• On TechRepublic: Windows 7: Slower to boot than Vista?
September 2, 2008 8:50 AM PDT

Google Chrome: Browser competition back in high gear

by Stephen Shankland
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 29 comments

Google Chrome is a warning shot over the bows of Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, and Opera.

The open-source software project, to be detailed later Tuesday at Google's headquarters in Mountain View, Calif., should dispel any lingering thoughts that the browser wars are over. To be sure, it's less cutthroat now than in the 1990s, but one of technology's most powerful companies is now on the battlefield.

So how does Chrome change the competitive landscape?

Google Chrome has many competitors to contend with.

Google Chrome has many competitors to contend with, according to these August stats.

(Credit: Net Applications)

Initially at least, it's not likely to change the market share rankings. According to Net Applications' browser market share statistics for August, IE has 72 percent share, Firefox 20 percent, Safari 6 percent, and Opera 1 percent.

But even before Google's browser became available for download, its repercussions were traversing the industry. There are plenty of implications from a company as large as Google that builds a browser tuned to advance the company's agenda of Web-based applications.

Here are some possible implications for the four major alternatives to Chrome.

Internet Explorer
IE still claims the dominant share of the browser market, and it still has the hard-to-beat distribution channel of being built into the most widely used operating system.

CNET News Poll

Browser wars, redux
What browser is in your future?

Google Chrome
Internet Explorer
Firefox
Safari
Opera
Other



View results

Firefox has been chipping away at IE's share for years, but the dominance has remained fairly secure, and unless Chrome offers revolutionary new abilities, it's not likely to do more than perhaps increase the chipping rate a bit.

Microsoft has lit a fire under its IE team, and given that Google is such a powerful Microsoft rival, that fire doubtless will burn all the hotter because of Chrome. The forthcoming IE 8, with beta 2 released last week and the final version officially due to ship by the end of January, is a sign of how serious Microsoft is.

Officially, Microsoft welcomes the competition. "The browser landscape is highly competitive, but people will choose Internet Explorer 8 for the way it puts the services they want right at their fingertips, respects their personal choices about how they want to browse and, more than any other browsing technology, puts them in control of their personal data online," Dean Hachamovitch, Internet Explorer general manager, said in a statement.

Vast numbers of people haven't upgraded from IE 6, which is ancient in Internet years. That cuts both ways for Microsoft: it's hard to get people to upgrade to IE 7 much less to IE 8, but those folks aren't moving to the competition either.

Of course, with Google's Web application agenda, the bigger long-term threat is to Microsoft's Office team, not to its IE team.

Firefox
Firefox potentially stands to lose the most from Chrome.

It's the leading alternative to IE and the standard bearer for those who love open-source software and revile Microsoft's technology, its business practices, and its philosophy. If you're hell-bent on taking down Microsoft, you could pick worse allies than Google.

Mozilla has something for the philosophical purists that Google lacks, though: a measure of independence. "Uniquely in this market, we're a public-benefit, nonprofit group, with no other agenda or profit motive at all," Mozilla Corp. Chief Executive John Lilly said in a blog posting Monday.

Survival is a powerful motive even if profit isn't, though, and the Mozilla Foundation, the parent of the Mozilla Corp., relies on Google for tens of millions of dollars each year in exchange for prominent placement of Google in the browser's search. Happily for Mozilla, Google just signed up for three more years of subsidizing Mozilla, so Firefox and other foundation activities should be financially sound at least for the time being.

Firefox has built a massive grassroots fan base, though. And even Google, for all its charisma, money, and power, will have a hard time replicating that.

Finally, though Chrome at first blush is bad news for Firefox, there's a subtler reality at play: IE is the dominant browser, and the greater the number of credible underdogs that exist, the more that dominance can't be taken for granted. Don't be surprised to hear Mozilla and Google present themselves more as allies than foes.

Safari
Apple has expanded its Safari ambitions from Mac OS X to Windows, most notably by letting the browser hitch a ride along with the iTunes update software. However, Safari has yet to become a force to be reckoned with.

But Safari could benefit indirectly from Chrome: both browsers are based on the open-source WebKit rendering engine.

If Google sponsors aggressive Webkit development--and doesn't end up wrestling with Apple for power over the project--both browsers stand to gain. Google's Android browser for mobile phones, it should be noted, also is based on WebKit.

Opera
Opera has a small share of the browser market, so it's the most likely to drop in position if Google Chrome catches on. It already fights for relevance against the bigger players.

