Five reasons why Chrome will crash and burn
Summary
Google dipped its mighty toe into the increasingly crowded world of internet browsers today with the announcement of its open source offering, Chrome.
Topics
After all the polished promises of a streamlined new way to tame the web, the blogosphere was ready to predict Chrome would inspire everything from the end of Firefox to the demise of Microsoft itself.
silicon.com spoke to industry experts and Google's new rivals to find out why Chrome matters and whether the browser reality can deliver on the hype.
Internet Explorer's stranglehold
The average computer user tends to lack the technical know-how or motivation to change from their default browser, Internet Explorer, giving Microsoft around 60 per cent of the market without even trying. Despite being the only really viable alternative to IE's domination, Firefox has struggled to gain above 20 per cent of the market.
In spite of Google's huge brand leverage analysts feel Chrome could still struggle to gain a foothold when faced with consumers who prefer to stick with what they know.
David Mitchell, VP for IT research at analysts Ovum, said: "Internet Explorer is still used by about 60 to 70 per cent of people and there is a big chunk of the population who are remarkably reticent to change platform.
"I think that Google will grab market share but whether they will knock IE off the top spot is another scenario."
Microsoft itself is confident of IE's unassailability. The company said: "The browser landscape is highly competitive but people will choose Internet Explorer 8 for the way it puts the services they want right at their fingertips, respects their personal choices about how they want to browse and puts them in control of their personal data online."
Bad track record
Despite Google's search dominance, its other homegrown applications have failed to attract anywhere near the same popularity.
It was one of the first companies to enter the social networking market with orkut but the site remains largely unknown outside of Brazil, and despite being launched before YouTube, Google Video always failed to match its popularity, eventually forcing Google to buy up its rival.
Similarly, despite being perhaps the most well-known Google branded app outside of search, Gmail still lags behind Windows Live Hotmail.
Nate Elliott, research director at analysts Jupiter Research, said: "In most cases the products that Google has delivered on its own have failed.
"To achieve success they have had to buy in services from elsewhere and not build them themselves."
Google backlash
With the Google brand already ubiquitous worldwide, could the sheer scale of the search giant's reach start to scare consumers? Tor Odland, head of communications for rival browser Opera, thinks the brand's attempted dominance could prompt an anti-Microsoft style backlash against lack of choice.
He said: "You have to ask whether people want to use products and services from only one company. It is a return to the days of Microsoft.
"I wonder how people will feel about being so tied into one company - the one thing that the online world has taught us is that people like choice."
Damage to Google services
Google has traditionally taken a cross platform approach to its services and worked closely with its soon-to-be rivals Opera and Mozilla, and recently renewed a deal with Mozilla that puts Google as the default search in Firefox. Focusing on Chrome could see those all-important bonds start to loosen.
Odland said: "It is important that they keep testing their services for compatibility with other browsers.
"We hope that they will continue to work with Opera and Mozilla to deliver a better internet experience."
Jupiter Research's Elliott believes Google is hedging its bets: "They have given themselves plenty of time to make progress in the browser market while maintaining a strong presence in Firefox."
How to get it out there?
There is also the question of how Google will get Chrome onto people's computers in the first place. Will it take the Apple approach of bundling it with other application downloads as Apple did with Safari and iTunes or Sun's bundling of Java downloads with OpenOffice.
Ovum's Mitchell said: "One thing that has not been made clear is what is their distribution strategy? Are they going to rely on downloads straight from the Google site or follow the lead of Apple?"
Jupiter Research's Elliott said: "Firefox is by all accounts a fantastic browser and still has less than 20 per cent browser share. That speaks volumes about how big an advantage Microsoft has by installing IE on PCs."
On the other hand, see why Chrome may well be the next big thing...
Just In
Atleast the beta version of Google Chrome is not stable, even though it is fast and light weight. See some screen shots of Chrome crashing minutes after use - http://www.indiastudychannel.com/resources/35865-Google-chrome-reviews.aspx.
conasidering this is version 0.01 that the public have seen, so far this is looking amazing.
What will they build on top of the browser?
I think: local Google Gears apps for Google Apps. These will replicate the data from the server, but run very fast locally.
This means a superfast machine independent office suite.
The future will be insteresting indeed!
What will they build on top of the browser?
