Wonder How Chrome is Growing Market Share? Ask Adobe

23 September 2011 by Matthew Gertner - Category: Rants and Ruminations

Yesterday one of my colleagues started grumbling and swearing even more vociferously than usual. He had installed Adobe Flash in Firefox in order to test some changes to our website and claimed that Google Chrome had been installed as well.

“Impossible,” I said. “Remember Google’s motto is Don’t Be Evil. They wouldn’t do anything as sneaky as that.”

Nonetheless, my curiosity was piqued and I googled around (oh, the irony!) to see if anyone had reported something similar. Sure enough, this immediately turned up some mozillaZine forum posts and a blog entry by an outraged German blogger. I fired up a clean Windows virtual machine, installed Firefox, headed to the Adobe Flash Update page and — holy hound of hell! — it turns out to be true:

Now software bundling is a widely practiced — if vaguely creepy — way of distributing software, but to me this crosses an invisible line (particularly in light of Google’s self-professed non-evilness). I’ve just installed Firefox, and the first thing Adobe does is propose to install Chrome? At very least, the link should be an opt-in rather than opt-out. (The rule of thumb I’ve heard is that about 80% of users download opt-out software versus 20% for opt-in.) It’s a bit sad that Google is willing to go to these lengths to grow market share. And it’s arguably even sadder that Adobe hasn’t come up with a better way to monetize the enormous number of Flash downloads they serve.

« In Defense of Netflix - Firefox 7 and Browser Memory Consumption »

COMMENTS

http://adblockplus.org/blog/ Wladimir Palant

That isn’t really surprising. Google has a long tradition of distributing its software via software bundling (see Google Toolbar, Google-flavored Firefox etc.). They pay per installation and they don’t care what software bundles them. And Adobe traditionally monetizes its software by bundling. It used to be some crappy security scan, now it is Google Chrome. Ever wondered why people hate updating Flash?

http://www.salsitasoft.com Matthew Gertner

Actually they still bundle the crappy security scan. I tried it a few times (clearing cookies in between) and it seems like that or Google Chrome are offered randomly.

http://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com David Rajchenbach-Teller

Similarly, when you install Avast antivirus for Windows, you now receive Google Chrome, too. A bit disappointing from Google.
Michael

I’m surprised that you’re surprised by this, and I’m not sure I understand where your “invisible line” is. Pretty much all popular free (as in money) software bundles additional stuff. The “good” bundling actually tells you and gives you an opt-out – in lots of cases the opt-out is non-existent or hidden. Chrome is one of the things bundled with Adobe Reader too.

I’m sure it makes a difference to actual usage, but I find people who have Chrome and Safari installed on their Windows PCs but are still using IE. When people ask me to fix their computers, often the biggest fix is to uninstall 10-20 bits of software they’ve installed without actually being aware of what they were installing.

Aside from being bundled with various software, Chrome is also pre-installed on Sony computers (which is something different, but another length they are going to for market share).

DigDug2k

I think its mostly recognition of the fact that 1.) Standards are becoming ubiquitous (yay!) and 2.) as they become ubiquitous, users don’t really care what browser they’re running anymore. At least, some people I know who use Chrome don’t use it because they love it or think its better. They use it because its an icon on the desktop/dock that says “Internet”. Same as they did with IE before.

Its ironic to me. Google employees have complained to me about people not knowing what an internet browser is (i.e. “I just click the blue E!”). Then, rather than working to fix that, they just shift the problem to themselves. I get the feeling they’re ok with people not knowing what a browser is, as long as they’re using one from Google.

the_dees

Actually Chrome (WebKit) has rather bad standards support. Even CSS 2.1 has a lot of issues in WebKit whether you look at domensioning block formatting contexts, margin collaspsing or some of the more simple strictness rules. Unfortunately Chrome is a retreat from the standards effort. See the Test Suite for yourself: http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/report/

Guest

“Don’t be evil” More like Be Evil(TM).
Anonymous

Don’t forget that Google scans all your Gmail messages and web searches supposedly to “serve” more relevant ads to you, but…

What is comes down to is that Google trying to worm it’s way into as many facets of our lives as it can. To what end ultimately is anyone’s guess.

Erunno

Your remark concerning email scanning is a bogus argument. Pretty much every mail provider already scans your e-mails to filter spam messages.