But Opera is a scrappy company. Not surprisingly, it prefers to look at its own growth rather than its sliver of share, and CEO Jon Tetzchner points out that its share has grown each time a new browser has emerged as a viable competitor to Internet Explorer.

"Last year, we had more than 50 percent growth in our user base," Tetzchner said. "I think we'll do quite well this year as well. It seems every time there's talk of new browsers, that's been a positive thing for us. It has been good there is focus on browser alternatives."

Click here for full coverage of the Google Chrome launch.

Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank.
Recent posts from Digital Media
Police arrest exec for not using Twitter
Google picks up ad company Teracent
'Technical issue' downs eBay search over weekend
Economics dooming free streaming sites?
IBM taps into group language translation
Report: Wikipedia losing volunteers
'Jurassic Park' kid cast as Facebook co-founder
Farewell, triangles: AOL preps its post-Time Warner look
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (29 Comments)
by kwhsy82 September 2, 2008 9:30 AM PDT
I think it's nuts to say that Firefox has the most to lose to Chrome. Umm, the multibillion company with 71.5% share has the most to lose. Whether it will lose it, who knows. But who "lost" the most to Google, Yahoo or Infoseek? Sure, I get the "early adopters of Firefox may be most prone to Chrome" line of thought. Conversely, if this market turned say 20, 20, 50, 10 (with IE as the 50), it will feel far different. That's a MSFT nightmare. Google also has the economic clout to fight IE's one huge advantage -- bundling with the OS. Google can't afford to pay say Dell, HP, etc., to bundle Chrome? Google's deep pockets and its ability to monetize a browser with ad dollars -- that's a true threat.
Reply to this comment
by technewsjunkie September 2, 2008 10:46 AM PDT
Maybe more than economic clout, google has the all important DISTRIBUTION channel in that Google is "everywhere".
He who controls the distribution, has a Huge advantage.

I wonder what Chrome has that makes it compelling ENOUGH THAT CONSUMERS will download it? Most people won't download it from fear of losing their current "working" browser or other reasons.
by madams_chromevoice September 2, 2008 9:42 AM PDT
I agree that Firefox has the most to loose. It's the "un-cola" of browsers and now Chrome might turn out to be the "taste" people want instead.

I think the bigger battle is one step beyond browser competition. This is another salvo in the battle to break Microsoft's hold on the desktop OS. How many more pieces of the OS/applications puzzle do we need before we don't need anything from Microsoft any more?

-Michael Adams, www.chromevoice.com
Reply to this comment
by alan_06 September 2, 2008 9:48 AM PDT
Looks like MS is speeding up IE8 for a reason (may be they got insider info on chrome release ;) )
I love the new features in IE8 and I think it's ready to fight any competition!

As I read somewhere on user comments in CNET, it's sad from web designer perspective to make existing and new pages compliant on one more browser.
Reply to this comment
by open-mind September 2, 2008 10:33 AM PDT
One great thing about all this ... IE's market share is finally getting low enough (IMHO) that Microsoft can no longer manipulate web pseudo-standards. Hopefully soon, sites developed specifically for IE-on-Windows-only will be a thing of the past.
Reply to this comment
by CrashPad63 September 2, 2008 10:57 AM PDT
As your moniker states I ask this question. Why do you think an IE based site is so bad? What is so wrong with the standards of MS that 93.5% install base of OS and 75% browser consumers are so wrong in using? Better make it intelligent and concise, or your answer will be torn apart.
Man you linux and Apple fanbois cant get enough of yourselves. Years of trying and still MS is still dominating.
by sean_001 September 2, 2008 11:24 AM PDT
are you nuts?
by open-mind September 2, 2008 3:26 PM PDT
To answer your question Crashpad, only 72% (according to this article) of people are now using IE, and that number continues to decline. So that means the other 28% of people are SCREWED when they try to access one of these IE-only sites.

The simple alternative is for developers to code their sites to W3C standards. It's about the same amount of work to code, but then their site works with all compliant browsers on all operating systems. Nearly 100% instead of only 72%.

