It's becoming obvious that Chrome will beat Firefox and become #2

[Zlain]

Yes, because the average public don't give a flying fig about extensions, user javascript, tab behaviour. They want something simple to use, and fast. The problem is that all of you are thinking like nerds when you should be thinking like the average web using layman. Chrome is by far the easiest web browser to use, and it pretty much ties with Opera at being the fastest. Firefox not only seems to be getting more buggy with each release, they actually seem to be going back with their rendering engine as well, a lot of work is needed on Firefox. I am a tech geek, and I don't even care about extensions. I use ad muncher to get rid of advertising, and the only addons I use in Chromium are ESPN cricinfo, Chrome 2 Phone, Awesome Screenshot, and F.B Purity. I use my web browser to browse, I don't need it to do a million things in one go. Chrome may not be as customisable as some other browsers, but it is slick, extremely fast, and easy to use, and that is why it is turning into such a hit.

Nice comment.

No, that's why it won't beat Firefox, at least among people who know better. Just works? DownThemAll doesn't 'just work' on it, so there is no way I'll use it as my primary browser. AdBlock Plus doesn't 'just work' on it like on Firefox, so there's another reason. It's more than just a browser that just works, most people want the ability to customize it and be able to do things easier. With literally thousands of add-ons, you can do that with Firefox. Chrome will never be that way, to say nothing of different themes like Firefox has. Every time a new version of Chrome is released I try it out for a week or so, but consistently I go back to Firefox.

I can't understand why you would say that when Google Chrome has its own extensions (where the browser doesn't need to be restarted) and the amount of extensions are growing.

[brentaal]

I can't understand why you would say that when Google Chrome has its own extensions (where the browser doesn't need to be restarted) and the amount of extensions are growing.

Because Chrome's extensions are nowhere close to having the same amount of functionality that Firefox extensions have. Even the most important one, Adblock Plus, doesn't work properly because Google doesn't want it to, otherwise they'd be losing out a lot of money if people managed to completely and successfully block out their ads.

Until Chrome allows me to have a fully functional Adblock Plus, BetterPrivacy and GoogleSharing, I won't be using it. Oh and yeah, it'd be useful to give people the ability to turn off history and cache, too.

[Vice]

I think that Chrome will become the dominant browser eventually. It has been growing really fast and they improve it all the time. Google has almost limitless resources to pump in to this browser and it shows.

[marc2003]

i love firefox and won't be switching anytime soon.

but of course, the answer to the question is "yes"....

yeah it has the behemoth google behind it.

[The International]

Opera is becoming my primary browsing browser primarily for its browsing speed and ability to stack tabs, however there are still a few extensions i miss from chrome such as the autopager, built in rss feed and gmail checker. The only reason I use firefox is for its greasemonkey script support.

There is a gmail checker extension for opera -> https://addons.opera.com/addons/extensions/details/gmail-checker/1.1.2/?display=en

[Ironman273]

Petty browser bashing aside, I think the numbers tell the tale. These are the browser statistics from 2010. While IE is declining and Firefox is on top, Firefox usage is flat and slightly declining. Chrome usage, however, is on the rise. If the trend continues, then eventually more people will be using Chrome than Firefox.

Source: W3Schools

(Ignore the months on the bottom. I accidentally have them backwards.)

[laycat]

Petty browser bashing aside, I think the numbers tell the tale. These are the browser statistics from 2010. While IE is declining and Firefox is on top, Firefox usage is flat and slightly declining. Chrome usage, however, is on the rise. If the trend continues, then eventually more people will be using Chrome than Firefox.

<snip>

Source: W3Schools

(Ignore the months on the bottom. I accidentally have them backwards.)

Source, w3schools. W3Schools even states on the web site displaying those statistics that these numbers are derived from it's own web hits, and the traffic through W3Schools is primarily technology based. Therefore, this is far from a true representation of the web browsing joe bloggs. If you really want to try and use numbers, you might be better using the numbers as stated on the wikipedia page for browser share (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers). This at least uses multiple statistics counts, and takes the mean for a fairer representation.

