Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Google Chrome Stats

Google Chrome Tops 1 Billion Users 102

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Venture Beat: At the I/O 2015 developer conference today, Sundar Pichai, Google's senior vice president of product, announced that Chrome has passed 1 billion active users. Less than a year ago, Google revealed Android has over 1 billion active users. These are indeed Google's biggest ecosystems. Google also shared that Google Search, YouTube, and Google Maps all have over 1 billion users as well. Gmail will reach the milestone next; it has 900 million users.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Chrome Tops 1 Billion Users

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 30, 2015 @10:46AM (#49804889)

    Screw the open internet. Let's put EVERYTHING on Google! No.... Let's make Google be the internet!!

    Who's with me on this?

    What could possibly go wrong?

    Captcha: amassed!

    • by ArcadeMan ( 2766669 ) on Saturday May 30, 2015 @10:58AM (#49804927)

      Some people already seem to think that Facebook is the Internet.

      • by YrWrstNtmr ( 564987 ) on Saturday May 30, 2015 @11:16AM (#49804975)
        And people used to think that AOL was "the internet". They were wrong then, too.
        • The sad part about is that there are far more people who think that AOL / Facebook / The Blue E / Google is the "Internet" than not.

          Then there is the tube guy, but he's dead.

        • A pity. AOL had a lot of entertainment value, even if it wasn't quite the kind AOL intended.

      • You can't get porn on Facebook.

  • While there are certainly people who are running chrome on different unlinked devices, this measurement is probably still a lot more meaningful than when facebook says it has 12 billion users. Similarly, I'm not sure how meaningful the measurement of 900 million gmail accounts is; I have more than one myself.
    • 12 billion users is not that hard to get. For example, the Mormon church has at least 12 billion members by now too [wikipedia.org].

      In truth, these numbers of users are really quite small. The current upper bound seems to be about 108 billion [prb.org], so there's still a ways to go.

  • by Electricity Likes Me ( 1098643 ) on Saturday May 30, 2015 @10:59AM (#49804933)

    And here I am about to ditch Chrome for Firefox because the 4+gb of memory usage on desktop with a bunch of inactive tabs open is meaning I can't really do work properly anymore because my machine is liable to lock up from running out of memory. And this isn't hundreds of tabs - it's like, 30-40 tops.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Just add some swap then.
    • IE 6 only uses 32 megs of ram top. You know just saying

    • by Imagix ( 695350 ) on Saturday May 30, 2015 @11:25AM (#49804995)
      Somehow I've never understood the penchant for people to have tens of tabs open in a browser. Right now I have 4, and two of them are email tabs. The only time I get anywhere near tens of tabs is when I'm actively searching for things and I open potential results as a new tab. But as I go through and determine which are useful, I close the rest until I'm down to the 1 or 2 that I actually need. With hundreds of tabs, how do you even find the tab that you need?
      • With hundreds of tabs, how do you even find the tab that you need?

        That's why there are to many extensions to help manage dozens/hundreds of tabs. I agree with you though, there is no need for that many tabs all the time. I haven't heard a great explanation of it from anyone.

      • Mutiltas....

        Wait! A squir ...

      • by jopsen ( 885607 )

        Somehow I've never understood the penchant for people to have tens of tabs open in a browser....With hundreds of tabs, how do you even find the tab that you need?

        If you run any linux desktop environment you have virtual desktops... I have on for each project I'm actively working on... Each desktop features: text editor, file-browser, terminal and a web browser window with multiple tabs. Those tabs are usually opened on relevant documentation, bugs, github pull-requests, stackoverflow or any other resource related to what I'm coding.

        Sure a desktop can sit idle for a day or two, but usually I come back to a project just to make a quick adjustment. This is a flow for

      • by devent ( 1627873 )

        I never understand the penchant for people who complain how many tabs other people have open. Is there a rule that you should limit yourself to single digit count of tabs open? But to answer your question, Firefox have since ages vertical tree tabs as plugin, and the lack of such vertical tabs plugin is the reason why I don't use Chrome.

      • I scroll through an RSS reader and middle-click on links to open them in a new tab for reading later. When I've read it I close the tab and move on. The reason for this behaviour is that I have long file saves at work and I keep myself entertained for roughly 90 seconds at a time. Sometimes I read what I got, sometimes I find new stuft. Basically it's what you do except I don't get enough time to go through them all. I have a few tabs that have been open for over two months. Sooner or later I'll

      • I frequently have quite a few up. I'll keep tabs up if I plan to go back to them later. Once it goes above about ten tabs or so, though, it becomes pretty worthless and I just close them all.

        I've had memory issues with Chrome a few times, but usually due to the Flash plugin, and things stay pretty zippy as long as I disable Flash (especially nice because usually the only thing it impacts is it makes for fewer annoying ads).

      • I use my tabs as a replacement for bookmarks, for the most part. There are many sites that I simply use often, or pages want to visit at a moments notice whenever I wish. And some i'm saving for later (though I could conceivably use bookmarks for that, keeping it in a tab is just the easier/lazier way to do it).

        With the use of several tab management add-ons, like tree-style tabs, extra tab options, session saving, two forms of tab grouping, automatic timed tab suspension to save resources etc, It has become

      • This started happening when web browsers ditched bookmarks, because people are stupid, hate organization, and don't need useful stuff.

    • Firefox using 4+GB of memory really isn't any better than Chrome using 4+GB.

      • by narcc ( 412956 )

        I'm running two versions of FireFox right now (the current 38.0.1 release and 40.0a2 nightly) Combined, both are using less than 700mb. I've had Nightly open for a little over a day, and the current release for about 6 days.

    • I finally left firefox for chrome for the exact same reason. After visiting 2 or 3 web sites, FF would be using almost 1GB or ram. When I had just 4 or 5 tabs open, like facebook ,amazon, ebay FF would totally stop, freezing for 5-10 seconds and having to just sit there and wait. With chrome, I can have 10+ tabs running and never have a slowdown. Firefox seems to just get worse and worse going from 32-36 to whatever they are on now. I was a faithful user, using the line since it was netscape.
    • There's an extension for Chrome called The Great Suspender [google.com] which purports to free up resources by automatically suspending tabs when inactive for a period of time (unless they're on a whitelisted domain). It greys out the tab text/icon, unloads the page and replaces it with a "click to reload" dialogue; it basically just redirects to: chrome-extension://klbibkeccnjlkjkiokjodocebajanakg/suspended.html#uri=ORIGINAL_URL_HERE, so you'd have to remember to whitelist inactive forms and such. It doesn't reload the

  • quite amazing (Score:1, Interesting)

    by roman_mir ( 125474 )

    Nobody teaches you how to handle 100,000,000 simultaneous user requests. Throwing more and more hardware at it is what you cannot escape when dealing with tens of millions of users a second. At least Google is not a bank, where things really need to be synchronized across accounts and be perfectly transactional. It doesn't matter to Google that there are no transactions. A piece of data presented to a user in the USA may be different than the one presented to a user in Japan, but it isaybe an answer to

    • PRIVEAT INDUSTRY will teach you if you get grubberment off their backs. First and only step is to replace paper fiat theft money with intrinsically valuable rhodium. All else shall follow, rainbows included (for those who work hard enough).

  • Look folks, I have avoided Google Maps on Android for one major reason: The app shuts off the screen, while in use! Imagine that for a second. This has been an ongoing thing since the very beginning.

    Consequently, for Maps, I use Waze which exhibits no such annoyance.

  • by chthon ( 580889 ) on Saturday May 30, 2015 @11:43AM (#49805063) Homepage Journal

    I considered using Chrome some time, but Firefox still beats it regarding plug-ins and their configurations: Adblock+, Noscript, Lightbeam, ... and the possibilities to block anything that you do not want on your computer/browser.

  • by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Saturday May 30, 2015 @12:20PM (#49805211) Journal
    Imagine! What the user base is going to be once they are out of beta and do the first release.
  • I use Chrome, but only for gmail. That way, I figure that Google just gets to read my gmail (mostly used for public email lists) twice.

  • That one billion figure doesn't sound as impressive after one considers that it's fairly likely that it's mostly obtained by counting every Android install that comes bundled with Chrome. I'd be shocked, just shocked, if Google does NOT count someone who used Chrome a few times, before installing Firefox mobile. Like me, for example. I hardly ever use Chrome on my Googlephone. But, I'm sure I'm counted in that billion-plus figure.

    • That one billion figure doesn't sound as impressive after one considers that it's fairly likely that it's mostly obtained by counting every Android install that comes bundled with Chrome. I'd be shocked, just shocked, if Google does NOT count someone who used Chrome a few times, before installing Firefox mobile. Like me, for example. I hardly ever use Chrome on my Googlephone. But, I'm sure I'm counted in that billion-plus figure.

      Exactly what I was thinking. Should it really count if the user can't uninstall the damn thing?

      Would be a more useful metric if they subtracted the number of users that have it disabled in their android devices, or haven't opened it in the last year, or whatever...but maybe they did, I don't really care enough to find out :P

  • Some point to the iOS vs Android as being walled garden vs. freedom, while it is actually more like closed garden vs. being a prostitute. Some point to Firefox vs. Chrome as okay vs better, while it is actually more like freedom vs. being a prostitute.

    I keep hoping that Android and Chrome will successfully fork from Google at some point so we can enjoy great open source software AND freedom. What, exactly, makes that unreasonable?

  • Which users do they count?
    Desktop only?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    it is still a pile of steaming elephant dung.

    Not news, Film at 11.

  • Either I should stop buying Google ads because they are severely overstating their exposure or people within the United States of America are not Google's primary customer base.

  • So? Chrome crashes constantly and sucks now -- despite Google removing features every new version. Android is fragmented as hell and slow, with Google trying to remove as much open-source as it can.

    Meanwhile, the big news for developers at Google I/O was the awesome news about how Google can help developers serve even more shitty adverts to app users.

    Fuck Google, I'm going Microsoft, at least Microsoft plays well with others now that Ballmer is gone and Nadella in charge.

  • The downside of this is that they can afford to be totally unresponsive to users. Google has recently replaced their classic Google maps with a piece of junk. Don't take my word for it, go to the Google maps forum, this link for example: https://productforums.google.c... [google.com]. While every single one of the close to 1000 posts on that thread (except for the Google representative's initial post) is negative, Google can afford to ignore them (and in fact, not even respond to them), because the complainers consti

  • Or should i say Farcebook?

If in any problem you find yourself doing an immense amount of work, the answer can be obtained by simple inspection.

Working...