Slashdot Mirror
Chrome 15 Overtakes IE 8 For Top Browser Spot
An anonymous reader writes "If you're reading this on Chrome, you're part of a wave that has ditched Internet Explorer or Firefox and helped vault Google's browser to the top Web browser spot worldwide." Are you reading this on Chrome? (I'm using Chromium right now, but that's pretty close.)
IE lagging behind again.
This is complete nonsense, if you take into account all versions of said browsers, IE still comes out on top. Who cares that a particular version (numbering incompatibility?!) is more used than another?
Also are they lumping all versions of Chrome together? All versions of Firefox together?
Seems misleading...
"Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
Aldous Huxley
Probably, but the Googlelluminati have now put it in second.
rewriting history since 2109
I simply can't understand how a browser with such a godawful interface could get so popular.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Well I never. Next you'll be saying they do a mobile OS, or even more far-fetched: a search engine.
What if you use both Chrome and Firefox or Chrome and Internet Explorer (not that I can see much incentive for Chrome and IE)? Wouldn't the results be inaccurate?
Posting this from Iceweasel 8.0/Debian Wheezy.
Once you've got used to some of the better add-ons (adblock, noscript, peraperakun, tabmixplus, treeestyletabs) it's hard to make a change.
I don't care enough about slightly lower memory usage or slightly shorter start-up times (4GB of RAM, browser running for a week on average).
I don't get the advantages of chrome.
I've used chrome, and I experience more of a vendor-lock-down feeling with it. Of course there are a lot of extensions, but they seem more of an afterthought as compared with Firefox.
The biggest problem of Firefox ATM is that they are copying chrome too much instead of choosing their own direction.
That's all.
The one thing that keeps me off Chrome for serious web browsing is the lack of a **full** equivalent to Tree Style Tab. I've found various attempts, but until something with all the critical features is available, I can't leave Firefox.
And yes, it's that important. I find serious web browsing without tree tabs is basically unusable.
Some analysis of Chrome extensions I've tried follows below, along with a longer explaination of why tree tabs matter.
-----
Why tree tabs are important
Critical features:
* Arrange tabs in a hierarchy (subordinate/superior relationships)
* Links middle-clicked to open in a new tab, open under the current tab
* You can collapse branches of the tabs tree, like a folder tree in Explorer/Outlook
* You can drag tabs around to restructure the tree
For example, my current top-level hierarchies at work are "PVI clusterfsck", "vern buerg list", "to read", "vmware ctrl alt del", "new server", and "training". "training" has four immediate subtabs, each for various training providers we use at $WORK. Each of those is an exploration of their course hierarchy. I can expand or collapse any section or subsection as my focus changes. I can also bookmark branches for later.
For me, at least, knowledge isn't linear, it's tree structured. The Back/Forward paradigm is totally inadequate for the task.
-----
Tree Style Tabs (Beta)
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ffididlaalcoegfcalmeldjfnihmoech
Unfortunately, it's lacking some features. The biggest is that it
doesn't actually replace the tab bar across the top of the screen.
Rather, it gives you a new toolbar button, which, when clicked, drops
down a tree structure. No way to make that appear permanently, that I
can see. (TreeStyleTab appears much like a "side bar" in Firefox.)
The tree structure does reflect which tab opened from which. But I
can't drag tabs or branches to organize them, nor can I
collapse/expand branches.
-----
Tab Sense
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/oiabeebnmckkdjloeofbfladabfhedlg
Similar to the "Tree Style Tabs (Beta)" above. Same
button-not-a-sidebar issue. Does allow collapse/expand, which is
good. It opens up a new Google Chrome window to hold collapsed tabs
(with the message to minimize it and forget about it), which is rather
kludgey. Still can't drag tabs.
-----
Tabs Manager
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ioigddmjfpphkbamgbaolfkpifddnaje
Same button-not-a-sidebar issue. Tab structure doesn't appear to
reflect browsing history. Seems to have only two levels, a "folder"
it creates, and all your tabs. Does allow dragging of those tabs, but
I'm not sure what the point is. Can't find a way to create a folder.
I'm not quite sure what the point is.