EDIT: Please note I'm not disagreeing with the actual statistics, I believe in terms of trends these are fairly accurate, with IE declining, FF remaining roughly equal, and chrome increasing rapidly, however, using a wider range of stats to prove this would provide a much more solid basis for argument.

[tanjiajun_34]

In about 3 or 4 years ago, I was in love with Firefox. It was not slow as compare to the browsers at at time (Safari 3). I remember Opera and IE is the slowest and Firefox is faster and Safari is the fastest. I tried switching to Safari because it looks better and it is faster (Even through actually I cannot tell the different). But I give up on Safari 3 due to bookmarks menu. I have tons of bookmarks. Like 100+ (Now even much more). On firefox, i can scroll using my mouse across my bookmarks. But on Safari 3, I have to spam the down button to scroll my bookmark. So I jump back to Firefox. Then i remember reading on newspapers, a new web browser by Google is released. I remember immediately on my computer to try it a try. I don't feel the gui very smooth (But actually it is....). I give its bookmark menu a try. I remember it is stupid to display like first 8 bookmarks outside and the other like 100+ bookmarks in the drop down menu. Well at least it can scroll! Unlike safari.... So I decided to give it a try and then in about like 2-3 weeks, I got used to chrome and no longer cares about firefox.

Well it took some time to switch a browser for me.. So I think Chrome might not catch up very fast. But it will. Maybe years...

Petty browser bashing aside, I think the numbers tell the tale. These are the browser statistics from 2010. While IE is declining and Firefox is on top, Firefox usage is flat and slightly declining. Chrome usage, however, is on the rise. If the trend continues, then eventually more people will be using Chrome than Firefox.

Source: W3Schools

(Ignore the months on the bottom. I accidentally have them backwards.)

Wtf? I thought IE share is highest?

[Samurizer]

Because Chrome's extensions are nowhere close to having the same amount of functionality that Firefox extensions have. Even the most important one, Adblock Plus, doesn't work properly because Google doesn't want it to, otherwise they'd be losing out a lot of money if people managed to completely and successfully block out their ads.

I'm really sorry, but it's been possible for adblocking extensions to "work properly" since months ago. Can you give an example of what you mean when you say "doesn't work properly"?

And "nowhere close"? Could you be any more unspecific and vague? What units are you measuring by, and how are you defining "close"?

[thenaes]

I'm really sorry, but it's been possible for adblocking extensions to "work properly" since months ago. Can you give an example of what you mean when you say "doesn't work properly"?

And "nowhere close"? Could you be any more unspecific and vague? What units are you measuring by, and how are you defining "close"?

I agree - adblocking works just as well now in Chrome as it does in Firefox IMO. Or at least very close. I don't see any problems in my daily browsing.

[brentaal]

I'm really sorry, but it's been possible for adblocking extensions to "work properly" since months ago. Can you give an example of what you mean when you say "doesn't work properly"?

No, it has not. It works using JS. It doesn't allow for blocking of ads within videos. It can't block requests. It's _not_ a proper "Adblock Plus" as it lacks all those Adblock Plus functions.

And "nowhere close"? Could you be any more unspecific and vague? What units are you measuring by, and how are you defining "close"?

That's not vague. That's reality. Chrome offers none of the flexibility to addon developers that Firefox did.

I agree - adblocking works just as well now in Chrome as it does in Firefox IMO. Or at least very close. I don't see any problems in my daily browsing.

You can agree if you want, but the adblocking still lacks core features. You're getting a half-baked product. Well, or maybe not, if you look at it from Google's self-preservation perspective, which makes it completely logical for them not to offer flexibility.

[polyarchist]

IE9 opens fastest by FAR on Windows.

I was waiting for people to mention this.

The main reasons people use Chrome over IE/Firefox is because of 1) Responsiveness of the UI. 2) Standards adherence and Compatibility with the sites they visit. 3) Sheer rendering speed.

