Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Google's Chrome Declining In Popularity

Posted by CmdrTaco on Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:20 AM
from the still-no-mac-version dept.
holy_calamity writes "After launching in a blaze of publicity that even warmed Slashdot, Google's browser grabbed a 3% share of the market, but has been slipping ever since, and now accounts for 1.5%. Google has also stopped promoting the browser on its search page. Assuming they wanted it to grab a significant share of the browser market, have they dropped the ball, or is this part of the plan?" On Slashdot, Chrome is still the #4 browser (after FF, IE, and Safari) but it was ahead of Safari for a few days, hitting almost 10% of our traffic.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Google Chrome, the Google Browser 807 comments
Philipp Lenssen writes "Google announced their very own browser project called Google Chrome — an announcement in the form of a comic book drawn by Scott McCloud, no less. Google says Google Chrome will be open source, include a new JavaScript virtual machine, include the Google Gears add-on by default, and put the tabs above the address bar (not below), among other things. I've also uploaded Google's comic book with all the details (details given from Google's perspective, anyway... let's see how this holds up). While Google provided the URL www.google.com/chrome there's nothing up there yet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • I know why... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Iceykitsune (1059892) <stevemon23@@@gmail...com> on Monday October 13 2008, @11:22AM (#25356971)
    No add-ons. I want my ad block plus please.
    • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2008, @11:24AM (#25357011)

      I booted up windows to see what all the fuss was about, then went right back to linux. Let me know when they have a package in the ubuntu repository.

    • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Nethead (1563) <joe@nethead.com> on Monday October 13 2008, @11:24AM (#25357017) Homepage Journal

      and no-script. Does it run on FreeBSD yet?

      • by mikehoskins (177074) on Monday October 13 2008, @05:49PM (#25362529)

        ...stop the presses...

        This just in... Google should have contributed to Firefox, instead of reinventing the wheel. Following a wave of hype, market share is now declining... News at 11, 10 Central.

        ...cue commercial...

        Speaking of FreeBSD/Linux/Solaris/AIX/BeOS/whatever OS you can name, chances are there is a Firefox to suit you.

        Unlike any other browser in the history of the planet, there are also approximately 1.2 gazillion plugins for Firefox. The vast majority are cross platform, due to Firefox's Gecko/XUL/Chrome (note the name).

        Firefox has momentum. I.e., it's growing on IE (pardon the pun) as well as Safari/Opera. (Was that an estimated 300 million FF users, out of 1.5 billion on the Internet?)

        In addition to this, the future Firefox 3.1 is supposed to have a really, really fast JavaScript engine that rival's JS in Google's Chrome browser.

        But wait, there's more. Wasn't it Google Gears that was supposed to create disconnected (on- or off-line) desktop apps on Firefox. Why throw in the towel?

        There's even more! Google could have wrapped this all up neatly in a "plugin framework," and written it with less effort, and made themselves a defacto-must-have-it part of Firefox, and have impacted more users in less time.

        People could have even written themes and other plugins that bolt on to their "plugin framework," the same way Firebug has its own add-ons (like YSlow).

        So, why, why, why did they move away from Firefox and reinvent the wheel, instead? I saw no features that couldn't have been done as a Firefox Add-On.

        ...back to your regularly scheduled program...

        Maybe I'm wrong, here, so feel free to flame away and moderate me out of my miserable existence!

    • Re:I know why... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ethanol-fueled (1125189) * on Monday October 13 2008, @11:25AM (#25357023) Homepage
      I tried it out and was very impressed with it and it would be my default browser but the dealbreakers are(in order of importance):

      (1) Lack of NoScript and AdBlock plugins.
      (2) No Linux version.
      (3) Speaking of plugins, There's no clear Google-sponsored plugin site analagous to Mozilla's [mozilla.org](googling "Firefox plugins" vs. "Google Chrome plugins"), so it lacks credibility.
      (4) Speaking of lacking in credibility, GOOG are heavily into advertising - Incognito is a neat feature but what will GOOG do with our web records and even keystrokes? [/tinfoil hat]
      (5) More of a suggestion, but Google should have given Chrome a bit more fanfare(Slashvertisements nothwithstanding :) ). Seems like they just released it relatively quietly hoping that it caught on, like they do with most of their other stuff.

