Slashdot Mirror


Google Says There Are Now 2 Billion Active Chrome Installs (techcrunch.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Google is hosting its Chrome Dev Summit today. There hasn't been a lot of news out of the event, but one number that stood out in today's keynote by Chrome Engineering VP Darin Fisher was that there are now 2 billion Chrome installs in active use across desktop and mobile. This is the first time Google has shared this number. Sadly, Google didn't announce any new user numbers for Chrome today. The latest stat for active Chrome users remains at 1 billion -- a number Google shared in April. While this number is surely higher today than it was six months ago, the company decided to focus on the number of active browser install today. "I wanted to make this point that there are a lot of Chrome browsers out there," Fisher said. "What's exciting about this to you all is that when you think about building for the web, there' a lot of browsers out there that implement the latest web standards -- that implement the latest and greatest web features." The report also notes that Google has a total of seven products with more than a billion users: Gmail, Android, Chrome, Maps, Search, YouTube and Google Play Store.

48 comments

  1. too bad.... by jip_janneke1901 · · Score: 0

    that's a lot of browsers that that have rendering problems with google's own Open Sans Font in 300, 600, 800 weight....

  2. Safari, Konqueror, KHTML? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how people seem to forget how it all started.

    1. Re:Safari, Konqueror, KHTML? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Konqueror's still my main browser.

  3. two "billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They say two "billion", but they only mean 10^9, as they are american "billions".

    1. Re:two "billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      they're also obviously counting every single platform from mobile, to tablets to desktops and laptops. and every install on every platform that has communicated with google servers since some arbitrary cut-off date.. since chrome installs services that constantly talk to google's servers, that's pretty much every single install that exists on a working device, regardless of whether or not its actually used, and regardless of HOW that software got installed in the first place (remember that google uses spyware like distribution tactics, among other things)..

    2. Re:two "billion" by fibonacci8 · · Score: 1

      Billion as in the same order of magnitude as the human population on Earth.

      --
      Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
    3. Re:two "billion" by unixisc · · Score: 1

      That's what I think they have to, and also, by active, do they mean people who took the trouble of explicitly downloading them to their laptop or iPhone, as opposed to getting them preloaded on an Android phone or tablet? I think the 2 billion is the summation of all devices, not 2 billion people.

    4. Re:two "billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What it says on the sign in the article is "1B monthly active mobile users". This is not number of installs, but number of users actually using the product on a mobile device in the last month.

    5. Re:two "billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Wikipedia, no one uses the long scale in English anymore.

    6. Re: two "billion" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frick. I just checked my application list. My galaxy has Chrome. Never used it. Never knew it was there.

    7. Re: two "billion" by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Chrome has come installed on every Android device I've owned, 3 of which are still in active use. The devices, that is. As for the *active* Chrome installations--if that means "actually used for browsing the Web"--make that 2 billion minus 3, please.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    8. Re: two "billion" by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I thought 'active' meant the browser had to be separately downloaded i.e. applicable only to Windows and iOS

  4. Well duh by sremick · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Of course there are. Chrome is the new above-board "virus" being shoved on everyone as unwanted bundle-ware along with anything they download, then making itself the default browser (worked so great for IE, right?). Then once it's on there, it arrogantly thinks that "OH I HEAR YOU WANT TO RUN CHROME, OK I'M GOING TO TAKE OVER YOUR COMPUTER ALL TO MYSELF", spawns a dozen processes or so and proceeds to suck up all available RAM and CPU. This is not platform specific (we're seeing it on Macs and Windows) and as a result people are switching back to Firefox because they're tired of the horrible performance and Chrome taking over the whole computer (hey Google, computers are meant to multitask).

    I personally have never had a good taste about Chrome but I'm seeing tons of previous Chrome fanboys coming to the Firefox side now. *shrug*

    1. Re:Well duh by kosmosik · · Score: 2

      > Chrome is the new above-board "virus" being shoved on everyone as unwanted
      > bundle-ware along with anything they download,

      Hardly everyones. I haven't seen any Chrome bundled with apps on Mac nor Linux, maybe it is a Windows thing but nah... And hardly anything. To be hones last time I've seen Chrome bundled with installer was AFAIR with Avast Antivirus on Windows and it is probably a good thing to include Chrome with AV on Windows since it is way more secure than IE.

