Print 22 comment(s) - last by DominionSeraph.. on Sep 4 at 11:57 PM

Chrome's original "primitive" release  (Source: Google)

Yesterday Google aired the final build of Chrome 6.0, a faster, more compatible, more stable browser.  (Source: Google)
Browser has become a hit with some customers

"Slow and steady wins the race" -- that was the motto of the proverbial tortoise and its seemingly that of Google, as well.  After all Google isn't exactly the first to come to any particular market -- search, email, browser, smartphone operating system, etc. -- it just slowly builds in popularity and becomes a formidable force in each respective market.

Two years ago yesterday Google launched Chrome -- its first browser.  Yesterday it celebrated that anniversary with the release of the stable sixth version of its growingly popular browser [download here].

When Google Chrome first launched many were skeptical of the effort at best.  What did Google, a web software provider, know about making a successful piece of 
desktop software?  The answer, it turns out, was "quite a lot".

Google's Chrome browser has consistently been the fastest browser (based on our own testing here at 
DailyTech).  It also was among the first to implement sandboxed process for individual tabs, adding security and stability.  What's impressive on that note is how quickly it turned what was just an intriguing research project -- into code in a flagship product.

The road hasn't always been smooth.  As Chrome regulars know, the browser has had some serious stability and compatibility issues, particular for those downloading experimental builds.  Some days you saw Google's "Aw, snap!" error message on a far too regular basis.

However, here it is today sitting pretty in third place with 7.52 percent market share -- over twice what it had in October 2009.  And its momentum is continuing.

With Chrome 6.0, Google's tuned up stability, improved HTML 5 support, improved autofill, offered auto-translate, and improved syncing remotely with your various installs.  Menus have also been merged into a single all purpose unified menu, down from two in a previous build.  Linux and Mac support have also been improved.

In months ahead Google says its biggest goals are to roll out hardware acceleration (GPU rendering) for its browser (which Internet Explorer 9 and Firefox 4 feature) and build up its Chrome Web Store, which Google intends to be the internet's version of Apple's iTunes App Store. 

In short, while Google currently sits a bit back from top dogs Microsoft and Mozilla, the best is yet to come.  After all, this picture looks awful familiar -- doubling growth on a year-to-year basis, big veteran players, and a unique fresh perspective from Google.  Android, anyone?

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Growingly popular, or not...
By Basilisk on 9/3/2010 9:55:47 AM , Rating: 2
I've switched from FF to this because it's lighter and faster: with heavy Folding (2xGPU's, SMP-6) in the background, the Google browser is more responsivingly....

RE: Growingly popular, or not...
By ianweck on 9/3/2010 11:14:40 AM , Rating: 2
I've used Chrome for awhile now and love it. I'm using Iron now, I think I'll stick with this for a long time.

By drunkenmastermind on 9/4/2010 6:58:40 AM , Rating: 2
Iron rocks!

By neihrick1 on 9/3/2010 1:28:04 PM , Rating: 2
i've always found chrome to be faster, but ff 4 beta 4 is faster now i think

By aegisofrime on 9/3/2010 2:32:14 PM , Rating: 2
Firefox 4 Beta feels as fast as Chrome, but I miss the history dropdown menu though :(

By Spivonious on 9/3/2010 9:57:22 AM , Rating: 1
6 major versions over 2 years? Either their versioning system is wacky and this is really v1.6, or they write some buggy software.

RE: Wow
By Noliving on 9/3/2010 10:20:40 AM , Rating: 2
That is not at all what it means, it just means they have a faster browser development refresh rate than the others. If its anything it is probably a "wacky" version system they use but when you think about it there is no real standard for how you label your versions at all.

RE: Wow
By bug77 on 9/3/2010 10:39:54 AM , Rating: 2
Far from being wacky, it's actually very straight-up: each time a new major feature is added, the major version gets increased. Like going from 5.x to 6.x gets you the integrated Flash player, going from 6.x to 7.x yields GPU acceleration. Doesn't get much simpler than that, does it?

The Proverbial Hare
By praetorfenix86 on 9/3/2010 9:50:34 AM , Rating: 1
The proverbial tortoise said slow and steady wins the race.

The proverbial hare would be more like Netscape.

RE: The Proverbial Hare
By Drag0nFire on 9/3/2010 10:06:03 AM , Rating: 2
Meh. Netscape was an incredibly strong browser for its time. First with tabbed browsing, and much faster than IE.

And, it's code formed the basis of Firefox.

I wouldn't diss it.

Javascript performance
By edge929 on 9/3/2010 1:14:59 PM , Rating: 2
I work as a Java developer for a fortune 100 company and our ~300 person development team is using Chrome for our current application. Our main reason for going from IE6 (shudder) to Chrome was Javascript rendering performance. We develop in a heavily modified version of GWT + Java back-end, the end result being all Javascript on the client-side. Our performance testing with Chrome left every other browser in the dust.