      If it satisfied (1) it'd be my primary browser on Windows and if it satisfied (2) then it'd be my primary browser, period. Damn shame.
      • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Informative)

        by AGRW (745778) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:34AM (#25357197)
        Seems some basic things don't work... Basic functional issues: #1 Chrome UI Freezes uploading files. #2 Stops playing you tube vidoes after third one, need to restart chrome to play video. #3 Memory hog, freezes sometimes when low on memory. Firefox, IE, Opera, Safari don't have these basic functional issues. Maybe a limited beta would have been more suitable...
        • Re:I know why... (Score:4, Informative)

          by Kagura (843695) on Monday October 13 2008, @12:16PM (#25357935)
          When running multiple tabs, it can't deal with more than one page running Shockwave at once, it seems. This affects Hulu and Youtube videos when you have another page like CNN.com open in a separate tab. Very annoying.

          That said, I recently dropped Chrome after using it since it came out. There are a few things I miss, such as Firefox's 'omni' bar not being as good, and the new tab page, but otherwise I prefer my Firefox.
        • Re:I know why... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by BitZtream (692029) on Monday October 13 2008, @01:00PM (#25358683)
          You mean, like how its labeled as a beta on the website, or is there some other meaning of beta that I'm missing?

          http://www.google.com/chrome [google.com]

          Google Chrome (BETA) for Windows

          Google Chrome is a browser that combines a minimal design with sophisticated technology to make the web faster, safer, and easier.

          • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by quanticle (843097) on Monday October 13 2008, @03:03PM (#25360395) Homepage

            No, its not that. Its just that its Google's own fault for releasing quality software and labeling it "beta" as well. For example, GMail is still officially in "beta", but the quality of GMail is far above the quality of Google Chrome.

      • Re:I know why... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by sulfur (1008327) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:36AM (#25357257)
        Yeah, I'd say that current popularity of Firefox was heavily influenced by "computer enthusiasts", also known as geeks. A typical Joe Sixpack is not going to install new browser unless his local geek does it when he fixes Joe's computer. In this sense, Google failed to appeal to tech savvy folks by not releasing Linux version of Chrome and not making it customizable using add-ons. Having browsed the web with AdBlock and FlashBlock, I'm not sure I will ever use a browser that doesn't provide these features.
          • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Interesting)

            by sketerpot (454020) <sketerpot@NoSPAm.gmail.com> on Monday October 13 2008, @12:34PM (#25358237)
            Once the open source Chromium version comes out and has been tossed around for a while, I think there will be a pretty solid case for using it. The rendering engine is competitive, and the one-process-per-tab thing is an idea that needs to happen; the browser is being used as an operating system more and more, so it makes sense to delegate some duties to the OS itself.
      • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Jim Hall (2985) on Monday October 13 2008, @12:01PM (#25357713) Homepage

        For me, the issue was No native Linux version. Yes, there's the Linux version provided by the CrossOver guys, and that's great. I've used it a few times. But it takes forever to launch, and is generally a little slow. A native application would be better.

        I'll look at Chrome again when there's a native version for Linux.

      • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by fermion (181285) on Monday October 13 2008, @12:59PM (#25358669) Homepage Journal
        I think lack of OS independence and adblock is a critical issue. I would think that Chrome can't really compete in the non IE 30% of the market that is comprised largely of users that (A) have permissions set to install new programs and browse in something that is not IE, (B) know how to install a new browser, (C) are motivated to move from IE and (D) are motivated to take the time to deal with a new application. I am sure a significant percentage of these users are not on MS Windows platforms and those that are move from IE to block ad or, in the case of the Mozilla crowd, have some innate need to pimp their browser.

        So Chrome is largely going to attract current IE users that are attracted to the Google brand. But these IE users have stayed with IE even when other options are available. Many of them stay because they do not have the ability to move to another broswer. Many because of the learning curve. I question whether there is a significant number of MS Windows users that care enough to use chrome, or if MS will let them go without a fight.