      > [Chrome performance compared to Fx]

      Wow! First time I see somebody complaining about Chrome performance as compared to Fx. For me Fx is a cow by YMMV. Usual complaint about Chrome is Google data policy about users...

    2. Re:Well duh by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

      Of course there are. Chrome is the new above-board "virus" being shoved on everyone as unwanted bundle-ware along with anything they download, then making itself the default browser (worked so great for IE, right?). Then once it's on there, it arrogantly thinks that "OH I HEAR YOU WANT TO RUN CHROME, OK I'M GOING TO TAKE OVER YOUR COMPUTER ALL TO MYSELF", spawns a dozen processes or so and proceeds to suck up all available RAM and CPU

      YMMV on Chrome. I use it on everything and I've never had a problem. Well, ok, it does make my shitty laptop's GPU go bonkers once in a while, but, that's all the trouble I've had with it.

      As for it taking over my computer... hardly. Seems to go away just fine when I close it.

      The only thing I'm giving you is MAYBE it runs kinda crappy on older systems (it is a bit demanding.)

      Now one thing I do on my computers, that I guess a fair number of other people DO NOT DO, is I close my browser every time I'm done looking at a page. I don't open 920384019321 tabs, so Chrome gets shut down completely and restarted again when I wanna browse the web some more. Chrome could be memory leaky, I dunno, my usage doesn't reveal that flaw, if it exists.

    3. Re:Well duh by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I can back this up, one of the things everyone asks me to do at the shop is "can you get rid of that Chrome thing? IDK what happened but now it keeps launching instead of (insert FF, Opera, Comodo, etc) and IDK how to make it go away" because every piece of "freeware" is shoving chrome even when those freeware programs are updated.

      And I'm sorry Chrome fanboys but I shat on MSFT when they tried shoving IE everywhere, I shat on Sun/Oracle when they were shoving Java everywhere, and now I think Google is slimy for using the exact same tactics as the spyware companies by shoving their product into third party programs that have shit to do with browsing.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    4. Re:Well duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had an unwanted Chrome install last week. Bought a new laptop and installed Windows 7 (back porting USB3 drivers was difficult. Pirates to the rescue! Seriously, why is hacked software so much better and easier to use?). Installed around 6 tools (7z, VLC, Firefox, CCleaner, can't remember the other ones...), went to download more, and suddenly noticed a Chrome icon staring back at me. I always choose the advanced options when installing software. I never saw a checkbox for Chrome. I now consider Chrome as malware.

    5. Re:Well duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If, and I do mean IF, Chrome drops the nasty habit of popping a 'completed download' bar at the bottom of my browser- every time I download something- a pic for example-. If they do that I may switch back. In the meantime, it's annoying, takes up realestate space on screen, (I don't have a 24" TV computer), and there you go. Drop that shite.

    6. Re:Well duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can't remember the other ones...

      Found your problem. Not clicking advanced install is consent.

  5. I installed Chrome once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many of these are used only to stream Netflix?

  6. Google Tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one am worried about Google tracking users and providing their browsing data/location to governmental agencies for their parsing with the purpose of watching/graphing what everyone is doing. While I may not do anything illegal or immoral online, I still prefer to remain anonymous as I see fit. I do currently use Chrome on work computers, but I am transitioning to Firefox/Tor on all of my home machines. I already do not install Google's web browser on new machines, whereas I had been inclined to before. Hopefully, this will become a trend and keep Google innovative and promote privacy internationally. If anyone is interested in privacy-related tools:

    Check out DuckDuckGo, StartPage (ixquick), epicsearch for privacy-oriented search engines and Pale Moon, Firefox/Tor, and Epic Browser for privacy-oriented web browsers.

    Also, go to https://privacytools.io for more information on privacy/security.

    Stay safe out there!

    1. Re:Google Tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does everyone assume that DuckDuckGo means you are not being tracked? They use AWS!