Now that IE9 seems to be on top of all 3 of those reasons, (people don't pick Chrome over Firefox for extension support) shouldn't we see a significant number of Chrome/Firefox users come back to IE9?

[thenaes]

I was waiting for people to mention this.

The main reasons people use Chrome over IE/Firefox is because of 1) Responsiveness of the UI. 2) Standards adherence and Compatibility with the sites they visit. 3) Sheer rendering speed.

Now that IE9 seems to be on top of all 3 of those reasons, (people don't pick Chrome over Firefox for extension support) shouldn't we see a significant number of Chrome/Firefox users come back to IE9?

I tried out the IE9 Beta the other day and I was very impressed. I am going to be watching that one closely.

[thenaes]

You can agree if you want, but the adblocking still lacks core features. You're getting a half-baked product. Well, or maybe not, if you look at it from Google's self-preservation perspective, which makes it completely logical for them not to offer flexibility.

All I know is that I hit one button to install the extension and now I don't see ads. I haven't come across any sites that it didn't work on, yet. I guess I just don't care exactly how it works, just that it works. Adblock used to be the thing holding me back from switching to Chrome, but it works fine now.

[Samurizer]

No, it has not. It works using JS.

So?

It doesn't allow for blocking of ads within videos.

You're wrong. Look through the settings page for yourself and find the options there. And if you really want to pretend you can't find it, let me know so I can go through the trouble of posting a screenshot to prove you wrong.

It can't block requests.

It blocks downloads all the same. Your point being?

That's not vague. That's reality. Chrome offers none of the flexibility to addon developers that Firefox did.

You can agree if you want, but the adblocking still lacks core features. You're getting a half-baked product. Well, or maybe not, if you look at it from Google's self-preservation perspective, which makes it completely logical for them not to offer flexibility.

Well, if it's not vague, I'm sure you can offer some VALID examples on how Adblock "doesn't work properly" in Chrome instead of just the usual anti-Google rhetoric spouted by ignorant noobs (you're not one of them, right?).

[brentaal]

Well, the ads are "hidden", but the paranoid ones among us who block them for privacy reasons (along with tracking sites) don't feel like it really blocks anything. Google will for example still load its Google Analytics while you browse (unlike with Firefox where you can fully block it).

So?

It doesn't work if JS is turned off.

You're wrong. Look through the settings page for yourself and find the options there. And if you really want to pretend you can't find it, let me know so I can go through the trouble of posting a screenshot to prove you wrong.

The availability of a check-box in an addon means nothing when the ads don't get blocked.

It blocks downloads all the same.

No, it's not.

I'm sure you can offer some VALID

And I'm sure you'll be the one to define what's valid and what's not.

[9088]

Safari is #1 :yes:

:whistle:

[xplatinum]

Firefox has decent extensions. Chrome doesn't. Chrome has almost 0 customization and is extremely basic.

NOPE

The average user does not need extensions and customization.

[Paul Ferson Veteran]

Chrome isn't really for me. I used to really like the browser, but then I tried Firefox for a few days and realised I couldn't accept a downgrade again. At the moment I'm using Opera because it's another truly great browser, along with Firefox. Chrome doesn't allow you to do half as much as Firefox does. With Firefox themes you can radically change the interface of the browser - with Chrome you can only change the colors and such. It is undoubtedly not as advanced as Firefox in the customization area. While it's nice to be able to install an add-on without restarting the browser, it's not a big deal to have to do so at the same time. Firefox extensions feel more complete as well - look at Stylish in the two browsers for a comparison. Chrome uses a basic HTML page, and Firefox uses a window for the extension, making it feel more like a core feature than an addition.

While Opera's doesn't seem to be working flawlessly with everything I'd like it to, or it works with it slightly differently, I don't mind. I edit a website a lot, and Chrome doesn't allow me to use tables to their fullest extent. Firefox does. So if I'm going to edit a website, Firefox is the browser I'll be using for that purpose. I enjoy using different browsers, but I dislike a couple of aspects of Chrome. I might not use my browser in a method as advanced as some people do, but I can appreciate some of the features Firefox and Opera afford. I tend to be quite particular about fonts, and one of the reasons I dislike Chrome is because it does not really render fonts quite as well as any other browser. It seems to be one of the weaknesses of the Chromium platform for me, but anyway. I think it might be best to sit back and see what others are saying - I know I'll find some interesting arguments from different perspectives.