Anonymous

As I stated, Google scans the content of the message in an attempt to serve ads that the reader/user is more likely to click on. Doesn’t that by definition mean it is more extensive than just bayesian-based scanning for spam messages? And, wouldn’t it be more effect for Google to associate their scanning to the user–which I understand they do–so as to serve ads that the user is even more likely to click on? And, if it is both more extensive and associated with the user, isn’t that more invasive of one’s personal privacy?

Sorry, but, no, there is nothing bogus in my point.

Erunno

Doesn’t change the fact that other e-mail providers do scan your e-mail contents automatically. You are simply assuming or trusting them that they don’t process the information in any other way. Google is at least upfront in how they use and intend to use your data (and how not, i.e. selling it). If you want to protect your privacy client-side encryption is unavoidable.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FRJ32FNCWQPONS46BFZW5TTBJU Jordan

Google’s practice is unethical, disrespectful, and a invasion of privacy.

Other mail providers that MAY OR MAY NOT do so are irrelevant to this.

You’re using “Two wrongs make a right” fallacy as your crutch.

Tragedy.

Anonymous

chrome has been bundled with acrobat for a while too – and the best part:: there was NO opt out, no checkbox, nothing, just a small text saying its going to be installed whether u like it or not – then its started automatically.
I dunno if its still the case but I suppose so
Tiago Sá

This is a good thing!!! The more people use Google Chrome, the higher the average Firefox user IQ will be.

Erunno

You are a petty person and hopefully not representative of the Mozilla community.

Alex Huctwith

He definitely isn’t. Many of us even develop both. Relations are warmer than he thinks.

Erunno

Bundling Chrome with other applications may grow Chrome’s installation base but the usage grows because people actually keep using it afterwards (i.e. they like what they get). Don’t fool yourself into thinking that Firefox’ declining market share has anything to do with how Google distributes its browser.

I don’t use Chrome personally myself but I can at least clearly see its attractiveness for people with different requirements/priorities than me.

Anonymous

Actually, that’s not quite true.
Chrome market share grows has everything to do the way they distribute it.

It wouldn’t stick if the product wasnt also good – it is; But without that evil distribution model it would grow very slowly.

Let’s also not forget the people who will just install and click “yes” when Chrome asks to be the default browser without knowing what they’re doing.

Let’s not forget either the ones who will do it knowingly, after reading every single day on their google.com homepage (which is the most common home page by very, very far) that they SHOULD use Chrome over anything else.

Most of them believe Chrome is simply “the web now”, because “Google.com is the web” and “they say its the thing to use now” so “others are probably deprecated.

Salsitasoft

This is just another reason why we should drop flash ASAP.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FRJ32FNCWQPONS46BFZW5TTBJU Jordan

You mean Chrome. They’re the ones paying under the counter for Adobe to do this.

Pingback: Adobe Tricks Users into Downloading, Installing Google Chrome | Stop Spam Tips
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=122600361 Ashok Raju

I seriously think you’re overstating how evil this is. Seriously? If you didn’t like it then you’d stop using Chrome and continue to use Firefox. If you did like it then Google has done you a favour. Sure this isn’t the nicest thing Google has done, but how can you seriously suggest that chrome has increased marketshare of actual users because of this. It helps, but it’s not the only reason.
Pingback: Adobe Tricks Users into Downloading, Installing Google Chrome « Gregory D. Evans
Pingback: Adobe Tricks Users into Downloading, Installing Google Chrome | LocatePC | Locate your stolen computer or stolen laptop - Works for both Mac and PC
http://limpet.net/mbrubeck/ Matt Brubeck

Chrome has also been bundled for a long time with the Skype installer for Windows, although I expect that will stop because of Microsoft’s acquisition of Skype.

This has been going on for a year or so, but most techies didn’t notice it before because, until recently, Chrome was only installed by these programs if the current default browser was Internet Explorer. But now they are going after Firefox too.
http://twitter.com/mantra2 Zackery Fretty

It’s not evil, Flash works at least 5x better on Chrome.

But hey! Firefox is worthless on OS X, especially on OS X 10.7. The developer seed was out for a year and Mozilla has yet to really make Firefox ready for Lion. Very sad.

tl;dr – Chrome is getting market share, because it’s better.

Jeff Bekcer

It is better because the other one is not as good.

http://devonyoung.com Devon

UUhh market share is measured by browser USE, not browser INSTALLS. Also, if a computer user just downloads anything and everything they are CLEARLY offered, I don’t see how they have any reason to complain about the offer.
Anonymous

To those who defends Google.