I think: local Google Gears apps for Google Apps. These will replicate the data from the server, but run very fast locally.
This means a superfast machine independent office suite.
The future will be insteresting indeed!
I like Chrome for its speed but one of my chief uses of a browser is to access my bank accounts via EGG and IE6-8 or Outlook are the only ones that do this.
Also I miss 'AutoFill'.
Also I miss 'AutoFill'.
It's for early adopters, that's why it's tagged as beta. What do you expect?
Microsoft, on the other hand, are happy to lie, over-promote themselves and laughably FORCE a WORK-IN-PROGRESS (not my words) _OPERATING SYSTEM_ down the consumers throats. The sooner Microsoft die the better.
Go Google, go, go go!!!!!!
Microsoft, on the other hand, are happy to lie, over-promote themselves and laughably FORCE a WORK-IN-PROGRESS (not my words) _OPERATING SYSTEM_ down the consumers throats. The sooner Microsoft die the better.
Go Google, go, go go!!!!!!
Chrome isn't going to crash and burn. Not a hope.
Google puts lots of widgety little applications out
there, like Picaso, for instance.
Even if Chrome does not slay IE, it is a good little
browser with an excellent (and simple UI) that zips
along faster than any other browser out there.
Crash and burn? Not a chance. Nada.
Google puts lots of widgety little applications out
there, like Picaso, for instance.
Even if Chrome does not slay IE, it is a good little
browser with an excellent (and simple UI) that zips
along faster than any other browser out there.
Crash and burn? Not a chance. Nada.
With web apps coming in at tens of thousands of lines of Javascript it really is a no brainer 
The key reason they developed their own browser was for mobile browsing, which is expected to be more and more dominant in coming years. Chrome would be a good browser for the Google Android mobile platform - at least as good as Safari on the iPhone.
To understand Google, you have to think about the future like Google.
To understand Google, you have to think about the future like Google.
Not only is IE horrifically slow for anything web-appy, but we all know that ScumSoft will (and probably already are) "fiddling" with their pile of junk of a browser to break things in Google Apps so that they can force their ill-thought out strategies and create future monopolistic lock-ins. Can't have Google driving things forward, we MUST OWN EVERYTHING, no matter what the consequences to mankind!!!!!
Try Valium....
No need, all my work is done on software that works, so that's not necessary.
For those of us who enjoy avoiding microsoft, and are
tired of Firefox hogging memory and crashing, Chrome
looks like a pretty good choice. Sure, maybe beta is
not perfectly stable yet, but still, it has a light
footprint, runs pretty fast, is easy on the eye and
does a few cool things. If somehow they could
incorporate the advantages of Firefox with its
extensions for gmail, it would be perfect.
tired of Firefox hogging memory and crashing, Chrome
looks like a pretty good choice. Sure, maybe beta is
not perfectly stable yet, but still, it has a light
footprint, runs pretty fast, is easy on the eye and
does a few cool things. If somehow they could
incorporate the advantages of Firefox with its
extensions for gmail, it would be perfect.
?We are so, so happy with Google Chrome,? mumbled Mozilla CEO John Lilly through gritted teeth. ?That most of our income is from Google has no bearing on me making this statement.? http://notnews.today.com/?p=57
yeah, use a fake quote from an obviously joke news site... the actual representatives have been very positive, it doesn't have to be a game where only one person wins and they realize it.
That was a joke news site! Oh my god.......Thank you! I was hoping the browser would really make me a cup of tea.
It lacks a File-Edit-View menu. I really really dislike not having a File Edit View menu at the top. That's one reason why I don't use IE7.
It's not even compatible with Google applications.
Chrome won't run Google Lively as of yesterday, for instance.
I would think that even for a beta Google would have made sure that all Google apps, release or still in beta, would work in their own browser.
Chrome crashed on several occasions when FF, Opera, Flock, IE7, etc. wouldn't have flinched.
It's not even compatible with Google applications.
Chrome won't run Google Lively as of yesterday, for instance.
I would think that even for a beta Google would have made sure that all Google apps, release or still in beta, would work in their own browser.
Chrome crashed on several occasions when FF, Opera, Flock, IE7, etc. wouldn't have flinched.
Well, no offense, but if you can't turn on the file edit view etc... toolbar in IE7, you're probably one of the people mentioned in the story who just stick with the preinstalled browser.