[thenaes]

Safari is #1 :yes:

:whistle:

Funny you mention this - I actually really liked Safari when I had a Mac and even the Safari 5 on Windows isn't bad. The thing it does not do well is memory usage though - I had 1 tab open after using it for 20-30 minutes and it had nearly 500mb of RAM usage.

[Samurizer]

Well, the ads are "hidden", but the paranoid ones among us who block them for privacy reasons (along with tracking sites) don't feel like it really blocks anything. Google will for example still load its Google Analytics while you browse (unlike with Firefox where you can fully block it).

The availability of a check-box in an addon means nothing when the ads don't get blocked.

No, it's not.

They do get blocked. I'm not sure how to make it any simpler for you than that. Maybe one day you'll find out why your computer's behaving strangely for you, but I suppose that's your own concern.

And I'm sure you'll be the one to define what's valid and what's not.

I'm not deciding anything, I'm just telling you what's blatantly obvious. Your complaints aren't valid because they aren't true, simple as that.

[still1]

Source, w3schools. W3Schools even states on the web site displaying those statistics that these numbers are derived from it's own web hits, and the traffic through W3Schools is primarily technology based. Therefore, this is far from a true representation of the web browsing joe bloggs. If you really want to try and use numbers, you might be better using the numbers as stated on the wikipedia page for browser share (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers). This at least uses multiple statistics counts, and takes the mean for a fairer representation.

EDIT: Please note I'm not disagreeing with the actual statistics, I believe in terms of trends these are fairly accurate, with IE declining, FF remaining roughly equal, and chrome increasing rapidly, however, using a wider range of stats to prove this would provide a much more solid basis for argument.

yup like this

http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1

[Fraud OS 11]

Probably the biggest reason is that it's from Google, it's fast and Joe Average gets tired of using the same software and is always looking for something new.

I used to like Chrome thinking Google will catchup up and add essential features but it's still far too basic for my taste. You cant even do a "Find on this page" with "whole word only" or "match case". Or play a sound when a download finishes. Or save as MHT. Worse than that, Chrome has heavily influenced Safari and IE9. IE9 has a great rendering engine, kudos to Microsoft for that but the non-customizable dumbed down UI completely sucks. IE9 has the worse UI of all browsers and it's because of Chrome-envy. For those who don't want their browser oversimplified and *prefer* customizability, Firefox remains the best choice. Chrome's extensions aren't as powerful or abundant as Firefox's. if you don't overload FF with extensions, it's reasonably fast and problem free for me. I was a crazy IE loyalist until IE8 but IE9 simply drives me away. IE with version 9 is now a grandma browser.

[brentaal]

They do get blocked. I'm not sure how to make it any simpler for you than that. Maybe one day you'll find out why your computer's behaving strangely for you, but I suppose that's your own concern.

No, they do not. They get hidden. Chrome doesn't offer the ability to block either downloads or requests made within flash objects. It has nothing to do with someone's PC, nor with addon developers, it has to do with the fact that Chrome simply doesn't allow that.

[Jen Smith]

Oh look, its this thread again. Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Which is exactly what it is.. opinion. The only thing that's obvious is some people have a hard time differentiating opinion with fact.

Personally, I like Firefox. Fastest? Probably not. Smallest? Definitely not. Most flexible? Absolutely. But it's what I like to use and am comfortable with. I for one hate Chrome's UI with a passion. That minimalistic nonsense is just backasswards and unintuitive to use. Congrats on having the fastest javascript engine, but if it's just a chore to use, I'll pass thanks. I think the only browser with a worse interface would be Lynx. But that's opinion.. do I care if anyone else agrees with me? Not in the least, and I certainly won't go ramming it down peoples throat.