  7. Re:So the real question.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real question is, how does that make Trump look bad?

    Why would it need to do that? Trump makes Trump look bad.

  8. Unique users of Chrome by andrewa · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many unique users of Chrome though? Google can likely have a fairy good idea of that by the nagging you get to log into it when installing it.

    I'm personally responsible for about 16 instances of Chrome across various devices, virtual machines, etc. in my house. Others may not have quite so many instances, but I'd guess that most users have at least two instances of it (computer, phone).

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
    1. Re:Unique users of Chrome by andrewa · · Score: 1

      Clearly I should RTFA before I post, but then look at my ID#, it's a hard habit to break...

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    2. Re:Unique users of Chrome by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many unique users of Chrome though? ...
      I'm personally responsible for about 16 instances of Chrome

      5 here. Off the top of my head, probably more in VMs.

  9. accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The numbers can't be accurate unless these "active installs" are calling home...

  10. Re:So the real question.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks, Obama!

  11. How do they know? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    How do they know that Chrome has 2 billion active installs? Is it because Chrome always phones home?

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:How do they know? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      How do they know that Chrome has 2 billion active installs? Is it because Chrome always phones home?

      At the very least, it does when it checks home to see if it needs to auto-update. And certainly if it's tied to your Google account, syncs your settings and bookmarks, etc. I bet there are options to send metrics and diagnostic information as well.

      So, yeah... It's probably pretty easy for Google to get pretty accurate global install counts from all this.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    2. Re:How do they know? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      It's a safe assumption that my Android phone spies on me, after all that is why Google promotes Android and does not allow removing Google services by any method short of changing the firmware. However, if it turns out that Google also spies on my desktop computer by way of Chrome I'm going to be very upset. I don't think it does, unless you tell it to.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  12. Installed but not used by darkain · · Score: 1

    YUP! I have it installed on every machine I work on, yet use it on none except for extreme situations. Same goes for IE and Firefox. None are default. None get daily usage, only there for testing purposes and debugging things. My daily driver? Opera, AKA Chromium Stable.

  13. Which one has an incredibly stupid name? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Quick quiz: which one of the following billion user apps has an incredibly stupid name?

    1. Gmail
    2. Android
    3. Chrome
    4. Maps
    5. Search
    6. YouTube
    7. Google Play Store
    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:Which one has an incredibly stupid name? by Daniel+Klugh · · Score: 1

      To be fair, Google didn't name Youtube,

      --
      Daniel Klugh
    2. Re:Which one has an incredibly stupid name? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Hint: it's one that Google did name.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  14. Another inflated claim by techno-vampire · · Score: 2

    The one and only reason that Google can claim this is because every Android device comes with Chrome installed and you can't remove it. Sure, you can install Firefox or some other browser instead, but even if you never ever use Chrome, it will still be there, wasting bandwidth on updates that will never get used. And, even if you select another browser as your default, you'll still get asked which browser to use every time you click on a link in an email, with Chrome selected instead of whatever you've picked as your default. (And, the checkbox to make it the default will also be checked.)

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
    1. Re:Another inflated claim by swillden · · Score: 2

      The one and only reason that Google can claim this is because every Android device comes with Chrome installed and you can't remove it.

      You can disable it. The original factory-installed version will still be sitting on your read-only data partition, but Android will act as if it doesn't exist. Settings -> Apps -> Chrome -> Disable. You'll get a warning that disabling it may break other apps, but if you have another browser installed, and some app does get broken by Chrome being missing, that app is buggy and you should complain to the app vendor. The whole idea of "intents" is to allow apps to depend on one another without being tightly coupled.

      Sure, you can install Firefox or some other browser instead, but even if you never ever use Chrome, it will still be there, wasting bandwidth on updates that will never get used

      If you disable it, it will never be updated.

      And, even if you select another browser as your default, you'll still get asked which browser to use every time you click on a link in an email, with Chrome selected instead of whatever you've picked as your default. (And, the checkbox to make it the default will also be checked.)

      Umm, no. Your OEM messed something up if after you've set a different default it continues offering Chrome. And in any case, it can't be offered if you disabled it.

      Also, Google is claiming *active* installs, meaning they're measuring installs that actually do get used, so none of what you said actually has any bearing on the article.

      Of course, Chrome undoubtedly gets a boost on mobile by already being there, just as IE does on Windows. In both cases lots and lots of users never bother getting anything else. This is probably more true on Android than on Windows these days just because IE was so bad for so long that a lot of users got trained that the first thing you do on a new Windows machine is download Chrome and delete the IE icon. Since Chrome is actually a pretty decent browser on Android, that hasn't happened.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:Another inflated claim by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      You can disable it. The original factory-installed version will still be sitting on your read-only data partition, but Android will act as if it doesn't exist.

      Live and learn. Thank you. Of course, if you do disable it, Android uninstalls any and all updates for it, meaning that if you ever change your mind, the updates need to be downloaded and installed again. With luck, that will be one, big cumulative update, instead of having to do them all, one after the other.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    3. Re:Another inflated claim by swillden · · Score: 1

      You can disable it. The original factory-installed version will still be sitting on your read-only data partition, but Android will act as if it doesn't exist. Live and learn. Thank you. Of course, if you do disable it, Android uninstalls any and all updates for it, meaning that if you ever change your mind, the updates need to be downloaded and installed again. With luck, that will be one, big cumulative update, instead of having to do them all, one after the other.

      Yes, it will be a single update, and no bigger than it has to be. Worst case, that first update is a download of an entirely new APK.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  15. Standards support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chrome should not be proud of their "standards support". They not only failed to remove non-standard failures from WebKit, waiting for too long for the web to become reliant on them, and then leaving it up to others to clean up the mess, but they also implement support for standards that are never quite right, and feel really rushed out the door.

    This includes them wagging the dog to get others to implement things like WebRTC and IoT stuff before it's really been properly vetted, but also them just dumping their own proprietary tech out into Chrome before it's even a pseudo-standard (WebP, QUIC, PPAPI, etc), then let scads of their drones haunt other's bug listings trying to get these half-baked features into other browsers. Then others have to do the heavy-lifting to make proper standards out of them, fixing the problems they can which aren't already "too far gone", and making others look like they're behind.

    This isn't even counting how they essentially worsened support for Flash by making the PPAPI version the only relatively stable one, instead of putting their muscle behind making a version that didn't need the plugin API. On top of that, they've shown how willing they are to just ignore other's standards when it's convenient, even if it screws things up for everyone. Just look at how they gave up on Pointer Events, made a competing, inferior Touch Events spec that didn't co-exist with it, and then backpedaled too late, only driving the state of touch event support back by many, many months while others sorted out the problems they had introduced.

    Frankly, Google hasn't been any better at driving the modern web than Microsoft was back when they were #1. The only difference is that their supporters still love them enough to give them a pass for their steering, and that their most visible opposition (Apple) are a laughing stock when it comes to web standards support after touting it so loudly when it helped sell their early iPhones.

    1. Re:Standards support? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      You mean websites don't really need to know my battery level?

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  16. Nice Non-Twist by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    Although this is really a SFW* factoid they gave, it is refreshing to see that they are apparently only counting installs that actually get used. I know some companies claim any system that may have had their product installed on it (even if that product got removed and replaced with something else right away) as part of their numbers.

    * SFW = So Freakin' What (or So Fuckin' What, if you are not afraid of the fuck word)

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  17. Re:So the real question.... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    Spasibo, Vladimir!

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  18. Google chrome is spyware by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    If you like Chrome use Chromium instead. At least you can turn off the spyware misfeatures.

    It is not feasible to stop Chrome from calling home. It intentionally sends data to Google's main website URL to prevent anyone from trying.

  19. I really miss pre-Chromeized Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We *nearly* got there - We were *almost* at the point when you could browse the web with *any* browser you liked and it would work!

    Now we're back where in the dark days where you have to use a specific browser to be guaranteed full site functionality. And it friggin' sucks.

  20. Google Chrome by codefaktory · · Score: 1

    Yess !! I am totally agreed with it.