Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pvg 3127 days ago
Wasn't the original Mozilla leading into Firefox wildly successful, though? It certainly put a dent in IE's market share. The opposite has been true for Chrome so it seems their recent history is not one of successful adaptation.
1 comments
digi_owl 3127 days ago
The first thing to consider is that MS let IE stagnate, and had large deviations from W3C standards. Mozilla rode in on the cry for standard adherence.

Chrome on the other hand is not stagnant, far from it. And Google is not letting Chrome stagnate.

Never mind that Google is using their marketing muscle to push Chrome every chance they get.

Just try downloading some shareware on Windows, and you are bound to get Chrome along for the ride. Hell, even Adobe offers Chrome as a Flash bundle even though Google is using Chrome to effectively kill Flash...

link
ksec 3127 days ago
Actually the two incident is pretty similar.

While Google has not let Chrome stagnate, the Chrome today is no longer the Chrome when it was released. Chrome has definitely felt slower and heavier over the years. Google today is no longer the Google it once was*, and it is getting lots of sticks over privacy problem. Firefox happens to be in the right place at the right time.

link
littlestymaar 3127 days ago
> Chrome on the other hand is not stagnant, far from it. And Google is not letting Chrome stagnate.

That's not Brendan Eich's point of view as part of the tc39 (the standardization body for JavaScript) :

https://youtu.be/gO2tt9x9zBc?t=11m58s

link