Bloated and complacent, Chrome might be on the path to playing the same role as IE was playing 15 years ago, shunned by developers and technologically inferior to other browsers.

    • Libb@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      They chose Chromium. Which is the base for Chrome (and all other relevant browsers).

      I know we live in a time of why-give-a-fuck-about-facts, but I see two ‘relevant browsers’ in the top ranking that are not chromium-based:

      Chrome 66.68%
      Safari 18.07%
      Edge 5.25%
      Firefox 2.65%

      (https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share)

      • sibachian@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        and out of those 4, 3 are based on a fork that came originally from khtml. so it’s really just firefox that matters in this race. well, until ladybird is ready.

        • Otter@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 month ago

          https://ladybird.org/

          Well that’s cool

          Ladybird is a brand-new browser & web engine. Driven by a web standards first approach, Ladybird aims to render the modern web with good performance, stability and security.

          Singular focus

          We are focused on one thing: the web browser.

          No monetization

          No “default search deals”, crypto tokens, or other forms of user monetization, ever.

          Announcing the Ladybird Browser Initiative

          Launching our 501©(3) nonprofit.

          Looking forward to it, 2026 feels like a long ways away but I imagine there is lots to do before then

      • ShieldGengar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Your source is missing a bunch of chromium-based browsers to add up to 100%, and there’s no methodology or statistics explanation.

        • Libb@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 month ago

          Your source is missing a bunch of chromium-based browsers to add up to 100%, and there’s no methodology or statistics explanation.

          FFS… I listed the first four results of the first web search result I got. Also, may I remind you that me quoting only the four first results (unfiltered) of a longer list doesn’t change a thing on the ranking: on those 4 firsts (aka, the browsers occupying the 1st to the 4th places, aka the ones ranked before the 5th, 6th places and so on), two of them are not Chromium-based. That’s all I was saying.

          For the rest:

          1. Feel free to quote other sources, obviously. I would be happy to see other numbers with some more of that ‘methodology or statistics explanation’ you’re talking about.
          2. Have a nice day.
        • Libb@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Is it that hard to read a four entries list without skipping half of them to try to prove your point?

          Safari and Firefox are not chromium-based.

        • LinkA
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 month ago

          Hence why they said two not three.