So it's not really about being a fanboy. It's about bang-for-the-buck and common sense.
by sean_001 September 2, 2008 11:23 AM PDT
Create a browser? that easy? tomorrow you may see them launch a rocket to challenge NASA. goole is most stupid of all.
Reply to this comment
by digitallydrafted September 2, 2008 11:38 AM PDT
has noone noticed the folder in the mozilla firefox install named "chrome"? The google browser will most likely just be a skinned version of firefox. firefox will remain, if nothing else, under a google fascade. the company press releases should be interesting very soon with these two organizations.
the hits to april fools jokes of past with google established there would be a demand for a google browser. turning a "joke" into market research, what a concept. firefox leaving open source to go subscription under the google name? doubtful, but the companies seem to be headed in same direction - regardless of hints to the contrary in various press releases.
Reply to this comment
by joetesta70 September 2, 2008 12:00 PM PDT
I'm using Chrome to read this on a 4GB Vista 64 bit machine. It seems a LOT slower than FF3 and IE8 beta 2 loading NEWS.COM, Wired.com, CNN etc....anyone else seeing this too?
Reply to this comment
by danajohnson September 2, 2008 12:01 PM PDT
If they can keep this browser as speedy and reliable as the search services, and make strident efforts to stop subversion, phishing, and hi-jacking attacks within the users domain, they'll certainly be popular at start.
Allowing the accessories available on the other browsers from Google and others, to be 'switchable', or temporarily dis-counted, from the main browser will be important. I use many accessory devices on IE, and a few on FireFox, but the drain on browser potential makes online bidding, page opening, and new searches noticeably slower and less stable.

As to 'sean_001's' comment on a space project, I'm waiting for more 'X' Prize and other competitions, and yes, in time, perhaps a privately funded mission to a well selected location- something like the Stardust mission, with real physical returns for the investment, as a possibility...
in a quote appropriate to the style, "Godspeed to Google".
Reply to this comment
by RedJac101 September 2, 2008 12:06 PM PDT
Here is my view: Mac people are going to complain because this article is saying that IE has 72+% of the market, and this is obviously wrong because nobody likes or uses Windows. Personally I use Firefox, but am looking forward to trying Chrome. But I will keep IE around of course, because despite what the Mac camp would have you believe, it is THE industry standard. Apple shot themselves in the head (which is not the first time) when they developed Safari causing MS to stop offering a Mac version of IE. And they didn?t help things by releasing a beta version as a completed product. If anyone is hurt by Chrome, it will be Safari for sure when Google releases the Mac version.
Reply to this comment
by The User September 2, 2008 12:46 PM PDT
I downloaded Chrome and forced myself to play with it for a few hours.

I might be a little faster than FF3. However, it is far less intuitive than FF3. Also, it is overly simplistic, to the point it reminds me of a stripped down sandbox version of a real browser that is undergoing development. Definitely not a browser I'd switch to.

My ranking is:
1. FF3
2. Opera - distant second
3. IE
4. Chrome
Reply to this comment
by gerrrg September 2, 2008 12:56 PM PDT
Whoa. This thing is fast. No idea what "The User" is referring to, but NO WAY is IE faster than Chrome. Lately, I've been having javascript problems with IE for whatever reason...def time to test this thing out.
Reply to this comment
by soulweaponry September 2, 2008 1:30 PM PDT
Agreed gerrrg. Just downloaded it and surfed a few sites. I use firefox as my primary browser and love it to death, but Google chrome i have to admit is quite a bit faster Loaded youtube in half the time

Question: does chrome have the little applications fire does? I love pic lens and window preview and gmail checker and all that. If i could get all that in google's browser, i might try it out longer
by The User September 2, 2008 2:24 PM PDT
Reading comprehension - the ranking says nothing about the speed, just personal preference.

Chrome does look faster than other browsers. It also seems to be less developed than others for regular use. It reminds me of stripped-down sports cars: they are ok for a few laps on a weekend, but for daily commute I'd choose a little slower but much more comfortable road vehicle with heated seats, power windows and cd player. Same goes here, I don't see using Chrome for regularly. I rather wait 0.01 of a second more, but have something less spartan.
by loserguy3000 September 2, 2008 2:46 PM PDT
I agree with the comments about what the 'user' who claims Chrome is slow... are you using the same software? I'm typing this using Chrome right now and I must say, this thing is BLAZING fast. Being a brand new product I suspect there's a ways to go, but I'm already supremely impressed. Spell check and plug-ins need evaluated, but its on its way.