-----
Some of these limitations might be due to Chrome's architecture,
rather than the extension programmers. In particular, I suspect
Chrome just doesn't let extensions have enough access to the UI to do
anything really useful. Which is a shame, because Chrome feels so
much faster than Firefox.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
While my personal preference is for Safari, as a designer, this is good news, on two fronts. First, anything that knocks IE market share down is a great thing because I, like every web designer out there, am sick and tired of uttering the phrase "it works perfectly in every browser _except_ IE..." Second, I think it's good because, pure and simple, I think the Webkit engine is phenomenal. Both Safari and Chrome have deep HTML5/CSS3 compatibility and, more importantly, they are capable of things that allow web designers to do some really spectacular things. While I would love to see Safari market share increase, I'll be very happy to see webkit market share increase any way it can.
Does Chrome have the ability yet to make text a readable size without widening the page so I have to scroll sideways?
Does it have the ability to selectively stop/play animations?
No? Then I'll be sticking with Firefox a while longer, I guess. Come back when your browser's accessible and then we'll talk.
Though a few people have pointed out that it's version specific, if you look at the actual numbers Chrome is still pretty close to IE, which is very cool. Of course, it's based on pageviews and not the number of users, and I bet most people who bother using Chrome probably use the web more than your average IE user. Is Firefox going to go bye-bye? I expect that there will always be an open source browser that has a reasonable market share. Will Firefox continue to be on top, or will we be seeing a different dominant open source browser in a couple of years?
I've used Chrome a lot and like it even more. Unfortunately, a mere day's browsing generates 700,000 writes according to windows (almost an order of magnitude over any other browser). As an SSD user, this just isn't acceptable and all the fixes are a complicated way of 'shoving the cache onto a spinning disc drive'.
I think Chrome should depend on the underlying OS to handle video. This allows them to both support and NOT support h.264. Most people will get h.264 support, and those who want to vote with their wallets won't.
People keep claiming that Chrome uses less memory than Firefox so I decided to take a look.
Memory used:
Initial start up, no pages open:
Firefox 39 MB
Chrome 56 MB
5 tabs open:
Firefox 135 MB
Chrome 152 MB
Size on disk (Windows version)
Firefox 44 MB
Chrome 75 MB
There are things that I like about Chrome and over the past couple of years Firefox has really pissed me off with their never ending bonehead design decisions. But the "Firefox is bloated" claims just don't make sense.
The problem is that as long as MPEG LA expects to be paid for use of the standard you're going to have a two tiered net the way that it used to be with Flash. Granted most folks would have a license via MS, but it's a really shitty situation to have to either a licensing fee to use the web or violate somebody's patents.
The ones who should be worried about this are not Microsoft. Rather, they are Mozilla. This news just goes to show how irrelevant Firefox is quickly becoming. Luckily for them, they still have time. All they need to do is stop doing the stupid shit that they've been doing the past couple of years.
First, bring back the fucking menu bar and the status bar by default! The space gained by not showing them is much less valuable than the time saved by having the browser's functionality easily accessible (using the menus) and by having informational messages shown much more obviously (using the status bar). It was a really fucking stupid decision to hide these by default, and it has crippled Firefox's UI. No, I don't want to dig through about:config trying to find the right options to re-enable this functionality that shouldn't be disabled by default.
Second, go back to a sensible release schedule! Put out solid, well-tested major releases once a year. Use version numbers that are actually meaningful. Don't succumb to stupid release policies or version number shenanigans just because Chrome does. Using a sensible release schedule will also help prevent the UI from changing drastically on a monthly basis, which only serves to drive users away.
Third, fix the really fucking horrible memory and CPU consumption that Firefox has exhibited for years now. This alone is one of the major reasons why people use Chrome. It's not that they like Chrome, but rather they just don't like how Firefox consumes so much fucking memory even after short browsing sessions, and even when using a fresh installation with no extensions or add-ons installed yet. It's even less pleasant when Firefox feels so much slower than Chrome, Opera, and even IE these days.
Fourth, show the damn protocol in the URL bar by default! Yes, it's important, and no, it doesn't waste space. It was a pathetic decision to remove it, and it really made Firefox much less usable. No, I don't want to dig through about:config trying to find the right option to re-enable this functionality that shouldn't be disabled by default.
Mozilla had their most successful years before Firefox 4. It has been all downhill since then. It's also been long enough that it should be obvious that this new approach isn't working. It's driving away the core Firefox users who made Firefox what it once was. If Firefox is just going to be a poor imitation of Chrome, and inferior in many ways, then why the fuck don't people just use Chrome? Well, that's what's happening. Maybe Mozilla can get their shit together and fix this problem before Firefox is completely irrelevant.
