrote a wallpaper rotator or something, that is WAY WAY WAY different from working on firefox or linux or even openoffice.

If that is indeed his goal, he should not be on the firefox dev team, but start his own project deriving off the firefox source with the blessings of its organizers.

Re:Complete lack of surprise (0)

arkane1234 (457605) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238808)

No, he gets it, he's just being an off-the-wall asshat who thinks that we live in a world where everyone can do anything they want with little to no repercussion from said event.
What the GP fails to realize is that a single developer doesn't (at least should not...) control what goes into the code. There are (or at least should be..) project managers and committee votes within the application project.

You are right.

Re:Complete lack of surprise (2)

kiwimate (458274) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238638)

(firefox)...for a long time they were extremely competitive

Firefox had gotten to a point of maturity and very high popularity. It's easy to become complacent at that point.

What do you do when you have a mature and stable product? There are a lot of directions you can go, and in a commercial product those directions are usually set by people in the marketing and product owner roles. Marketing/sales give feedback as to what they believe will be important to the customer. The product owner is responsible for deciding what to implement and in what timeline - the product lifecycle.

If you don't have those roles as part of your team, who makes those decisions? It's not impossible, but there is a reason those roles exist (as unpopular as they might be with some - not all - Slashdot readers, who view sales and marketing as fluff).

And I understand the viewpoint of the developer. What motivates someone? For me, I have a job and I enjoy it, but if I was getting constant criticism on my output and very little praise that'd be pretty demotivating. Now, I realize that part of a job is sometimes you have to do things you don't like, and even if you enjoy your job and are good at it there's still going to be feedback that you won't like.

You might be driven by ideology and desire to go on despite criticism. Personally, there's a great motivation for me in recognizing that I need to make a living because I have a family to support and that means I have superiors that I need to make happy. I.e. I can't afford to just drop this job - I have too much to lose.

If you're an unpaid open source free software developer, your motivation is, what? Ideology and grateful feedback. If you've reached a fulfillment point ("the product is mature and popular") and now start getting a whole bunch of negative feedback, that's very demotivating. What happens if you just stop? You've already done a great job, you can get precious time back, and you don't have to care any more about the complaining. For some people, they're constantly driven to move on, push forwards, continue. They're the entrepreneurs, or the high ideologues (like Richard Stallman). But it takes a lot of energy and passion, and sometimes it's easy to decide it's not worth it any more.

Firefox is to blame (4, Insightful)

lsolano (398432) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238304)

I'm not saying that Chrome is not a good browser, but, what happened IMHO is not that Chrome is getting better, instead, FF is getting worse every day.

I do not know how the Flash Plugin in a browser can suddenly take the 90% of a i7 CPU.

FF people forgot what made them succeed: simplicity.

Re:Firefox is to blame (4, Interesting)

dargaud (518470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238336)

Yes, particularly FF on Linux. It used to worked great, but in the last 6 months or so, after a few hours of use, FF maxes up my memory and CPU and starts crawling in molasses. Never had the problem before. A kill/restart fixes it but it's a PITA. Chrome is so much faster.

Re:Firefox is to blame (2)

markdavis (642305) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238600)

I *never* used to have crashes in Firefox in Linux until version 5 came out. And there has been ZERO improvement with 6, 7, and now 8, as far as crashing goes. Sometimes I can go for days, other times, it can have a fit and crash several times in a day, even in a row.

I think memory usage was silly high in 3 and 4 and hasn't changed much with 5/6/7/8. It is not a problem if you start the browser every day, but on systems where you leave it running for days, it can get crazy (if it doesn't crash first).

I wish Firefox developers would work ONLY on speed, memory usage, and stability, and stop trying to make Firefox LOOK and FEEL like Chrome! I know it is not as exciting, but it is what we need more than anything else.

Re:Firefox is to blame (2)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238842)

And yet I have the pretty much the reverse experience with FF on ubuntu. I leave it running for weeks at a time. I even run multiple copies - not just multiple windows, but completely separate profiles for specific tasks. And with every iteration its become more stable and more efficient, or at least no worse than before, even with roughly 20 extensions installed in my main profile. I used to regularly run into swap on my 4GB system due to having 100+ tabs open. That hasn't happened for a couple of months now.

