Top Browsers Per Country from 1 to 30 June 2013

[Knife Party]

While he's being dramatic, you're being a drone. Bundling software in with other software in a sneaky manner like Google does with Chrome is an unsavoury practice. I go to get the latest version of Flash and if I don't uncheck the box conveniently checked for me under the download button, I end up with Chrome on my system. That is annoying.

facepalm, now both of you are being dramatic. Anyways, this is offtopic

[gameboy1977]

one day, this will be happen to Google for anti-trust. I really hate Google so much. I went to that website earlier, and I noticed who is really search online king: Google, but there is no google service in China, because they blocked Google search engine long time ago. Google's Chrome is also king in the world. I feel bad for Opera already.

[FloatingFatMan]

I am using Internet explorer 9 everyday. Did you remember EU and Opera sued MS for Browsers Wars? I feel bad for EU has tiny brain, because Opera wants to be more popular in the world, but it already failed.   EU should not fined MS for over billions dollars a few months ago, so they can sue Google's Chrome in first place!

 

Irony. Accusing the entirety of the EU of having a tiny brain, when your post is barely understandable. :rofl:

[FloatingFatMan]

one day, this will be happen to Google for anti-trust. I really hate Google so much. I went to that website earlier, and I noticed who is really search online king: Google, but there is no google service in China, because they blocked Google search engine long time ago. Google's Chrome is also king in the world. I feel bad for Opera already.

 

And do you know WHY Google is blocked in China?  Because Google refused to filter their search results to the Chinese governments orders.

 

Good for them, I say!  Censorship is bad.

[Knife Party]

Irony. Accusing the entirety of the EU of having a tiny brain, when your post is barely understandable. :rofl:

lol what I don't understand Is, you call out the OP on his post being barely understandable and being nonsense, yet he likes your post? LOL :D This is the new Neowin I say dear chap. 

[metallithrax]

Are you aware that when installing popular software, Chrome is bundled by default, just like toolbars were bundled years ago? By employing this sneaky tactic, Chrome acts like malware.

 

 

"acts like malware", not "is malware".

 

Then that would be the fault of those distributing the initial software, not Google's fault.  They don't have to accept Chrome as the additional download software, and neither do those downloading the initial software.

[XP1]

Then that would be the fault of those distributing the initial software, not Google's fault.  They don't have to accept Chrome as the additional download software, and neither do those downloading the initial software.

Is it not Google's fault for having licensed or authorized the distribution of its software through bundled packages?

Here is an example:

"Google has agreed to pay an unspecified 'significant amount' to have the software bundled with select Adobe downloads."

http://wayback.archive.org/web/20060709082728/http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=11200CI6N1HS

[metallithrax]

Is it not Google's fault for having licensed or authorized the distribution of its software through bundled packages?

Here is an example:

"Google has agreed to pay an unspecified 'significant amount' to have the software bundled with select Adobe downloads."

http://wayback.archive.org/web/20060709082728/http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=11200CI6N1HS

 

No, it is the fault of those bundling the software with their own software.  Google couldn't do it if others didn't allow it

[XP1]

No, it is the fault of those bundling the software with their own software.  Google couldn't do it if others didn't allow it

Google signed the deals. Google paid the money to have bundling. How can you say that Google is faultless?

[f0rk_b0mb]

I'm still using Firefox here. :)

[metallithrax]

Google signed the deals. Google paid the money to have bundling. How can you say that Google is faultless?

 

Because if the other companies said no, then Google wouldn't be bundling.

[XP1]

Because if the other companies said no, then Google wouldn't be bundling.

Are you saying that both sides are at fault? If Google did not want the bundling, Google would not have agreed to the deals and paid money.

[metallithrax]

Are you saying that both sides are at fault? If Google did not want the bundling, Google would not have agreed to the deals and paid money.

 

 

No, I do not see how Google are at fault in any way.  They are asking software companies if they will bundle their software(Chrome) with whatever the 1st company is offering.  It is down to the 1st company to accept or decline.  If they accept, then they are the ones who should be blamed.

 

Although, depending on how much is offered, I can see why a company would accept such a proposition.

[SiCKX]

Damn, I didn't know Google was wiping the floor with FF.

I used FF since the beginning, but the last year it was 99% all Chrome. It almost has everything FF has (add-ons) and strats faster+handles Flash better.