    • Re:I know why... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kjuib (584451) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:26AM (#25357071) Homepage Journal

      Firebug holds the gold as a web developer

    • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by outcast36 (696132) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:42AM (#25357381) Homepage
      I'm sill using Chrome, so I'm currently an outcast. I have Firefox3 with 9 plugins (of course AdBlock/Flashblock/... and so on). The major reason I keep using Chrome is that the Javascript engine is so much faster. It is actually faster for me to load all the extra crap with Chrome than it is for adblock to remove it and render the page with stuff missing. It sounds ridiculous, but it is my experience. Of course now my privacy is being raped 8 ways to Sunday, but its worth it for that 15 extra milliseconds of my life.
    • I know why to (Score:4, Insightful)

      by aliquis (678370) <dospam@gmail.com> on Monday October 13 2008, @11:47AM (#25357469) Homepage

      People wanted to tested it.

      Ohnoz, some people thought their old browser was better than the first public version of the other one, who could have guessed!?!

    • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Monday October 13 2008, @11:48AM (#25357493) Homepage Journal

      No add-ons. I want my ad block plus please.

      According to one source [internetworldstats.com], there are about 1.5 billion Internet users in the world. Another source [hitslink.com] estimates that maybe 20%, or 300 million of them, are using Firefox.

      Now, Mozilla.org says that most popular add-on [mozilla.org] right now is Video DownloadHelper with about 340K downloads each week. However, its developers have released 32 versions in the last 22 months [mozilla.org], so a big chunk of downloads will be for upgraders. Let's assume that a full one-half of all downloads are first-time users and not people upgrading from last week's version, and that 100% of downloaders actually use it. That means that Video DownloadHelper has about 16,000,000 users, or about 5% of Firefox's user base.

      You like add-ons. I like add-ons. Objectively, though, we're a very small minority of users. The numbers look even worse for your position when you consider that the majority of Internet users are browsing with Internet Explorer, and therefore wouldn't miss add-ons were they to switch to Chrome.

      There are a lot of reasons why people might not be using Chrome. The lack of add-ons is almost certainly not an important one, statistically speaking.

      • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by otter42 (190544) on Monday October 13 2008, @12:11PM (#25357857) Homepage Journal

        I respect your math, but disagree with your conclusion. New technologies do not go straight to users. They get picked up by early adopters, who then tell everyone about them. Half of the students at my university were using Firefox after we left. Mostly because nerds like me installed it on their computers. When people like us start installing Chrome on everyone's computers, everyone will move to Chrome.

        So without plugins and without Linux and Mac support, I won't support it. And if I don't, my parents, girlfriend, colleagues, and friends won't, because they don't really care, and why should they?

      • Re:I know why... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by tppublic (899574) on Monday October 13 2008, @12:32PM (#25358197)
        The lack of add-ons is almost certainly not an important one, statistically speaking.

        citation needed [xkcd.com].

        Have you ever heard of innovators and early adopters? Do you recognize the influence they have in markets? There is a recognized "product diffucion curve" where innovators and early adopters have significant influence over the larger (mass) market.

        I would assert that early adopters are more likely to use add-ons. I would therefore assert that the lack of add-ons may be important, and may be statistically significant. I would also assert that Firefox, IE and Safari meet the criteria of "good enough" and therefore replacement products have a much higher hurdle to achieve market penetration.

        I would also assert the market share numbers show a problem for Google. A spike in usage followed by a decline as they are seeing indicates a problem in "crossing the chasm" (search for the book of that name if you don't follow).

        However, all of this is simply "assertions" and not "proof" - same as your assertion that add-ons are not an issue. My primary point is that meeting the needs of the innovator vs. the mass market is often underestimated (and is a very tough balancing act)

        • Re:I know why... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by MBGMorden (803437) on Monday October 13 2008, @12:30PM (#25358161)

          Also, it's important to understand that all users of addons are not using any particular addon. VideoDownload helper? I've never even heard of it honestly, but I DO use Adblock Plus and NoScript. Other users use other addons. Now certainly many, many of these addons have overlapping user bases, but the percentage of users who use ANY addon is going to be a very different figure from the percentage of users that use any specific addon.

          • Re:I know why... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by X0563511 (793323) <draeathNO@SPAMmember.fsf.org> on Monday October 13 2008, @12:52PM (#25358541) Homepage Journal

            Keep in mind that other addons, such as noscript, don't use Mozilla's download page.

            For instance, my install of adblock plus - happened to come from my distro's package repository. Mozilla has no idea that I've downloaded it.

            The best way to determine penetration is with phone-home ability, which naturally will not happen in these cases. We won't stand for it.

