NewsUpcomingReviewsUnboxingTips & TricksAppsChromebooksChromecastGoogle AssistantAbout

Chrome Unboxed - The Latest Chrome OS News

A Space for All Things Chrome

Former Mozilla CTO: Chrome Won The Browser Wars

By 11 Comments

by Robby Payne
Filed under:

In what is likely no mistake by Google, my Google Now feed offered up an article from a blog I didn’t know existed until this morning. That blog’s name? Andreas Gal. As in Andreas Gal, former Mozilla CTO. The blog’s title?

Chrome Won.

Depending on the news sources you frequent, you may or may not know how prolific Chrome has become in terms of market share. Is it the browser to end all browsers? Perfect? Without issue? No, it is not.




It is, however, the most-used browser across operating systems by a pretty wide margin. You can see in the chart below from Andreas’ post that Chrome’s lead across all devices is substantial and only growing as time marches on.

This chart simply shows market share across all devices since 2011. It isn’t hard to see Chrome has pulled away from the pack.

You can see some of the deeper facts about these stats over at the original post, but I want to talk a bit about the significance of this post.




Former Leaders Can Be Honest

This is obvious, but company leaders have deep knowledge (most times) of their field. Its the only way you make it to a place with a title like CTO or CEO. You have to know some things.

Being the CTO of Mozilla (the company behind Firefox), Andreas Gal not only knows the business of browsers, he likely understands trends with consumers on a level most of us haven’t really thought about. That’s what happens when you spend years as a CTO. You analyze and move based on users and their activities.

While at Mozilla, there’s no way he could have ever publicly made these comments. Imagine Microsoft’s CTO saying that IE is basically dead and Chrome has won this part of the war. It is true and we all know it, but he can’t say that for obvious reasons.

Andreas Gal couldn’t, either. At least not until he left a couple years ago.

But now, a bit separated from the business of browsers, he can voice what he truly sees in the trends presented. He can weigh in, using his expertise and knowledge without needing a filter.

With no provocation or agenda, he can lay out the facts as he sees them.

And the facts are: Chrome won. Not Chrome is winning or Chrome will win. Chrome won.

Game over. No turning back.

Here To Stay

Like it or hate it, Chrome is here to stay. The combination of new features, continuing development, and interoperability across almost all devices (looking at you, Windows 10 S), Chrome has permeated all things internet-connected.

That same deep influence will continue to drive the growth of Chromebooks, too. As trends keep pushing forward and more tasks are handled via browser on the web, Chrome OS continues to gain relevance. Look at Gabriel’s post from yesterday. Google is confident and behind Chrome OS.

This is a marathon, not a sprint.

As the internet in general continues to evolve and grow in its abilities, Chrome will likely remain the vehicle people use to navigate it. As Chrome’s flight pattern continues upward, it brings Chrome OS right along for that ride.

  • Michael K Sargent

    I really enjoy all of your Chromebook reviews. They will help me in choosing my next Chromebook. Thanks, so much!

  • No surprise here, but the other browser companies still fail to realize what happened. Chrome is not just a browser, it has become a platform, so comparing any other browser with Chrome really isn’t fair, e.g. what other browser has a full featured web store? J

  • Mike

    “Imagine Microsoft’s CTO saying that IE is basically dead …” – um, I think they said that a while ago. Remember MS Edge? Microsoft is steadily destroying all of their highly successful products, themselves.
    Here’s a Conspiracy Theory: Maybe this was an element of one of their court losses and they aren’t allowed to explain to anyone?
    It’s only one theory, but it could explain a LOT.
    Even during the times that IE wasn’t leading the group in security I was willing to put up with it because it had features built-in that I had to add to FF and Chrome as extensions or add-ins. But after MS decided to stop progress on IE and actually begin to break it (with updates failing so often), that was the final straw for me.
    I used to be a HYUGE advocate of MS Office and related products like IE. NOT.ANY.MORE.
    buh-bye MS, Helloo Google.

  • Pssst3

    Google needs to learn from Mozilla’s mistake (or Sears, or Bell Telephone).

    It isn’t enough to be the leader. It isn’t enough to be the defacto standard bearer or the largest provider of one kind of software.

    You won’t stay the leader if:

    1. You don’t stay focused on what customers want and need, not what you want to do.
    2. You don’t offer unmatchable unique advantages, and
    3. You don’t keep an eye out for unexpected competition.

    I threw Sears into the mix because Sears tried to diversify into things that customers hadn’t asked for, mostly because there were already plenty of sources – real estate, home repair, home and auto insurance, motor club, auto repair, appliance and hardware stores. At the same time it let its customer service deteriorate and its inventory become dated commodities. Sears had everything that you could buy from from other vendors, but those vendors had newer, better and/or lower prices.

