4 ms·

You've accidentally left off some pretty important context from that quote: > Chrome Mobile teams in Seattle and Kirkland, spanning four sub-teams in Chrome, w

by jsnell 2y ago

You've accidentally left off some pretty important context from that quote: > Chrome Mobile teams in Seattle and Kirkland, spanning four sub-teams in Chrome, with an emphasis on ... It's not the number of engineers working on Chrome. It's the number of engineers who worked in that guy's Chrome Mobile team in a specific location. (It's not clear whether there were other teams working in Chrome Mobile in other offices). That's a team making mobile-specific improvements to Chrome or adapting it to the mobile environment, not a team making a browser from scratch. So it's ignoring the people working on the layout engine, rendering engine, the javascript engine, security, the desktop UI, codecs, web APIs, developer tools, networking and protocols, extension APIs and store, etc. There is also absolutely no way Chrome had 23 engineers in 2012, but since you didn't give the source, I have no idea of exactly what tiny subset that number was actually representing.

BSDobelix 2y ago
2012: >Officially chrome has 23 members. https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-work-on-Google-Chrome https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-work-on-Google-Chrome 2008: https://web.archive.org/web/20240227122339/http://s.niallkennedy.com/blog/2008/09/google-chrome-team.html https://web.archive.org/web/20240227122339/http://s.niallken...
- jsnell 2y ago
  Ok, so let's check that quora link. The answer is by some random web designer. Their source is this: https://web.archive.org/web/20120116201141/http://code.google.com/team/index.html?product=chrome https://web.archive.org/web/20120116201141/http://code.googl... And what does that page say? Right at the top: > Here are some members of the Developer Relations team It's not the Chrome engineering team. It's some part of just the team doing developer outreach (not necessarily even the entirity of that team). You keep finding these obviously incorrect references to support your arguments, and presenting them as facts. And by obvious I mean really obvious. There is no way you can read that page and mistakenly think it's the Chrome engineering team. At this point the best case is that you're not actually reading any of these sources, and just randomly pasting them here. The worst case is that you've noticed that your sources are bogus, and just don't care. Neither of those is arguing in good faith.

by jsnell 2y ago

BSDobelix 2y ago

2012: >Officially chrome has 23 members. https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-work-on-Google-Chrome https://www.quora.com/How-many-people-work-on-Google-Chrome 2008: https://web.archive.org/web/20240227122339/http://s.niallkennedy.com/blog/2008/09/google-chrome-team.html https://web.archive.org/web/20240227122339/http://s.niallken...

jsnell 2y ago
Ok, so let's check that quora link. The answer is by some random web designer. Their source is this: https://web.archive.org/web/20120116201141/http://code.google.com/team/index.html?product=chrome https://web.archive.org/web/20120116201141/http://code.googl... And what does that page say? Right at the top: > Here are some members of the Developer Relations team It's not the Chrome engineering team. It's some part of just the team doing developer outreach (not necessarily even the entirity of that team). You keep finding these obviously incorrect references to support your arguments, and presenting them as facts. And by obvious I mean really obvious. There is no way you can read that page and mistakenly think it's the Chrome engineering team. At this point the best case is that you're not actually reading any of these sources, and just randomly pasting them here. The worst case is that you've noticed that your sources are bogus, and just don't care. Neither of those is arguing in good faith.