Looks good.
By DominionSeraph on 9/4/2010 11:57:29 PM , Rating: 2
I was a bit hesitant about upgrading because Chrome 5 was excellent. Chrome 5 is fast, stable (it never crashed on me), and compatible (some websites didn't render right under Opera 10.50, my previous browser).
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

But I went and fixed it.

I've now spent a few hours with Chrome 6. The speed is still there. They didn't mess with the great screen real estate. The new consolidated menu is nice -- the previous two (unlabeled) menus always made it a guessing match.

From what I've seen so far, Chrome 6 seems to improve upon Chrome 5 by maybe 5%. So it made the best even better, if not by much.

Chrome Web Store
By Reclaimer77 on 9/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: Chrome Web Store
By killerroach on 9/3/2010 10:58:10 AM , Rating: 2
Whatever you're smoking probably isn't fit for human consumption.

Chrome's add-on system allows you to add plugins from literally anywhere... and there's no reason you have to buy any applications in order to get the same usability as Firefox. There is a Web Store, yes, but from there you lost anyone who knows what they're talking about.

RE: Chrome Web Store
By ianweck on 9/3/2010 11:12:50 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds like Chrome had very little chance to become your default browser anyway.

RE: Chrome Web Store
By Flunk on 9/3/2010 11:15:14 AM , Rating: 2
Chrome has a whole library of free addons too. I do like how people post stupid things without even looking around slightly first.

RE: Chrome Web Store
By Sazar on 9/3/2010 11:21:34 AM , Rating: 2
It does not sound like you have used Chrome.

Naturally, to each their own. Both Mozilla and Google offer great browsers with somewhat different experiences. Enjoy that which you prefer and please, if you are going to bash something, be educated about it to some degree :)

RE: Chrome Web Store
By Reclaimer77 on 9/3/2010 5:16:14 PM , Rating: 1
Apparently you guys have a crystal ball. Because I see no reason why you would have robust free apps, AND a web store. Are you guys THAT thick? Obviously the authors of the good add-on's will migrate their work onto the Web Store. Why wouldn't they? If they are putting just as much work into software as someone who is getting paid, why keep doing it for free?

Seriously, try to reason something about before knee-jerk bashing someone who actually uses their brain. Can't you at least concede the possibility that this is a prelude to having all good plug-ins or add-on's pay to download?

RE: Chrome Web Store
By bug77 on 9/3/2010 7:17:23 PM , Rating: 2
If you insist going down that road:
1. Apple has an AppStore. Is that the place to get the better plugins for Safari?
2. Microsoft has Marketplace (or whatever). Is that the place to get the better plugins for IE?
2. Firefox 4.0 beta already has surveys asking users if they are willing to pay for add-ons.

And to answer your question directly: many things are possible. Some of them will happen. But probably none will spur the consequences you'd expect.

RE: Chrome Web Store
By Reclaimer77 on 9/3/2010 9:21:09 PM , Rating: 1
You aren't making sense. Apple's app store is for their smart phones and iPad, not a browser. Google is calling it the CHROME store, if there was a SAFARI store, you would have a point.

Again, Zune Marketplace is JUST for content for the Zune player. There IS no Zune HD app store, hello? And even if there was, none of them would be for IE. Your analogy is terrible, again.

2. Firefox 4.0 beta already has surveys asking users if they are willing to pay for add-ons.

Did you throw this one in just "because"? Businesses are constantly doing surveys, what's your point?

I don't think you got my OP. I don't mind someone making money. I just can't imagine what Chrome could offer over Firefox in the way of addons you would need to buy, or why anyone would want to. Just.. no, no thanks.

Have you even seen the Chrome Extensions framework? It's not nearly as robust as Firefox, they are basically userscripts.

RE: Chrome Web Store
By acer905 on 9/3/2010 10:51:59 PM , Rating: 2
From the information i find available, there is a difference between and extension and what will be sold on the Chrome store. The store will exist to create the same basic types of apps that you would find on the mobile devices, games mostly... really what else is on the Apple app store anyway. It won't be the place for the browser extensions like adblock, and mail checker.

Specifically, it is a place for cross-browser web applications. If you really don't understand, look at wikipedia for "Web Application."

Of course if you still don't understand, just ignore it. However don't bash things you just don't understand.

RE: Chrome Web Store
By vectorm12 on 9/4/2010 7:45:02 AM , Rating: 2
Ofc there's no way for any of us to be sure but my guess is the chrome store is in fact aimed at Chrome OS for netbooks allowing desktops with Chrome to run the same apps from a desktop computer. Google have never been big on pushing paid services and I doubt they will start anytime soon.

Just look at the Android market, the amount of paid apps and service are in a clear minority and most apps are instead paid for by in app advertising.

"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki