8 ms·

Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. I struggle to see how they get paid - except again, by charging search engine

Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. I struggle to see how they get paid - except again, by charging search engines to be the default browser or something.

jojobas 2y ago
Google can keep engineers working on Chrome employed without having control over Chrome.
- wmf 2y ago
  But why would they if they're forbidden from getting any benefit from Chrome?
  - jojobas 2y ago
    Why does everyone contribute to Linux?
    - threatofrain 2y ago
      Linux is foundational to everyone and there isn’t an obvious alternative. What companies care about Safari vs Chrome? From the perspective of other companies, what’s wrong with Safari and Edge taking command?
      - jojobas 2y ago
        For starters, there's no Safari for anything other than Mac OS and iOS, and Edge is Chromium with some cosmetics from Microsoft.
    - saati 2y ago
      They are selling computers, distros, support, etc. built with/for linux.
  - ajvs 2y ago
    A huge amount of their products require browser access, having a good UX to access them off in their best interest.
  - jauntywundrkind 2y ago
    Maybe AI changed this, but.. Google is entirely where they are because the web is a powerful capable rich interesting place, that was able to rise & grow & flourish without the typical platform gatekeepers. In my view, Google's whole reason for making and continuing to fund Chrome have never ever changed: they want a great (and powerful, not small/retrogressive) open web. Because if the web falters, the proprietary platforms from yesterday can come back & reassert their control. Because if the web falters, information will be someplace where a Google can't index and link you to it. Google's existence depends entirely upon the web being a good place, a place for good sites, that people want to find & go to. The couple hundred million a year Google pays engineers to make the web good is a very affordable existential hedge, upon which the entire company of rests. A corollary to this is that attempts to tilt the web towards themselves - to take advantage o Chrome - risk poisoning the web & killing the golden goose. Which is why - imo - Google has taken web standards so seriously, and gone to such lengths to create an air of transparency around browser standards, starting the Intent to Ship process.
viraptor 2y ago
Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.
- bad_user 2y ago
  IMO, Chrome does not move fast enough. The fact of the matter is that the web has been dying because people have moved to mobile devices, where they prefer native apps. If you're advocating for slower development of browsers, you're also advocating for the death of the open web.
  - troupo 2y ago
    Almost nothing Google ships at neck-breaking speed makes the web better, or faster, or a better open web.
    - threatofrain 2y ago
      JS has been moving at excellent speeds and Google has moved the web to evergreen. If anything I’d argue that without the specter of regulation then we might’ve had Dart or something new in the browser by now. The biggest existential risk to the web is that it’s not good enough. It’s being threatened by sharp innovation in other spaces - may the Vision Pro never come down in price or improve in UX.
      - troupo 2y ago
        What do regulations have to do with Dart? You got WASM in the browser which is a much better outcome than a language even Google doesn't know what to do with. The biggest existential risk to the web is Google themselves: it's the world's biggest advertising and user tracking company having outsized influence on where the web is headed, and moulding the web for its own profit.
        2y ago
maeln 2y ago
At the same time, if every company that actively make money from the web where to pitch in, we would have the most funded foundation in the world.
graemep 2y ago
I am not sure that is a good thing. Do we really need so many people working on it, or adding more and more features? IMO more engineers = more bloat, rather than more engineers = a better product.
tsimionescu 2y ago
That may be, but Firefox certainly doesn't, and it's not that far from Chrome in terms of feature set, particularly in terms of supported web standards, or security. So I don't feel that a smaller Chrome team would be a catastrophe for Chrome.
bjackman 2y ago
> Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. Are you sure? Do you know how many people work on Chrome? 2,000 people contributed to Linux 6.12. only a small portion of those will be full time but it's still likely many hundred full-time-equivalent engineers.
- josephg 2y ago
  I think so. About a decade ago I remember hearing that the chrome team had about 1000 full time engineers. I suspect the number has grown over time. Looking at the number of lines of code, the linux kernel is just barely ahead of chromium now (39m loc vs 36m). But that doesn't include all the proprietary parts of chrome that aren't in chromium - like their binary updating system, h264 decoder, built in google account support, and so on. https://openhub.net/p/linux/analyses/latest/languages_summary https://openhub.net/p/linux/analyses/latest/languages_summar... https://openhub.net/p/chrome/analyses/latest/languages_summary https://openhub.net/p/chrome/analyses/latest/languages_summa...