Also agree that Firefox has the most to lose...if only because its existence is based on being the alternative browser. If one of the biggest and most powerful companies makes their own alternative, then people will consider that more of an option. For better or worse, IE is supreme because it is standard.
Reply to this comment
by tomj1969 September 2, 2008 2:48 PM PDT
I've been using this for a couple of hours now. No problems rendering any of my favorite sites, and it is so fast I feel like my computer was upgraded. This is a beta, so I am sure there will be bugs, but I'll be using it as my primary browser for the foreseeable future...
Reply to this comment
by rcardona2k September 2, 2008 3:17 PM PDT
Browser share is NOT a zero-sum game and doesn't add up to 100%. Browser users have less loyalty than alley cats. I was Arbitron's worst nightmare client because I switched radio stations mid-songs, that's the kind of multiple personalities users have per-page!! I laugh when a browser asks if it wants to be my default browser! Be my GFF for like two pages. Chrome is shiny and new I'll be riding in her car more often these days, guaranteed.
Reply to this comment
by zubinwadia September 2, 2008 3:28 PM PDT
More thoughts, reviews, screenshots here:

http://zwadia.com/
Reply to this comment
by citizencontact September 2, 2008 3:37 PM PDT
What we have here is a failure to communicate. (homage to CHL)

Google did not make a browser to compete with other browsers. They built a browser to help improve the situation for web applications. In the press conference, they said that they profited by having more people use the web more. The real competition is with Adobe Flex/Flash and all other non-HTML application environments. As Flex/Flash and desktop applications continue to improve, web applications will fall behind. Although Firefox did just make improvements in Javascript speed, Google worked on more than just that.

As long as we are stuck trying to compare the browsers for bells and whistles we miss the point of Chrome. For web applications to continue to improve, the browsers need to do the work reserved for specialized applications. As was mentioned by Google, all the other browser developers can take anything and everything to improve their own browsers.

I feel strongly that web applications are preferable, all other things being equal. Right now Adobe has built a Flex/Flash application to replicate Photoshop. Perhaps with SVG (which Chrome can show) and downloadable @font-faces (not yet in Chrome), it would be possible to come up with an equal to the Flex-Photoshop. This is the real competition and if HTML wins, then Google build on its core strengths of searching HTML pages, HTML ads and HTML applications.
---------------------------
Daniel Bennett
Reply to this comment
by Solaris_User September 2, 2008 3:54 PM PDT
@madams_chromevoice:: "I agree that Firefox has the most to loose. It's the "un-cola" of browsers and now Chrome might turn out to be the "taste" people want instead."
--
Why are people so concentrated on "who is going to loose" like they are rooting for a baseball team of something? Competition is a GREAT things because people who use the web no matter what browser they use will win.

It hurts Microsoft 70%, Firefox 20%, Apple 7% and Opera 3% .. but the thing you need to realize is it helps internet users 100%.
Reply to this comment
by joycelann September 2, 2008 4:40 PM PDT
I HOPE IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH XP
Reply to this comment
by i_made_this September 2, 2008 9:42 PM PDT
Played with Chrome and was unimpressed. The download / install process was as obnoxious as I've experienced thru all the browser wars - every single option was "Make Google Chrome My Default [fill in the blank]" and "Allow Chrome to Steal All My Passwords from FF and IE" and so forth - I just opted-out of all the options that invade privacy. It's unbelievable to me that some idiot in Marketing at Google had the gall to demand we opt-in to all this garbage without even trying out their browser first - what planet are these people from?

Chrome's default installs are equally offensive as Apple's sneaking Safari on Windows users last year without being asked. Stuff like this makes me want to stick with FF and Opera more and more.

When Google wants to get this show on the road for real - a full featured 32 / 64 bit, desktop and laptop operating system with Chrome as a core element, fair enough - I'll reconsider But for now, I just don't see any benefits in using Chrome.
Reply to this comment
by David Dudley September 3, 2008 12:18 AM PDT
I'd like to say that the one browser that likely won't suffer is Flock. I love it, but it has no user base at all and therefore has very little to lose. Ultimately, I think the walled garden that is Chrome will keep a lot of power users away from it as the lack of extensibility is an unfortunate feature that is lacking from Chrome, and at the same time, one of the biggest selling points of Firefox.
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (29 Comments)
advertisement
Click Here

E-tailers linked to 'scam' blame customers

Priceline, Classmates.com, and Orbitz say customers should read the fine print before complaining about being charged to join loyalty programs they didn't want.

The 411 on early-termination fees

Verizon Wireless has doubled its early-termination fees for smartphones, but what does it mean for the rest of the industry?

About Digital Media

The Web is now the place to go for news and entertainment. Look here for the latest on blogs, music, video, virtual worlds, social networking and more.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Digital Media topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right