I think you are missing a key point here. Chrome is being released as open source, anyone can take what they like about of Chrome, build on it, and add it to their own browsers. No strings attached. As they said in their information comic, "Google lives on the internet". I don't think it's about the browser, it's about pushing out new ideas for others to build on.
That's what the Open Source nature of Chrome will give us.
Eventually MS will see an investor run, people are sick of them and their shoddy products. The Vista debacle is no surprise. It's typical Microsoft, it doesn't matter how junk the software is, it's simply time to rob illiterate computer users to feed the greedy once again, no matter the upheaval. Well, people are starting to see the pattern, and with all of that history, only idiots would go the MS web apps/cloud way. If you want lock-in and abuse, well, keep paying the lock-in abuser to stay around.
If you want progress, stop feeding the greedy liars who release "work-in-progress" software as a massively over-hyped "future of computing".
Whenever people come to me with Windows problems I just laugh at them and tell them that it's their fault if they want to run Windows. Same as it's a heroin addicts fault for taking heroin.
Eventually MS will see an investor run, people are sick of them and their shoddy products. The Vista debacle is no surprise. It's typical Microsoft, it doesn't matter how junk the software is, it's simply time to rob illiterate computer users to feed the greedy once again, no matter the upheaval. Well, people are starting to see the pattern, and with all of that history, only idiots would go the MS web apps/cloud way. If you want lock-in and abuse, well, keep paying the lock-in abuser to stay around.
If you want progress, stop feeding the greedy liars who release "work-in-progress" software as a massively over-hyped "future of computing".
Whenever people come to me with Windows problems I just laugh at them and tell them that it's their fault if they want to run Windows. Same as it's a heroin addicts fault for taking heroin.
if you are going to title an article 5 reasons...
the least you can do is list the 5 reasons....
I looked and didnt see what I thought were 5 good reasons.
lets review:
1. IE dominance and people's reluctance to change
2. Google's Poor track record
3. Google Backlash? This one is weak IMHO...
4. Deployment Strategy. maybe
5. ??? i didnt see any more, looks more like a couple reasons why google needs to plan the rollout of their
product once its out of beta. a little early to be signaling failure, i think...
the least you can do is list the 5 reasons....
I looked and didnt see what I thought were 5 good reasons.
lets review:
1. IE dominance and people's reluctance to change
2. Google's Poor track record
3. Google Backlash? This one is weak IMHO...
4. Deployment Strategy. maybe
5. ??? i didnt see any more, looks more like a couple reasons why google needs to plan the rollout of their
product once its out of beta. a little early to be signaling failure, i think...
This article completely misses the point of Google
Chrome.
Google is NOT out there to replace IE or Firefox!
They are trying to raise the bar technologically.
They've got plenty of ideas for their main web
services (the ones that make money - note that Chrome
does not bring any money to Google). The problem, they
say, is that there is no browser out there good enough
for those upgrades to their services.
So, seeing that IE and Firefox haven't made enough
progress, Google is giving away some free piece of
advice, and a working demo: Chrome.
It was the same with Firefox. IE was super-lame. Then
Firefox came along, showed Microsoft how IE sucks, so
Microsoft upgraded their browser (and you'll have to
admit it's gotten much better).
Now Chrome is showing both of them that it's time for
a better upgrade. It doesn't matter to Google who
makes the next best browser. Whether it's Microsoft,
Mozilla or Google themselves, as long as this browser
has the technology that Google is pushing, Google
wins.
Don't look at Chrome as a product. See it as a working
Concept Browser.
Chrome.
Google is NOT out there to replace IE or Firefox!
They are trying to raise the bar technologically.
They've got plenty of ideas for their main web
services (the ones that make money - note that Chrome
does not bring any money to Google). The problem, they
say, is that there is no browser out there good enough
for those upgrades to their services.
So, seeing that IE and Firefox haven't made enough
progress, Google is giving away some free piece of
advice, and a working demo: Chrome.
It was the same with Firefox. IE was super-lame. Then
Firefox came along, showed Microsoft how IE sucks, so
Microsoft upgraded their browser (and you'll have to
admit it's gotten much better).
Now Chrome is showing both of them that it's time for
a better upgrade. It doesn't matter to Google who
makes the next best browser. Whether it's Microsoft,
Mozilla or Google themselves, as long as this browser
has the technology that Google is pushing, Google
wins.
Don't look at Chrome as a product. See it as a working
Concept Browser.
You make a very valid point. But this article just exists because this is what "journalism" is now. Pushing the hype-backlash-comeback cycle into the shortest possible timeframe.
In real life, Google, MS, Apple and Mozilla are all looking for win-win symbiosis relationships with competitors. And Google appears to push for the win-win more than any other.
In real life, Google, MS, Apple and Mozilla are all looking for win-win symbiosis relationships with competitors. And Google appears to push for the win-win more than any other.
I'll wait and see. Let the zealots risk the horrid experiences!
I don't see versions for Apple, Unix or Linux systems, which are currently available from Firefox. (Perhaps Google Chrome will be offered for other operating systems if the PC Windows version gains traction and succeeds?)
they are already in development, but it doesn't really matter, the goal of Chrome is to get other browsers to include the same functionality so Google can make different and cooler web applications
"the goal of Chrome is to get other browsers to include the same functionality so Google can make different and cooler web applications"
You mean adding non standard stuff for which everybody hates IE. What about interoperability?...you must be kidding....this is Google....they can do no evil. Can they?
You mean adding non standard stuff for which everybody hates IE. What about interoperability?...you must be kidding....this is Google....they can do no evil. Can they?
note: I am no google lover, I don't even use their search engine.
the difference is the IE has never really followed standards, this is why they are making a big deal about finally passing some of the ACID tests, they never used to be able to.
google is doing things differently than microsoft. they are keeping all the old functionality (or at least attempting to, it isn't perfect yet) while still adding new things and asking/telling the other browsers to steal and incorporate anything they like (hence the open source and multiple statements about how they'd be really happy if other browsers copied the features.
the difference is the IE has never really followed standards, this is why they are making a big deal about finally passing some of the ACID tests, they never used to be able to.
google is doing things differently than microsoft. they are keeping all the old functionality (or at least attempting to, it isn't perfect yet) while still adding new things and asking/telling the other browsers to steal and incorporate anything they like (hence the open source and multiple statements about how they'd be really happy if other browsers copied the features.
Did I say it is fast. It has new ideas on how a browser should work.
It is better.
It is not going to fail. You can't fail when you have more money than god.
It is better.
It is not going to fail. You can't fail when you have more money than god.
just more proof that the "experts" at zdnet really don't get more complicated plans.
Google is not trying to seize market share with its browser, it is trying to get IE and the other browsers to improve themselves. they created an environment perfect for web applications and they open sourced said environment so that people can steal from it so the features spread and the environment grows. the goal is to get IE, Firefox, Opera, and the other browsers to follow their lead and include some of the innovations so that google can make even better web-applications.
also, google aims to make a profit through ads, they don't have to be the #1 person out there to have a success in that.
thanks again for reminding me why I usually don't read zdnet
Google is not trying to seize market share with its browser, it is trying to get IE and the other browsers to improve themselves. they created an environment perfect for web applications and they open sourced said environment so that people can steal from it so the features spread and the environment grows. the goal is to get IE, Firefox, Opera, and the other browsers to follow their lead and include some of the innovations so that google can make even better web-applications.
also, google aims to make a profit through ads, they don't have to be the #1 person out there to have a success in that.
thanks again for reminding me why I usually don't read zdnet
One thing I have noticed is that all of the people
putting out articles like this are stretching very far
to find something wrong with Chrome. I think the news
media is anti-Google, not everyone else.
You say that Firefox has had problems getting over 20%
usage - I hate to tell you, but a few years back, IE
had 96-98% usage... now they are at 60-70%? Sounds
like they are doing a good job of displacing IE usage.
I think Chrome stands a better chance of knocking IE
off of it's high horse because of one thing - Google.
The average non-techie can't tell you what in the
world "Firefox" is. But.. they sure know what Google
is. The non-techie people out there are probably a
lot more willing to trust Google than Mozilla.
As for the Google backlash - it exists - but mostly in
the techie world. Again, the average consumer who
doesn't live and breathe computers thinks that Google
is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
As for the stability of Chrome. I have to tell you,
I've been using it as my primary browser since it was
released yesterday - I haven't had a single crash. In
fact, I haven't had a single issue. I haven't had a
page yet not to display correctly - I'm sure I will
run across one - but haven't yet. For those of you
that are having crashes, you may want to ask yourself
if it had something to do with that crack you
downloaded off of torrent!