jojobas 2y ago

Google can keep engineers working on Chrome employed without having control over Chrome.

wmf 2y ago
But why would they if they're forbidden from getting any benefit from Chrome?
- jojobas 2y ago
  Why does everyone contribute to Linux?
  - threatofrain 2y ago
    Linux is foundational to everyone and there isn’t an obvious alternative. What companies care about Safari vs Chrome? From the perspective of other companies, what’s wrong with Safari and Edge taking command?
    - jojobas 2y ago
      For starters, there's no Safari for anything other than Mac OS and iOS, and Edge is Chromium with some cosmetics from Microsoft.
  - saati 2y ago
    They are selling computers, distros, support, etc. built with/for linux.
- ajvs 2y ago
  A huge amount of their products require browser access, having a good UX to access them off in their best interest.
- jauntywundrkind 2y ago
  Maybe AI changed this, but.. Google is entirely where they are because the web is a powerful capable rich interesting place, that was able to rise & grow & flourish without the typical platform gatekeepers. In my view, Google's whole reason for making and continuing to fund Chrome have never ever changed: they want a great (and powerful, not small/retrogressive) open web. Because if the web falters, the proprietary platforms from yesterday can come back & reassert their control. Because if the web falters, information will be someplace where a Google can't index and link you to it. Google's existence depends entirely upon the web being a good place, a place for good sites, that people want to find & go to. The couple hundred million a year Google pays engineers to make the web good is a very affordable existential hedge, upon which the entire company of rests. A corollary to this is that attempts to tilt the web towards themselves - to take advantage o Chrome - risk poisoning the web & killing the golden goose. Which is why - imo - Google has taken web standards so seriously, and gone to such lengths to create an air of transparency around browser standards, starting the Intent to Ship process.

viraptor 2y ago

Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

bad_user 2y ago
IMO, Chrome does not move fast enough. The fact of the matter is that the web has been dying because people have moved to mobile devices, where they prefer native apps. If you're advocating for slower development of browsers, you're also advocating for the death of the open web.
- troupo 2y ago
  Almost nothing Google ships at neck-breaking speed makes the web better, or faster, or a better open web.
  - threatofrain 2y ago
    JS has been moving at excellent speeds and Google has moved the web to evergreen. If anything I’d argue that without the specter of regulation then we might’ve had Dart or something new in the browser by now. The biggest existential risk to the web is that it’s not good enough. It’s being threatened by sharp innovation in other spaces - may the Vision Pro never come down in price or improve in UX.
    - troupo 2y ago
      What do regulations have to do with Dart? You got WASM in the browser which is a much better outcome than a language even Google doesn't know what to do with. The biggest existential risk to the web is Google themselves: it's the world's biggest advertising and user tracking company having outsized influence on where the web is headed, and moulding the web for its own profit.
      - 2y ago

maeln 2y ago

At the same time, if every company that actively make money from the web where to pitch in, we would have the most funded foundation in the world.

graemep 2y ago

I am not sure that is a good thing. Do we really need so many people working on it, or adding more and more features? IMO more engineers = more bloat, rather than more engineers = a better product.

tsimionescu 2y ago

That may be, but Firefox certainly doesn't, and it's not that far from Chrome in terms of feature set, particularly in terms of supported web standards, or security. So I don't feel that a smaller Chrome team would be a catastrophe for Chrome.

bjackman 2y ago

> Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. Are you sure? Do you know how many people work on Chrome? 2,000 people contributed to Linux 6.12. only a small portion of those will be full time but it's still likely many hundred full-time-equivalent engineers.

josephg 2y ago
I think so. About a decade ago I remember hearing that the chrome team had about 1000 full time engineers. I suspect the number has grown over time. Looking at the number of lines of code, the linux kernel is just barely ahead of chromium now (39m loc vs 36m). But that doesn't include all the proprietary parts of chrome that aren't in chromium - like their binary updating system, h264 decoder, built in google account support, and so on. https://openhub.net/p/linux/analyses/latest/languages_summary https://openhub.net/p/linux/analyses/latest/languages_summar... https://openhub.net/p/chrome/analyses/latest/languages_summary https://openhub.net/p/chrome/analyses/latest/languages_summa...