There is a fine line between evil or not, good or bad. So different people would have slightly different perception or interruption. That; I think, all would agree.

But When Google themselves criticize and calling other evil for doing EXACTLY the same thing. This; is Google calling itself Evil.
Test

You really need to get off the “don’t be evil” mantra. Google is about no such thing. Although, in its philosophy page (http://www.google.com/about/corporate/company/tenthings.html), they do mention “You can make money without doing evil”, and explain with some specific examples from search and ads. Its actual mission statement is “to organize the world‘s information and make it universally accessible and useful.” (http://www.google.com/about/corporate/company/) Then you might ask, how Chrome or Android fit into that mission, which just goes to show how far off any big company will strain of its original mission or philosophy.

As for software bundling, if that’s your fetish, you might also write an article about how Flash is bundled with Chrome in certain versions. I’ll leave it to you to figure out all the combinations, but it is at least the case for Chrome 32 bit RPM (from Google’s repository) on Fedora. However, if you do, please keep the religious metaphors out of it.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FRJ32FNCWQPONS46BFZW5TTBJU Jordan

Quoting Google’s own policy page shows how simple-minded and gullible you truly are; the type of users that Chrome attracts.

Tragedy.

http://cuer.pip.verisignlabs.com/ Cuer

Perhaps the “better way” that Adobe has found, is to promote a browser that includes an up-to-date version of Flash by default. Adobe is naturally looking to promote Flash; Chrome is the best browser from their point of view to do this. The more people who use Chrome instead of a browser that requires people to update Flash manually, the better off Adobe is. I would venture that integrated Flash updates are better for the internet ecosystem at large, since that means less people are running out of date versions of Flash that can cause security issues. (Of course over the long run, the less that Flash is needed the better, but most people browsing still do use it.)

Hopefully Firefox can eventually offer this level of integration at least as an option, which would certainly be nice, instead of having to manually download Flash updates all the time.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FRJ32FNCWQPONS46BFZW5TTBJU Jordan

Integration without consent isn’t good. This isn’t even issue of the “best option”.

It’s an issue of massive companies taking advantage of “normal” users by botnet-style loading their computer with software they didn’t ask for.

Thumbs up for freedom.

Andre

We, and by “we” I mean users and developers, should be thankful for that.

This is not Microsoft pushing a sucky browser. This is Google, pushing a very good, free, open source and standards adherent piece of software that – mark these words – has brought out a revolution to the internet, including to Firefox.

Quit whining, take off your hat, kneel and thank them. They deserve it.
Andre

Also, bundling is not “how [they] are growing market share”. That is as unfair a statement as it is incorrect.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FRJ32FNCWQPONS46BFZW5TTBJU Jordan

This is the same concept as bad music like Kesha being popular.

High popularity =/= quality.

Google BOUGHT marketshare because Chrome is such a shitty browser.
Anonymous

I wouldn’t call it evil, i would call it a standard marketing procedure.

Firefox twice asked me to make it default, with the check box selected, i don’t think this is evil, it is just a simple way to get people who aren’t paying attention and/or know nothing of browsers to switch. many people clearly don’t care, i know a dozen PHDs who don’t even know what brand computer they use. Chrome bundles flash, flash bundles chrome, People reading this are far too smart to not realize this is the way business works, and everyone does it. Shame the other browsers don’t bundle and auto-update flash, its not going away any time soon ( nor should it, i love me some html5, but it is still a far cry from what flash can do ) and should be auto-updated for the security of the user.
Anonymous

http://www.firefoxwithbing.com —> the same
Andres

Always read tge fine print, always check what is being installed. While I disapprove of google chrome doing this, please people, we are responsible too for our actions. Simply, check the installation dialogs
http://stevenroose.be Steven Roose

I can understand that you have a intuitive fear and disgrace for software bundling. That’s probably because it used to be the way to get your Windows PC full of crappy software.
But in this case I don’t see the point. Chrome is a very decent browser, not to say the best one out there, so why bother Google trying to get it on as much devices as possible.
BTW They probably majorly target people still sticked to IE. Those using FireFox mostly have a good reason for that but those still using IE mostly don’t so every change away from IE is a change for the better you should totally support as a web developer!
Cesar

I consider Google Chrome as a worm. The same way they yell when other companies installs something.
We didn’t ask to install it. It is almost silently installed on Flash. Even Avast is installing this piece without my consent, then I have to uninstall this thing in a regular basis.

Cesar

Better saying, Chrome is a Trojan. Fits better in this case.