    At one time Sears owned most of its stores and often the land surrounding them. It was often the largest anchor store y malls. That made some sense when it came to controlling its rent, but it got to a point where the land under those stores was often worth more than the profit produced by the store over a decade. When Sears Homart division sold off a lot of that land the sale resulted in one of the largest REITs, GGP. GGP now finds itself in Sears former position, but in reverse. The property declined in value in 2008, rents haven’t offset that decline, and GGP is stuck with a huge debt.

    Even though GGP is a well-managed rental property company, it’s in a stagnant market. All malls, large and small are in decline, having difficulty on retaining their customers, stores.

    My point is, that Google seems to be repeating Sears mistakes. Alphabet, by spinning off divisions that draw talent away from its primary business isn’t strengthening itself by diversification. It’s making it easier for direct competitors to arise.

    I mentioned Bell Telephone because the only thing that kept it going so long as an organization was a government monopoly. Google doesn’t have that, and it had=s built its cash cow on a foundation of open software and public standards.

    My guess is that Google’s competition will come out of seemingly nowhere. Something like a European telecom joint venture, or an American company financed by a Chinese effort with a tech feature that Google isn’t prepared to match. It could be something practical like data center locations with infrastructure in place in each of the EU countries ready to go if/when the EU collapses. It could be something unimaginable that customers have always wanted or needed but never were asked about.

    My fear is if Google doesn’t stay focused on pushing its core business ahead of competition by leaps and bounds, if it instead keeps diversifying, it could become the corporate equivalent of KMart.

    • BernardP

      Pssst3 – Thanks for the insightful post.

    • ChrisG

      That was an interesting taster to what seems to be a broader view about Google and where it stands in the world. In this case, I think a bit more than a taster is required. You need to lay out things more clearly. You could start by answering some very simple questions. What, for example, in your view, is Google’s ‘core business’? And how can Google intensify its work and investment in that core business more effectively and more profitably than it is now doing? New businesses, I note, are sometimes new domains in which core expertise can be applied. Also, even when a new line of business isn’t closely aligned with an existing core of business activities it may still have a transformative impact in some as yet poorly defined domain that opens up business opportunities in the same way that the first steps towards the existing core business did. So, are these new lines of businesses really just ballast weighing the core business down or are they good business opportunities? Your summary of the business case studies was fascinating but general reasoning from the Sears case can skew things as easily as clarify them. Is Google’s situation analogous to that of Sears in the relevant sense?

      I get it that you are expressing a worry about Google’s business approach. But, in lieu of something more substantial, it is hard to know whether to credit your misgivings. I do encourage you to develop your thoughts in this area further, however.

  • Psst3 – Very good post!

    I like to use the Sears & KMart analogy all the time myself, especially Sears. The had it made and then fumbled the ball on the goal line. Looks like Comcast and Direct TV are doing the same thing now too! There is really no reason to think that Google won’t do the same thing one day. History is repeating itself all the time, especially in American business. As soon as a browser comes along that doesn’t bombard me with suggestions “they” think I might need, and advertising that blocks my ability to read the text on the screen, I’m gone from Google.

  • CajunMoses

    Unlike other companies that peaked and lost their way, I’m confident that Google will continue to develop Chrome as a crucial vehicle toward its broader, longer term goal. That’s because Google’s ultimate goal is to truly run the entire world. And so, you see, unlike those other companies, it still has at least another twenty to thirty years to go before it can rest on it laurels.

    • ChrisG

      Arguably, Motorola could be running the world today if it had perceived that beyond the first revolutionary steps it took towards mobile telephony a further series of shifts with similar revolutionary import would have to ensue before the true outlines of the new world in the making would become clear. Looking back now, it is not hard to see how thoroughgoing has been the sweep of technological change in the last forty years and how much these changes have affected the way we organise our lives. The spheres of business and industry likewise have undergone great shifts. For example, there have been unexpected realignments between spheres like mobile communications, networking, media, information processing, commerce and retailing that would have been very hard to anticipate at the time Motorola released its first mobile phone. And, you only have to fail at one hurdle to be left behind. Google has shown itself more capable than other companies to continually revolutionise itself and to stay on the leading edge of technical developments. But, these matters are generally judged one shift at a time and a company’s past record of successfully negotiating change is not an entirely reliable measure as to whether that will be repeated at the next turn of events.

  • ChrisG

    I think it should be noted that while Chrome is exemplary amongst the current generation of browsers the Mozilla Foundation is researching and starting to deploy several technologies that will mean Firefox will be back at the cutting edge soon enough. It would be a great pity if Firefox were to fade away when Mozilla has done so much to support common standards for web browsers and has made so much of the work it has done on Firefox available under an open source license.

    References:
    https://servo.org/
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servo_(layout_engine)
    https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum

    • Gabriel Brangers

      I agree completely. Before diving into the world of Chrome and Chrome OS I used FireFox exclusively. Still a great browser. Hope to see more from them.