With a stock firefox that's true.
But throw in a few popular third party extensions, and leave FireFox running for a day or two. It will start consuming all your available RAM and a good chunk of virtual memory too (growing more and more the longer you leave it open).
With other browsers, memory consumption is rarely even noticeable. I can leave safari running for *months* and it'll happily sit on around 200MB with my usual 15 or so tabs. And yes, I do have a bunch of third party extensions installed. Pretty much the same ones I had when I was using FireFox every day.
What has happened to Opera! Opera has always been in the lead
{argument Here} I'll download and use the 64bit version, thank you.
It's just so many sites don't work with Opera anymore
http://i39.tinypic.com/ke8ztj.jpg directv.com for one.
Opera is not only being overlooked but rejected by many. I notice you've
been mod'ed down, even here...
Battlefield 3 requires Firefox or Chrome, folks can't understand why
I don't care for those browsers, and I can't understand why I can't use Opera.
I've used Opera forever, since way back when. I've used Internet Explorer intentional one time.
I tried to download a game (Win95), the game installed itself instead. I had met ActiveX and
never trusted I.E. since, using Netscape prior to Opera. Firefox and Chrome are alright, Opera is just more...Mature.
I notice Firefox finally has a "paste and go" in address bar context menu, Opera has had
it for years, just little things like that.
Here is the real news - chrome (all versions) near tied Firefox (all versions ) in November and as of December has clearly overtaken it for the position of second most popular browser
Well, my primary measure has been if I leave it open on Friday, how will it react on Monday when I get back. And on that FF has failed like horribly, both Chrome and IE respond much faster. Using process explorer it seems Firefox is busy reloading a billion stack pages which a) it'd has no reason using anyway and b) even if it did, just load the few I need and display those. Maybe I'm hitting some kind of issue that leaks memory like shit, but at least that's what I find. I haven't filed a bug because honestly I don't know WTF to file the bug on, I just switched to Chrome. If I got too paranoid about what Google is doing, I'd get Chromium.. but FF is really fucked up and I don't know what'd bring it back, it'd certainly be no quick fix.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Microsoft said only Windows Vista and Windows 7 would be auto-updated to IE 9. Windows XP, with over two years of extended support remaining, would get only IE 8. The latest versions of Chrome and Firefox run on Windows XP, unlike IE 9.
Then go look the numbers up and compile them into groups yourself.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
I've done a lot of experiments with Firefox memory usage and extensions, and I've concluded that memory usage depends less on extensions and plugins, and a lot more on what sites you visit. I tend to surf image gallery sites, especially those that use a lot of JavaScript (such as Deviantart). After only 10 minutes of surfing, memory usage usually goes up to 500MB. After just an hour, not a week, I'm up to the 700MB mark. It might be the JavaScript, or it might be due to surfing through a hundred megs of images within an hour.
I just updated from 3.6 to 8.0.1, and I've seen memory usage go up quite a bit, even without extensions. Given all the hype about lower memory usage, and fixed memory leaks, I was surprised. Firefox is indeed faster, but memory usage is even worse than ever.
Why care about memory usage? The problem is that Firefox has always had issues with freezes every 10 seconds or so, and I presume it's due to garbage collection. The more memory Firefox uses, the longer the freezes are, resulting in interrupted browsing, typing, and lost mouse clicks. I ended up downgrading back to 3.6. The freezes actually lasted longer in 8.0.1 because the browser uses more memory. Until Mozilla adds some wait states into their memory manager, or otherwise fixes the regular freezes, I won't upgrade beyond 3.6.
Microsoft is now planning to auto-update most IE users.
Chrome includes flash and a pdf viewer and both are binary. Also a terminal client, native code implementation, yada yada. if anything chrome's "bloated"
But the asynchronous UI is good. Fennec (Firefox for mobile) adopted *FINALLY* a truely asynchronous UI and let me tell you: it rocks. pure and simple.
I just wish this will happen on Desktop too. That's the one thing to steal from Chrome (albeit it's a different technical implementation of it).
It basically means UI never blocks, nothing ever feels laggy.
Truth be told, I read it on Firefox, though I also have Chrome running. In fact, I do my "throwaway" browsing on Chrome and "serious" browsing on Firefox. Chrome not being able to bookmark all tabs to a folder is a serious deficiency that prevents me from saving sets of links that are the result of possibly lengthy research. Another constant annoyance is Chrome saving all files to Downloads instead of giving me the option to open. This litters my Download directory with lots of junk, a problem I do not have with Firefox. And Chrome cannot be trusted to remember its open tabs after an unexpected shutdown (such as a reboot).
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
I use pretty much all the browsers.
Firefox: Usual generic browser with NoScript on.
Chrome: My Google+ games account, YouTube and Topless Robot (since half the links on there are YouTube videos anyways.)
Internet Explorer: My "private" G+ account.
Opera: My Google Apps email account.
Along with making it easy to log into different Google related accounts without worrying about fiddling with settings, it makes it easy to switch tasks quickly based on the icons in the taskbar.
I probably ought to do some research and figure out something else to replace the IE slot with though. It feels kinda embarrassing to be using IE for anything at all on a regular basis =P
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
I used to use Firefox all the time. But I like fast software (I'd be using Dillo if it could handle modern web needs) and FF just seemed to get bigger, slower and more bloated all the time and no-one at Mozilla cared. Then Chrome came out and wiped the floor with Firefox: it opened much faster (still does) and had the faster experience I was looking for. I immediately switched to Chrome/Chromium along with many other people. Firefox then improved the responsiveness of their browser considerably but they'd already lost some key market share.
A lot of desktop application coders, including some notables I used to work with, do not seem to care about the sluggish responsiveness of their frankenstein creations until someone jumps up and down and hits them with a big stick. Cases in point: Gnome, KDE and other monstrosities, massively endowed with alleged "features". On Linux I use fast light software where possible. I always enjoy watching applications and windows open instantly on five year old hardware. Posting from Chrome on Mac now.
The SafeBrowsing stuff does keep SQLite files, but the one I see in my Chrome profile is only 5.1 MB. My Firefox urlclassifier3.sqlite file is 44 MB. My Chrome's "History" file is 151 MB. I'm on Linux.
I don't trust Google completely, but I'd be very surprised if Chrome were snooping on files all around the system. In fact, I just used strace to record every file accessed by Chrome during a quick session in which I launched it and shut it down, and the only files it accessed that weren't strictly related to the Chrome profile or the desktop environment were files that I downloaded with Chrome in the past--and those were only stat accesses, to see if the files still existed. The total size of all files accessed in my home directory was 378 MB, and the entire ~/.config/google-chrome directory is 522 MB. This is Chrome 16.0.912.63-r113337 on Kubuntu Natty.
In this case I think your paranoia is misplaced. Chrome is probably the safest contemporary web browser one can use.
"Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
Maybe we can expect a version of IE for Android soon? :D
While the comparison might be somewhat apples-oranges, I do think Chrome deserves credit for upgrading the majority of its clients to the latest version, independent of OS version and without hassling its users about it. In contrast to this, Internet Explorer has artificial ceilings installed, older versions of Windows cannot upgrade past a certain version and I believe Apple has similar policies towards the use of Safari. Chrome imposes no such 'sanctions' on its users, which I think is a great way to adapt the way we use the Internet to its ever faster evolution.
Although I don't understand the resurfacing argument that IE6 is mainly kept alive by corporations. Would that not contradict some sort of evolutionary process? Those unwilling to change should be left behind, just because advances in web technology could provide advantages to internal applications of competitors, so if they decide not to upgrade, the competition should decide it for them. But this seems not to be the case. So my bet is that the majority of IE6 users probably come from bootlegged vanilla XP installations with (surprise-surprise) automatic upgrades turned off in regions like China.
And then there once was Firefox, in its heyday the only alternative to The Microsoft Way. Now, it tries to maintain a release schedule that is only rivaled in speed by some out-of-whack neutrinos. Somehow its upper management got deluded into thinking they needed to mimic their new-found rival to stay relevant. While that sentiment has some truth to it, the way it was executed hurt their core user base more than they could siphon off users from either IE or Chrome. Because people who like Chrome, will use Chrome. And not something that desperately chases Chrome, but fails to address other critical issues in the process.
I used to like Iron a lot too (the portable version) until in a recent Slashdot comment somebody pointed to a debunking of it at http://chromium.hybridsource.org/the-iron-scam. I must admit at first I was a bit disappointed, but then I said to myself "welcome to the wonderful world of FOSS".