4 ms·

>Do you have better stats on its adoption? Chrome (to include the original Chromium and forks like Edge and Brave) holds 80~90% of the browser market share, an

>Do you have better stats on its adoption? Chrome (to include the original Chromium and forks like Edge and Brave) holds 80~90% of the browser market share, and the vast majority of those installations will either autoupdate or be manually updated on a regular basis. The logical conclusion thus is that whatever feature(s) introduced by Chrome will be widely available for common use in a short period of time. This is the positive side to a monopolized browser market: Whatever Chrome supports is what the commons can support.

Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
It is not a positive, but a negative side to a monopolized browser market. Unrestrained power to define communication standards and protocols will eventually be used for malicious purposes and there will be no players in the market who would oppose it. Use Firefox, the last bastion of the Free Web.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
    Yeah right. IE6 'just worked' too and you didn't have to worry about compatibility if you used it.
  - account42 3y ago
    I too would be more than happy for Mozilla to be replaced but thinking that Google is any less cancerous is simply retarded. In fact, one of the biggest problems with Mozilla (but not the only one) is that they are effectively a Google vassal that can't afford to challenge its master. As for all the other non-Google-reliance problems, you can bet that as another SV tech corp, Google has them all too and then some.
- AshleysBrain 3y ago
  Firefox is working on implementing WebGPU support too.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
    It's not about WebGPU. It's about power to unilaterally define web standards.
    - AshleysBrain 3y ago
      Why bring that up with respects to a technology that was collaboratively designed between all major browser vendors?
      - Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
        Because see the context. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35971422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35971422
AshleysBrain 3y ago
That idea usually works, but doesn't apply to WebGPU, as it has some specific hardware and software requirements to be supported.
chrismorgan 3y ago
> Chrome (to include the original Chromium and forks like Edge and Brave) holds 80~90% of the browser market share https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share: worldwide, Chromium-family browsers are at around 76%. Naturally it depends on where you are: by Statcounter’s figures, Australia and USA are both under 62%, and India is over 95%. (Note that Statcounter is far from reliable: its data comes from trackers that are blocked by most ad/content blockers, which mean it is likely to significantly undercount Firefox especially.) And two other factors to consider here: • On a feature like this, browser support is only one of the gating factors: you also need graphics card/driver support. For a long time, WebGL support was way lower than the browser support charts suggested, for this reason. (Subpoint: WebGPU is not a cohesive whole; devices may support some features and not others, which will always make life more difficult, and that’s about the graphics card hardware and driver, not the browser.) • At this time, Chromium hasn’t shipped WebGPU on all platforms—only desktop platforms. Mobile platforms will lag, and I imagine that low-end devices will just not support WebGPU for many years to come.
pjmlp 3y ago
Hence why anyone doing Web development should update their CV for ChromeOS developer.
extra88 3y ago
As someone else pointed out, you're overestimating Chrome/ium's market share. Regardless, after the web.dev/baseline announcement, I looked at Browslerlist and one of our site's analytics and it is shocking how many people are not using the last two versions of evergreen browsers. There is a long tail of browser versions in those stats. https://browsersl.ist https://browsersl.ist

Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago

It is not a positive, but a negative side to a monopolized browser market. Unrestrained power to define communication standards and protocols will eventually be used for malicious purposes and there will be no players in the market who would oppose it. Use Firefox, the last bastion of the Free Web.

Dalewyn 3y ago
[flagged]
- Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
  Yeah right. IE6 'just worked' too and you didn't have to worry about compatibility if you used it.
- account42 3y ago
  I too would be more than happy for Mozilla to be replaced but thinking that Google is any less cancerous is simply retarded. In fact, one of the biggest problems with Mozilla (but not the only one) is that they are effectively a Google vassal that can't afford to challenge its master. As for all the other non-Google-reliance problems, you can bet that as another SV tech corp, Google has them all too and then some.
AshleysBrain 3y ago
Firefox is working on implementing WebGPU support too.
- Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
  It's not about WebGPU. It's about power to unilaterally define web standards.
  - AshleysBrain 3y ago
    Why bring that up with respects to a technology that was collaboratively designed between all major browser vendors?
    - Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
      Because see the context. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35971422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35971422

AshleysBrain 3y ago

That idea usually works, but doesn't apply to WebGPU, as it has some specific hardware and software requirements to be supported.

chrismorgan 3y ago

> Chrome (to include the original Chromium and forks like Edge and Brave) holds 80~90% of the browser market share https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share: worldwide, Chromium-family browsers are at around 76%. Naturally it depends on where you are: by Statcounter’s figures, Australia and USA are both under 62%, and India is over 95%. (Note that Statcounter is far from reliable: its data comes from trackers that are blocked by most ad/content blockers, which mean it is likely to significantly undercount Firefox especially.) And two other factors to consider here: • On a feature like this, browser support is only one of the gating factors: you also need graphics card/driver support. For a long time, WebGL support was way lower than the browser support charts suggested, for this reason. (Subpoint: WebGPU is not a cohesive whole; devices may support some features and not others, which will always make life more difficult, and that’s about the graphics card hardware and driver, not the browser.) • At this time, Chromium hasn’t shipped WebGPU on all platforms—only desktop platforms. Mobile platforms will lag, and I imagine that low-end devices will just not support WebGPU for many years to come.

pjmlp 3y ago

Hence why anyone doing Web development should update their CV for ChromeOS developer.

extra88 3y ago

As someone else pointed out, you're overestimating Chrome/ium's market share. Regardless, after the web.dev/baseline announcement, I looked at Browslerlist and one of our site's analytics and it is shocking how many people are not using the last two versions of evergreen browsers. There is a long tail of browser versions in those stats. https://browsersl.ist https://browsersl.ist