  • by UndyingShadow (867720) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:23AM (#25356989)
    I'm waiting for it to mature. I thought that was the whole point, we test it out, see what we like and wait for it to mature into a stable product.
    • by Praxx (918463) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:26AM (#25357059) Homepage
      The fact that people are still using it regularly despite it being beta should say something at least.
      • by Derek Loev (1050412) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:34AM (#25357209)
        Well, I think we all know that beta doesn't really mean anything to Google. In fact, that may be why a lot of people stopped using it after the first few days. Google has created the reputation that their beta products are pretty much fine-tuned and user-ready (gmail for example); but in Chrome's case, it really isn't up to par (at least so far) with the rest of Google's applications and people's expectations.
    • by thehorse (899389) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:26AM (#25357069)
      Yes, I was expecting google to come out with a few more updates at a faster pace. There were too many issues that prevented me from using it to become my primary browser (flash/shockwave video freezing/crashing, rendering issues with a few sites). I still use the incognito feature for por... I mean, for banking.
    • by sulfur (1008327) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:26AM (#25357073)
      Google products coming out of beta? I'll be playing Duke Nukem Forever long time before it happens.
    • by fm6 (162816) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:41AM (#25357347) Homepage Journal

      Well, "beta" doesn't necessarily mean "not ready for day to day use", especially with Google products. GMail has millions of users, but is still officially "beta."

      But jargon aside, I think you're correct. Google people have their blind spots, but all in all they're pretty smart, and I find it hard to believe that this release of Chrome was meant to to grab any significant market share. Too many functional limitations.

      If you go by the emphasis of the comic book [google.com], this version of Chrome is mostly about contributing to the open source browser community, and getting that community to rethink some of its strategies. And that actually makes sense. My only question is whether there will ever be a more serious version that will actually compete with other browsers. I think, probably not, but I'd be very happy to be wrong.

  • Now we know (Score:5, Funny)

    by ndansmith (582590) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:25AM (#25357027)

    Now we know how long Slashdot users can stand to browse the internet without AdBlock.

  • by xaosflux (917784) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:25AM (#25357029) Homepage

    With all the options available today, there's just not a need for another browser right now. For most that don't want to use whatever their default browser is, they use FireFox. Firefox also had a lot more grass-roots promotion in the earlier days, that does not appear to be prevalent with Chrome.

    • by LWATCDR (28044) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:31AM (#25357145) Homepage Journal

      Pretty much it. Firefox is as good or better than Chrome and has a lot more plugins.
      Adblock is probably a big driver for Firefox. Also Firefox works on Windows, Mac, Linux, Solaris, and BSD.
      So why move
      I think Chrome will be big on mobile devices.

      • by abigor (540274) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:42AM (#25357361)

        Well, one reason is the process independence of the tabs. Just yesterday I had a bunch of tabs open in Firefox to all sorts of stuff - the Globe and Mail, YouTube, Slashdot, various bits of documentation, etc. One tab went nuts and brought the whole thing down. I hate that, and it should never happen. Each tab is like a separate app - having one tab crash everything harkens back to the days of cooperative multitasking (hello again, AmigoOS/Win 3.1/OS 7/8/9).

        Once Chrome is fully up to speed with plugins and various refinements, I'll switch for sure.

  • by MosesJones (55544) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:25AM (#25357045) Homepage

    Come on is this a surprise? I've downloaded Chrome, I've used it for a little bit of time and then gone back to Firefox as its got the plug-ins and other bits that I use everyday. When Chrome becomes a full product and has the plug-ins that I need then I'd consider switching, but for now its just something I'll fire up when testing my web code and then use that open window for some browsing because I'm too lazy to switch to another window.

    Hell personally I'm shocked they beat 1% of people, I'm stunned that 1% of people cared enough to download a new browser.

  • Linux port yet? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RiffRafff (234408) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:28AM (#25357103) Homepage

    Still waiting for their e-mail saying a native Linux port is available.

    I gots no use for Windows apps.

