undefined | Better HN

0 pointstheptip7y ago0 comments

The GP didn't make the claim that the "product only succeeded because Google pushed it hard". All they said was that Google used their search monopoly to give it a big advantage.

Chrome's quality was a necessary, but probably not sufficient condition for it to gain the market traction that it did.

0 comments

cptskippy7y ago

Exactly, without Search pushing so hard the adoption rate would have been much slower and would have given Mozilla, Apple, and Microsoft time to respond.

Firefox has rapidly improved since it's inception and was rapidly stealing IE market share prior to Chrome.

Had Chrome not been rammed down people's throats then we might have a more even landscape than we do today.

josteink7y ago

Search. And Gmail. And YouTube. And every other google-controlled site on the internet.

Plus email-SPAM(!!!) about installing Chrome when you signed in to your Google-account on a new computer using a non-Chrome browser.

It also used dubious wording: “You need to upgrade your browser. Click here”

And paying to have it bundled as a drive-by installation with other software.

And Chrome-only websites. And the list just goes on and on.

It was spyware tactics + SPAM all over the place. And the sheer amount of it was mind-blowing.

Even technical people who explicitly didn’t want Chrome had a hard time avoiding it. Imagine the effect on regular, non-technical users.

Saying it was all down to technical merit is just appoligist and delusional.

With Chrome’s dominance and semi-monoculture undeniably in place, Google is now using that position to force new things, like subverting open web-standards with DRM.

I can’t believe people are so non-chalantly allowing this to happen.

ta34346787y ago

Its been a slow boil, and they employ experts to manipulate public opinion (HN fawns all over them still ... articles continually like "Ex-Googlers Do XYZ!". They won't get away with it long term.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse