Google Chrome growing in popularity amongst Lifehacker readers

We noted earlier that Google Analytics had begun tracking usage of Google Chrome. As of today, Chrome now accounts for 2.43% of Lifehacker visitors, almost three times what it was when we first checked the number. OK, that's still a lot less than Firefox, Internet Explorer or Safari, but it does put Chrome ahead of Opera — not bad for a browser that isn't yet than a fortnight old. If you're new to the Chrome experience, be sure to check out our power users guide.


    I think Chrome's popularity is going to just keep on growing.

    It's fast and easy and positioned ahead of the curve in terms of performance for tomorrows hard core web apps.

    Here's a great example, I just found an really intensive web app and ran a test on it versus Firefox. Chrome did 30fps while Firefox lagged at about 6fps.

    I posted the results on There's also steps to tell you how to run your own and see for yourself.

    Michael Adams

    Security Now = Steve Gibson is impressed by the possibilities created by Chrome’s underlying architecture, but he is extremely unimpressed by its total lack of critically important security and privacy features.

    After listening to this podcast, I have uninstalled Chrome.

    "Steve: It’s nuts. I mean, it is nuts, Leo. And if nothing else, look at the adoption rate. Almost, well, 1.57, 1.6 percent people used it. And I and a lot of other people said, okay, well, no thank you. I’m not using something that is by default storing the passwords I use for logging on and giving me no ability to protect that storage from somebody who might have access to my browser at any time in the future. I mean, that’s crazy. It’s just crazy.

    Also no provision in cookie handling for distinguishing between session and permanent cookies. Even IE, again, you’re able to say, look, I don’t mind session cookies, that is, cookies that are persistent only while I’m using the browser, as long as you throw them all away at the end. Other browsers provide that. No provision for handling sites individually. I mean, I truly - I don’t get what they’re thinking, who they’re aiming this at because IE users, who we might say, okay, are just not going to move away, and they’re not clued in to security and privacy, so they just stay with IE, well, they’re not apt to use some other browser. They’re not going to move from IE. People who do, do for a reason, because they want these additional features. And Chrome doesn’t have any of them. I mean, any of them. It just boggles my mind. Oh, yeah, I just - and no scripting management, weak cookie handling, I don’t know, I’m just… "

    Well, chrome rocks, for many reasons: fast, clean interface, no add ons? wtf?
    Look what became of firefox with all of it add ons, slow as heck, on startup gets "new updates" all the time for every add on, well point of that firefox became bloated along with horrible memory licks, firefox is loosing its origins. Storing passwords? who does that?

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now