  • by Derek Loev (1050412) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:29AM (#25357115)
    I downloaded it a couple days after it was released and although it is rough around the edges I've grown to like it a lot. The history search function is really nice and the fact that it takes about a second to launch compared to the 10 seconds for Firefox (at least for me, this is probably out of the ordinary) is a real bonus.
    But honestly, this seems entirely standard. Of course it's going to start off with a surge of popularity and then lose a little momentum. This doesn't mean Google has "dropped the ball", it means that people are acting quite normally. It may have been a mistake for Google to release Chrome before all the kinks were worked out (mine has crashed a couple times); however, I don't think this decline in percentage was anything that wasn't expected -- 1.5% is still a hell of a lot of people.
  • Stability (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hob42 (41735) <.jupo42. .at. .gmail.com.> on Monday October 13 2008, @11:30AM (#25357131) Homepage Journal

    I've been giving Chrome a try myself, but my wife and my kids all still use FF or IE. I like that it takes up less screen realestate for tabs and so forth, and the history-homepage thingy is useful to me.

    I'd be happier with Chrome if it weren't for it's habit of getting hung up on Flash sites and bringing the whole OS to a screeching halt - sites that work fine in Firefox.

  • by $RANDOMLUSER (804576) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:36AM (#25357251)
    Does this mean I don't have to add it to the list of browsers and platforms I already test with?
  • by ducomputergeek (595742) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:37AM (#25357261) Homepage

    with a bunch of engineering students last night. A few had Chrome on their laptops (We were meeting at a coffee shop about a conference), but most of the people in the shop were using FireFox. FF works fine for them and most asked why should they try chrome when what they have works with few or no complaints. There was nothing revolutionary in Chrome from their perspective. Hell, I opened it up and the first thing I saw was the dial pad area and I thought, "what the hell, looks just like Opera with different looking tabs at the top." To me there was no reason to use Chrome over Opera or FF or Safari.

    People are generally hesitant to change unless there is a good reason. Look at how long it to FF to make in roads. Finally when MSIE was having the hijack of the week, people moved to FF because of the perception it was somehow safer. A lot of Mac users, myself included, use Safari because it works. That was not always the case, but these days I don't have many problems with safari and webpages. I have FF and Opera but I rarely use either unless I'm testing.

  • Loyal Users (Score:5, Interesting)

    by epdp14 (1318641) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:38AM (#25357301)
    It seems to me that the pool of users that Chrome is seeking to draw from has already been taken by the likes of Firefox and Opera. And, unfortunately for Chrome, fans of Firefox and Opera are violently loyal customers. Even if Chrome supported addons I would have a hard time giving up my Firefox.
  • No Opera? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CastrTroy (595695) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:42AM (#25357379) Homepage
    I find it surprising that Opera is still behind Chrome. I'm personally a Firefox user, but I really thought that Opera was more prevalent, especially on Slashdot. I guess the few Opera users there are, are just really vocal when it comes to promoting their browser.
  • by edmicman (830206) on Monday October 13 2008, @11:49AM (#25357519) Homepage Journal
    So far...
    *No Linux version yet - can't use it at home on Ubuntu without sloppy hacks
    *No find-as-you-type - I didn't realize how much I used this in FF until it's not there
    *No AdBlock Plus - I determined this to be my only real must-have FF extension. There are a few others I really really like, but I can get away without them for the most part.
    *Lack of extensions in general.

    On top of those, I think it's a novel new browser, has some good things, but there's a lack of transparency, too. At least with Firefox, I can view their Bugzilla, check out progress on Mozillazine, and feel like I'm seeing some progress and idea of where things are and where they are going. So Google has said they'll support addons and extensions. It's open source so people can hack it if they want. Well....where are they on supporting extensions? Where's the community building on the source? When is the estimated release of a more final version rather than something that really seems more like a technology preview demo?

    That said, I'm having problems with the Minefield pre beta (FF 3.1) today, and am actually thinking of trying Chrome as my default for the day to see how I fare. Crazy.
  • by techsoldaten (309296) on Monday October 13 2008, @12:15PM (#25357905) Homepage Journal

    Get a Linux / Mac version of the browser going and see what happens. I know there aren't nearly as many Linux / Mac users out there, but these are vocal communities who will extol virtues of anything that takes up less processor capacity or makes their day have one less click in it. There's an opportunity to make all these windows guys feel like they are missing out unless they use Chrome.

    M

  • Google wants to be able to drive the future of the web and how it is used. To do that, they need some say in how browsers are built. Even if only 1.5% of people use Chrome, they still get this. For example, Google needs users to have browsers with fast Javascript so their apps work well. By releasing Chrome, they put pressure on Firefox and IE to meet their performance benchmarks. As they add other features, other browsers must take notice.