6 ms·

Not IE: not bundled, not integrated, easily uninstalled. If people don't like this move, there are a myriad of other browsers available for them to choose from.

mstade 9y ago
A myriad? Really?
- SturgeonsLaw 9y ago
  Yeah, all the Webkit reskins you could ever want!
sbierwagen 9y ago
What is Android or Chrome OS?
- dmitrygr 9y ago
  Android allows different browsers as first-class citizens. ChromeOS runs android apps, including those third-party browsers.
ocdtrekkie 9y ago
Chrome cannot be fully uninstalled without root from the operating system with the largest global market share (Android).
- dmitrygr 9y ago
  setting->apps->chrome->disable removes it form ever running, taking a byte of ram, or even in any way appearing to exist. it is not in /data, so it takes up no extra space
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
majormajor 9y ago
IE was extremely replaceable. Microsoft tried to tie it in as much as they could to leverage it being the default and justify it being bundled, but the other vendors share at least an equal share of the blame for completely dropping the ball. How long did Netscape Navigator/Communicator 4 linger? How many wasted resources were poured into things like the integrated page builder in Communicator instead of features? Do you remember trying to use Netscape 6 Beta or whatever it was called before it became Mozilla? IE 5 and 6 were initially just that much better. Heck, IE was even the best browser on Mac for a while circa 2000-2002ish. MS deserves a ton of extra blame for letting IE6 stagnate for five freaking years until Phoenix->Firebird->Firefox got them off their asses again, but don't blame them for having the better product when that initial war was won. But, another key difference here is that Google has much more incentive to keep improving Chrome and web standards even if they get more and more market share, since their user-facing products are web properties, and Microsoft's were not at the time.
- jdietrich 9y ago
  I'm not sure that's entirely fair to Netscape and Mozilla. Early versions of IE had absolutely horrible standards compliance, so there was a substantial lock-in effect. Other browser developers had to expend considerable resources to emulate IE's rendering, bug for bug. Even Microsoft had to bend over backwards to maintain compatibility, via the once notorious quirks mode.

mstade 9y ago

A myriad? Really?

SturgeonsLaw 9y ago
Yeah, all the Webkit reskins you could ever want!

sbierwagen 9y ago

What is Android or Chrome OS?

dmitrygr 9y ago
Android allows different browsers as first-class citizens. ChromeOS runs android apps, including those third-party browsers.

ocdtrekkie 9y ago

Chrome cannot be fully uninstalled without root from the operating system with the largest global market share (Android).

dmitrygr 9y ago
setting->apps->chrome->disable removes it form ever running, taking a byte of ram, or even in any way appearing to exist. it is not in /data, so it takes up no extra space

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

majormajor 9y ago

IE was extremely replaceable. Microsoft tried to tie it in as much as they could to leverage it being the default and justify it being bundled, but the other vendors share at least an equal share of the blame for completely dropping the ball. How long did Netscape Navigator/Communicator 4 linger? How many wasted resources were poured into things like the integrated page builder in Communicator instead of features? Do you remember trying to use Netscape 6 Beta or whatever it was called before it became Mozilla? IE 5 and 6 were initially just that much better. Heck, IE was even the best browser on Mac for a while circa 2000-2002ish. MS deserves a ton of extra blame for letting IE6 stagnate for five freaking years until Phoenix->Firebird->Firefox got them off their asses again, but don't blame them for having the better product when that initial war was won. But, another key difference here is that Google has much more incentive to keep improving Chrome and web standards even if they get more and more market share, since their user-facing products are web properties, and Microsoft's were not at the time.

jdietrich 9y ago
I'm not sure that's entirely fair to Netscape and Mozilla. Early versions of IE had absolutely horrible standards compliance, so there was a substantial lock-in effect. Other browser developers had to expend considerable resources to emulate IE's rendering, bug for bug. Even Microsoft had to bend over backwards to maintain compatibility, via the once notorious quirks mode.