Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chrome Hits 20% Share As IE Continues Slide

Posted by timothy on from the teeter-tottering-away dept.

jbrodkin writes "Google Chrome's rise in popularity has been remarkably fast and it's just hit a new milestone: more than 20% of all browser usage, according to StatCounter. Chrome rose from only 2.8% in June 2009 to 20.7% worldwide in June 2011, while Microsoft's Internet Explorer fell from 59% to 44% in the same time frame. Firefox dropped only slightly in the past two years, from 30% to 28%. While other browser trackers show Chrome with a lower percentage, there's a reason: StatCounter tracks total surfing, not the number of users. It's the Web's power users who are pushing Chrome to new heights."

12 of 308 comments (clear)

  1. PC manufacturers and affiliate marketers by cgeys · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google pays affiliate commissions for every install of their toolbar and chrome. It's perfect bundle for those PC manufacturers who put all kind of stuff on new pc's (like Norton trials etc) and get paid for commissions. IE doesn't give them anything, so they throw in Chrome and make a little extra every PC sold. Chrome and the toolbar also pushed by affiliate marketers who try to get people to install it along their (sometimes shitty) software. So it's no wonder it spreads.

    1. Re:PC manufacturers and affiliate marketers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      IE gets installed with every windows, and they get commission from installing windows.

    2. Re:PC manufacturers and affiliate marketers by jpapon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the consumer pays to install Windows. The PC manufacturer gets a commission on that.

      --
      -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
    3. Re:PC manufacturers and affiliate marketers by cgeys · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Web power users? What does that even mean? Some soccer mom on facebook probably spends many more hours online and browsers more than the actual so called power users, who are doing something productive with their computor.

      And since they track usage instead of users, that means Chrome's userbase is not 20%, like is usually calculated and what most people reading the headline will think.

      Soccer moms and clueless uses are perfectly targeted by Google too. Like someone below in the comments mention, not only is Chrome pushed by manufacturers etc, but Google packs it with every download from them. Picasa, Google Earth and so on.. The real power users would always untick the unwanted software and think why is Google trying to push them y while you only wanted x. Google also pushes it on YouTube, Google homepage (if you browse in with IE) and their other sites. They're using all the evil marketing tricks in the book, like using soft language "oh that's ok" or similar instead of "yes" when asking if you want to install Chrome etc..

    4. Re:PC manufacturers and affiliate marketers by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd add that while I can see why Chrome is climbing (I'm personally giving all my customers Comodo Dragon, based on Chromium because of the speed and added security) I'd add that there is waaaay too many pieces of software out there that has default install set for dumping Chrome. Just the other day I was rushed and found Chrome dropped on my desktop from Defraggler I believe.

      So while I see why some are switching (I personally don't like how Chrome phones home, one of the reasons I'm using Dragon instead) I have to wonder how many got it dropped on their desktop by some freeware. Speaking of dropped the only thing more irritating is how shockwave and some other software are now dropping some Norton Scanner crap on PCs. I don't know how many times I've had to clean that crap off someone's PC this past month.

      So while I personally wish the Chrome team well, and frankly after getting stuck for years cleaning up crap thanks to ActiveX frankly ANYTHING is better than IE, I have to question the wisdom of these stealth Chrome installs. I mean really guys, you are the largest search engine in the world, which gives you a really easy way to advertise Chrome. Do you really need to use sneaky realplayer style tactics just to gain share? It isn't like you have a bad product here, I personally find all the Chromium based browsers much faster, especially on the social and other JavaScript heavy sites. So please end the stealth install program, okay?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. "Surfing" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can we please stop saying 'surfing' and use 'browsing' instead? 'Surfing' just sounds silly.

  3. It's the ADS by AftanGustur · · Score: 1, Insightful

    StatCounter tracks total surfing, not the number of users.

    Meaning that it's counting the ads and other stuff Firefox users are blocking.

    Let's face it, Google thrives on advertising, it is the bread and butter of it's revenue stream and Google Chrome will never get even half of the ad-blocking capabilities Firefox users have.

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  4. Firefox dropped the ball by RoLi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Firefox could have become the rock solid browser that "just works".

    The only reason we have standards like those set by W3C is stability.

    There is no need for rapid releases any more because the major problems have been solved years ago. I am still using Firefox 3.0 as my default browser and while I had to install Chrome because Google-Translator mysteriously stopped working, otherwise I had no problems with it.

    Because of the good extension-system, Firefox could be a rock-solid browser while all the experimental stuff and new functionality is done in extensions.

    But no. Mozilla decided that Firefox has to be like Chrome. Of course not really like Chrome because to get the advantages of Chrome would require a complete rewrite of Firefox, so Mozilla settled for a completely nonsensical release-policy completely with automatic non-wanted upgrades ("What is my computer doing now? Oh, my browser changed again!").

    Mozilla should understand that the 90s are over and people are no longer buying a new computer every 2 years and upgrade their software even more often. The new features (ALL of them) are not needed in the default install. They could be tested using extensions but there is absolutely no reason any more to change ANYTHING just for change's sake.

    What we need is at least one browser-alternative that aims at creating a bug-free browser instead of a perpetual usability experiment.

    1. Re:Firefox dropped the ball by silanea · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meanwhile, we had browser plugins working just fine to get non-HTML things like video and interactive applications on the web.

      Right, like Shockwave, which only exists on Windows. Or Flash, whose 64-bit versions still are in beta and which still suffers all kinds of quirks and issues around hardware accelerated video decoding. Or Java applets, which are...well, it's Java.

      There was a time when HTML did not support the use of images within a document. You had to use an external application to view them. Up until today we have to install (and update; my Windows machine at work nags me on every other boot with updaters for three different plugins) several different browser plugins to watch video, play audio and use interactive content. Now this is merging into the browser itself, which means: No more plugins to install, no more context breaking (focus grabbing etc.), and consolidated security and privacy management. There still is much work to be done. And there still are considerable security concerns. But at least in my opinion we are on the right path.

      --
      Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
  5. Re:Expect IE to rise by yuhong · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The main cause is the new release cycle. Asa's big mouth only helped it a bit.

  6. Re:Google Evil (beta) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Firefox used to be in the Google Pack. Was that evil?

  7. Re:Recent convert from Firefox by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wouldn't ever take behaviour on Slashdot as an indication of anything for a browser, Slashdots Javascript is just shit, its layout is just shit, and in general its just shit - there are so many shitty bugs in the code that have been complained about for ages and yet the team constantly roll out new candy rather than fix fairly major bugs.

    My two pet ones are the "load another comment further up the chain when you click in the comment box, and remove the focus from the comment box. Yeah, that means the next click will load another comment..." and the random lack of karma scores on comments.

    And yet they recently changed the page layout slightly, which fixed none of the bugs commonly reported. Eye candy over functionality.

    Utterly pathetic. The only reason I come here any more is for the entertainment from the discussion, which actually I haven't found elsewhere. But as an example of a front end, Slashdot is just shit.