I leave the menu-bar turned on and for all intents and purposes FF8 looks no more like chrome than FF3.6x did.

Re:Firefox is to blame (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238710)

I'm not saying that Chrome is not a good browser, but, what happened IMHO is not that Chrome is getting better, instead, FF is getting worse every day.

What? No, Chrome is in fact getting better. I don't know if Firefox is regressing or not, but Chrome is in fact getting improved.

FF people forgot what made them succeed: simplicity.

That's where Chrome has the advantage, and Google is managing to keep the browser simple while continuing to improve it. I'll never leave my beloved Opera, but Chrome has at least replaced Firefox for development on my machines. The Javascript developer tools get a little bit too abstract at times, but at least I don't have to deal with the sluggishness I was seeing with Firefox/Firebug.

Use a browser written by an advertising company? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238310)

Over my dead body.

Re:Use a browser written by an advertising company (2)

paimin (656338) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238362)

Everything is an advertising company at this point.

No surprise due to bundling (5, Interesting)

birukun (145245) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238320)

We are constantly removing Chrome from the software packages that are bundling it. Kind of a turnoff for me.

Just like getting a new PC with all the trialware crap.

Re:No surprise due to bundling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238614)

I know your pain; so far every single Windows machine I've had has come with an ancient crufty piece of bundled bloatware called something like "Internet Exploder" that proven almost impossible to remove.

Re:No surprise due to bundling (2)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238782)

Just like getting a new PC with all the trialware crap.

As an aficionado of both Paint Shop Pro and Corel WordPerfect, I find this statement offensive.

Re:No surprise due to bundling (4, Funny)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238820)

Hey, it's perfectly okay because it's not Microsoft that's doing it but Google.

Some people are sloooow to change (1)

Killer Instinct (851436) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238326)

I have tried to get my parents to use it, but for some reason they stick to IE, and sometimes use FF. It kill me cause they always bitch about all the tools bars in IE and yet wont click on the damn chrome desktop link. I love chrome, I hate tool bars, and FF generally got so bad i quit using it about a year ago (except for freecorder) I have AVG, Zonelabs, Ad-aware on there computers and they still manage to get them so mucked up I have to spend about 30 mins every month cleaning them up. I really dont see how they can stand the load times, slow page loads, searchs being redirected to some other site all the time. Progress does happen with them, but at this rate they will be dead before I can ever get them to use chrome as their default browser.

Re:Some people are sloooow to change (2)

pandronic (1275276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238530)

... and they still manage to get them so mucked up I have to spend about 30 mins every month cleaning them up ...

Sound like a job for Deep Freeze [wikipedia.org]. Makes tech support for clueless relatives much easier.

Déjà vu (3, Insightful)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238354)

When Firefox appeared on the scene, it gave Microsoft the kick up the arse it needed to improve their crappy, aging browser.

When Chrome appeared on the scene, it gave Mozilla the kick up the arse it needed to improve their crappy, aging browser.

It'll be interesting to see if the same thing happens in a few years with IE.

How long before Safari #3? (1)

Bryan-10021 (223345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238366)

With all the 100's of millions of iOS devices being sold each year its just a matter of time.

Re:How long before Safari #3? (2)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238764)

With all the 100's of millions of iOS devices being sold each year its just a matter of time.

Safari runs on Cisco?

IE... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238368)

(Posting AC because I'm at work)

I wish that Chrome's success came at the cost of IE's market share rather than Firefox's, which I'm sure is a sentiment shared by many (all?) other web designers out there. I don't use Chrome nor Firefox so I have no investment in either of their success, but I most certainly would like to see IE taken down a few more pegs so that Microsoft would be forced to update and become more standards compliant or risk becoming more irrelevant. I'm so sick and tired of being forced to work around IE's deficiencies...

They screwed it with the new release process (5, Insightful)

danielcolchete (1088383) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238372)

Do you know what changed between FF4 and FF10? Almost nothing! Really! From FF6 to FF10 it is nothing for sure. But they managed to break addon compability 7 times in between. So, from what I understood, we were going to have releases from often so that we could get more features more frequently. We got nothing! Or almost nothing. I jumped of from FF6 to Chrome and I lived happily ever after. By the way, 5% of the Internet users are stuck with the outdated FF3.6 today, without the HTML5 advances of FF4 and FF6, because of this new release process. It is as if we need another browser vendor holding the web back. Thank you Mozilla.

Re:They screwed it with the new release process (1)

AdamJS (2466928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238784)

The 'release' schedule didn't really change. Instead of being 4.0.1 and 4.0.2 ... to the latest coming version (4.1.1) they just started incrementing whole numbers.

Because marketing.

Re:They screwed it with the new release process (1)

rjmx (233228) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238850)

But they managed to break addon compability 7 times in between.

Yep, that's what happened. They changed the versioning strategy, but left the addon compatibility as it was. Since most of the good reasons for running Firefox were its addons, they wiped out their advantage overnight. Apparently the addon developers were all expected to modify their apps once a month.

They'd have been much better off having addon compatibility rely not on the browser version, but on the API version, and left that alone unless it absolutely needed to be changed (*waves at Python developers, who don't seem to have a clue either*).

Re:They screwed it with the new release process (3, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238884)

they managed to break addon compability 7 times in between

Which is inexcusable really, I mean, it's not like the betas are kept behind closed doors and dropped on users and addon developers at the same time. That addon developers can't be arsed to keep up with the changes and really, the shift from FF3.6 to 4.0 broke more addons than subsequent changes from 5-11 (especially if you use the Addon Compatibility Reporter to enable them.)

Well, except for the competent ones like NoScript and AdblockPlus, which work great even up in the latest builds of Nightly.

noticed this a couple months ago (1)

elgeeko.com (2472782) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238384)

We noticed this in our site logs months ago. Chrome has been sitting higher than Firefox for a long time. When possible we encourage our clients to use Chrome because of the lightening fast JavaScript engine (we do a lot of heavy js development). On a personal level I use Chrome as my primary, but almost always have IE loaded.

Re:noticed this a couple months ago (2)

Reasonable Facsimile (2478544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238576)

Top five for our e-commerce site (over the last 30 days): 1. Chrome 33% 2. Safari 29% 3. Firefox 22% 4. IE 12% 5. Android 2%

Re:noticed this a couple months ago (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238684)

The fact that Chrome has better separation of privs than Firefox, so a compromised third party add-on wouldn't be able to get user privileges was the decision maker for me. I tend to use Chrome and Firefox interchangeably, although I do wish Chrome would encrypt stored passwords and offer a master password natively without requiring LastPass or another extension.

Faster! Faster! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238398)

Overheard in the Mozilla offices after reading this:

"Damnit, how are they still catching up? More releases! MORE! FASTER! If we reach version 100 first, we win! GO! HURRY!"

The power of marketing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238400)

Not taking anything away from Chrome, in itself it's a pretty decent browser and I'd rather see the average Joe use Chrome than IE..

But by far the biggest contributor to Chrome's success is marketing and Google as a recognizable brand. You can hardly download a piece of popular software (Flash, Skype...) without being offered Chrome.

While nowadays all major browsers are decent, 5-6 years ago Opera was way ahead of the competition. Did that help them gain market share? Hardly. Sure, 1% of people might like Chrome for some technical merits, but the average Joe uses it because of marketing. Also that Firefox is playing "me too" with a "major version" every week doesn't help. Would it really be so bad if FF was at, say, 4.3.5 now instead of 8? At least Chrome updates in the background, without annoying users.

Own experience (1)

MrMickS (568778) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238408)

My own companies consumer website, I work for a financial institution, shows figures of 11% Firefox, 11% Chrome, 11% Safari (including mobile Safari), with IE having all but 1% of the rest.

I'm always skeptical of browser stats because they very much depend on the audience you are monitoring and don't take account of changing usage. As an example Firefox and IE are likely to have dropped percentages on google.com as Bing has been an alternative/default search engine. This could be interpreted as a decrease in the use of these browsers when in fact its just that the traffic is going elsewhere.

Re:Own experience (1)

inKubus (199753) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238586)

Yes, IE is by far the most common browser for our sites, with about 50% IE, 30% FF and the rest chrome. Geeks use Chrome because it seems faster (especially when using their beloved Google Apps), but check out your process list. It uses a pretty meaty process for each tab and eats RAM like crazy. For traditional web browsing, Mozilla is the best. And it does have some deployable settings for a corporate environment. It supports Kerberos. Etc. Etc. Chrome is for like javascript stuff only. All the kids might say, "Who uses Kerberos instead of a web sso solution?" but the answer is millions of people at their jobs do. Finally, I agree with the parent. StatCounter is a geek counter.. not a everyday joe and grandma counter. Look at your own browser analytics and determine for yourself what audience is using your sites.

Color Management (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238430)

Only Firefox and Safari support color management. IE has partial color management support. Chrome and Opera don't support it at all.

Color management is vital to me so I use Firefox.

Popular of Common (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238444)

There's a little bit of a distinction. I personally have a love-hate relationship with it. Somethings it does well, other things are not present or idiotically implemented.

Firefox (1)

apcullen (2504324) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238510)

Since the Firefox developers seem to be tripping over themselves trying to copy chrome, there's really no reason to use anything else. If they just focused on better performance and a smaller memory footprint, I'd switch back in a second. Some kind of review of browser add-ons would be a compelling reason to go back also.

Until Pepper is pwned (again) (1, Insightful)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238590)

Chrome is popular partly because of three things: it's new, users are ignorant (below), and the Chrome plugin API[0] allows the browser to do some really fast, but braindead[1], crap (aka ActiveX/IE) like running native system code in a sandbox.

Re Ignorance: There has been a lot of misunderstanding towards mozilla "memory usage" over the years because users can't figure out that each of the 100 tabs they have open consumes a certain amount of memory. And several of those tabs, running Adobe Flash in the background, simply bring their system to it's knees.

Yeah, chrome is snazzy, and Mozilla does some brain dead stuff too, but I trust them more than Google. Furthermore, segregation in the market space is actually a really, really, really good thing for the consumer.

[0] - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/25/mozilla_on_npapi_pepper/ [theregister.co.uk]

[1] - http://www.tech.slashdot.org/story/11/10/24/151238/bug-opens-chrome-to-easy-remote-code-execution [slashdot.org]

Re:Until Pepper is pwned (again) (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238860)

I was getting a heavy hit on memory usage even with four or five tabs open. Firefox had memory usage issues for years that was never dealt with, other than the odd claim that "storing all that stuff in memory makes browser faster!" even as you watched your hard drive grinding constantly.

And that underlines the problem. Firefox developers have been too busy giving users what they think users should want, rather than what users want. I finally dropped them at version 4 and go back every once in a while and go "meh" and go back to Chrome.

Re:Until Pepper is pwned (again) (2)

AdamJS (2466928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238862)

Firefox still doesn't desegregate tabs properly like Chrome does.
As in, if you remove a tab from a windows to form its own new window, Chrome does it seamlessly while Firefox sort of trudges along.
It's better than it used to be, when it would just refresh the whole bloody page, but it's still pretty mediocre.
Plugins like Flash also lose orientation if you do so from a non-fullscreen window while they're operating. That's a big usability glitch with Firefox.

They also seem to be getting the "white page only rendering" glitch that Chrome has after a couple hundred tabs in multiple windows, wherein each tab contains a large amount of data or images. It's one of the main reasons I switched back to Firefox, and now a reason I'll have to jump to another browser as it gets worse with each version release.

Just really not the case (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238632)

I have a large web site that gets a broad spectrum of visitors. Over the last 30 days, I've had some 550,000 distinct hosts.

Chrome has less than 50% of the hits of Firefox and is in fact 4th behind Safari (desktop, not mobile).

I checked another site with a much smaller base, but more targeted towards web designers and software professionals. The results are very similar.

Someone's methodology is wrong.

No surprise there then. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238636)

They have been making developers lives a pain in the ass because of the constant changes, not just visual things or stuff like that, no, APIs, things that are supposed to be more-or-less constant and only upgraded, not changed EVERY DAMN TIME EVER.
It's like DLL Hell all over again, but with browser APIs.

Not only that, the updating process is painful, forced. (still not as bad as Opera... I deleted that browser because I was in a hurry and it FORCED an update on me! And then Firefox because it had that stupid retarded "THIS SITE IS UNSECURE YOU AIN'T GOIN TO IT BUB" nonsense that everybody hated)
The updating in Chromium branches are just elegant. Well, most of the time. I've had updates break the browser before, or throw some strange errors, but it was easy to fix. It ain't perfect, but it isn't as annoying as the others.

I honestly haven't liked Firefox since 1.5. That was the best version. Everything else after it has been atrocious. They ruined such a good thing.
Constantly adding features upon features to it because "OH THIS IS A POPULAR EXTENSION, LET'S ADD IT" without even a thought put in to it.
All the while adding more memory leaks and slowdown.
You'd think they would have a basic browser version and a "feature packed" version.

Yes, Chromium does have more overhead with more tabs opened, but that memory is used efficiently for the most part, besides the rare cases where some tabs just go loopy, or a plugin decides to screw things up and crash. (FLASH)
With Firefox, those leaks just pile up in the process.
I remember terminating the plugin-container process once after FF being opened for about 4 days, it took about a minute to terminate, probably taking a few months off my hard drives life with it.
Never again.
As a person who has their machine on constantly, this isn't a nice thing at all. (hey, at least it isn't as bad as those programs that want you to restart your OS... they get deleted and never used again, I don't care if it needs to, if it doesn't work after relog, it is gone)
If they want their browser to work in embedded environments, they best do some week long tests and fix those leaks.

See you Mozilla. You never listened to us. Instead you went loopy. Shame. I really liked XUL. I was hoping one day it would become the common spec for interfacing in browsers.
Now it looks like Mozilla is on a slow path to killing itself...again.

One advantage FF has over Chrome, IMO (4, Insightful)

bjdevil66 (583941) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238642)

Google's views on privacy. Maybe my view is born of ignorance about what Chrome actually does track vs. doesn't track, but as of now I just can't trust them enough to use that browser all the time. I can't get past the, "Just don't do anything wrong..." comments by the Google leadership a while back.

Re:One advantage FF has over Chrome, IMO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238716)

Yes, you are ignorant in this matter. If Chrome was reporting back to Google, it would show up in tcpdumps and would be caught immediately.

Convert Here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38238694)

Problem I had with Firefox is over the course of a day it'd gradually eat up more and more of my RAM until my computer started choking. So Chrome it is!

I'm sticking with Firefox. (4, Insightful)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238748)

I trust Firefox with my privacy rights more than I trust Google, which is simply an advertising company.

Re:I'm sticking with Firefox. (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238810)

I trust Firefox with my privacy rights more than I trust Google, which is simply an advertising company.

Ditto. I don't trust Google at all, so the last thing I want to do is run their web browser as well as being tracked all over the web through whatever browser I am using.

Web Engines (2)

fermion (181285) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238762)

To me what is more interesting here is what is happening with the engines and how OSS is forcing innovation. I have used browsers based on the Gecko engine for many years. Lately the browsers based on this engine has become less reliable, but that did not mean that I went to the proprietary Presto engine, even though it is no longer the garbage scow that it was before Mozilla forced MS to provide users with a decent MS Windows browser. No, I am using the Webkit engine more in the guise of Chrome and Safari. of course these two browsers, like IE, are targeted to promoting commercial concerns rather than providing the user with maximum configuration options(for instance my browser comes with flashblock built in, chrome blocking of third party cookies is hidden under a vague button in the preferences) so my primary is still Gecko based though it is not ideal.

Adblock (5, Insightful)

NYYz (1063406) | more than 2 years ago | (#38238778)

I like Chrome, but until Adblock works as well as it does on Firefox I'm not interested. I'm not willing to watch Youtube commercials.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...