A few posts back, someone was whining about not have a
File - Edit menu. I'm sorry, but I enjoy not having
it... I would much rather have the screen real estate.
Its people like that who don't want to ever change
that hold back innovation.
I give Chrome an A+ so far... the web development
inspector is pretty good, it may not be Firebug... but
it's workable. The new screen real estate is amazing
- not having all of that extra garbage at the top
makes a world of difference... let's face it, who
needs the title bar?
putting out articles like this are stretching very far
to find something wrong with Chrome. I think the news
media is anti-Google, not everyone else.
You say that Firefox has had problems getting over 20%
usage - I hate to tell you, but a few years back, IE
had 96-98% usage... now they are at 60-70%? Sounds
like they are doing a good job of displacing IE usage.
I think Chrome stands a better chance of knocking IE
off of it's high horse because of one thing - Google.
The average non-techie can't tell you what in the
world "Firefox" is. But.. they sure know what Google
is. The non-techie people out there are probably a
lot more willing to trust Google than Mozilla.
As for the Google backlash - it exists - but mostly in
the techie world. Again, the average consumer who
doesn't live and breathe computers thinks that Google
is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
As for the stability of Chrome. I have to tell you,
I've been using it as my primary browser since it was
released yesterday - I haven't had a single crash. In
fact, I haven't had a single issue. I haven't had a
page yet not to display correctly - I'm sure I will
run across one - but haven't yet. For those of you
that are having crashes, you may want to ask yourself
if it had something to do with that crack you
downloaded off of torrent!
A few posts back, someone was whining about not have a
File - Edit menu. I'm sorry, but I enjoy not having
it... I would much rather have the screen real estate.
Its people like that who don't want to ever change
that hold back innovation.
I give Chrome an A+ so far... the web development
inspector is pretty good, it may not be Firebug... but
it's workable. The new screen real estate is amazing
- not having all of that extra garbage at the top
makes a world of difference... let's face it, who
needs the title bar?
according to this site IE is around 50% and Firefox is around 43%. Big difference from what you claim.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
Quoting from your source:
"These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is used by at least 80% of the users.
Anyway, our data, collected from W3Schools' log-files, over a five year period, clearly shows the long and medium-term trends."
What? "Anyway, our data, collected from W3Schools' log-files....."
Yeah we all know people visiting w3schools represent the typical internet user......???
At least 80% true, 30% times, sometimes, just like those TV ads.
"These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is used by at least 80% of the users.
Anyway, our data, collected from W3Schools' log-files, over a five year period, clearly shows the long and medium-term trends."
What? "Anyway, our data, collected from W3Schools' log-files....."
Yeah we all know people visiting w3schools represent the typical internet user......???
At least 80% true, 30% times, sometimes, just like those TV ads.
US is more IE, Europe is 30% firefox, 70% IE. But finland within the EU is more like 60% firefox 40% IE.
(don't know why).
I think Chrome will be big.
(don't know why).
I think Chrome will be big.
Will be a big turn off for a lot of people. I can
already see Chrome being banned at offices because
anything you do in Chrome Google can use for whatever
it wants pretty much. They may not do it, but you
never know.
Plus, the references to almost all of Google's apps
outside of search being fairly bad is completely true.
That and Google would have to someday get it out of
beta which isn't likely to happen. I think it's there
for other people to copy some features that Google
think is good. I would LOVE if IE8 adopted the Java
engine from Chrome, it would really improve it
considerably. I doubt Firefox will dump all the work
on tracemonkey so I doubt they'll use it. I think
Chrome will make a big impact on browsers in general,
but very little splash in the market as a whole.
already see Chrome being banned at offices because
anything you do in Chrome Google can use for whatever
it wants pretty much. They may not do it, but you
never know.
Plus, the references to almost all of Google's apps
outside of search being fairly bad is completely true.
That and Google would have to someday get it out of
beta which isn't likely to happen. I think it's there
for other people to copy some features that Google
think is good. I would LOVE if IE8 adopted the Java
engine from Chrome, it would really improve it
considerably. I doubt Firefox will dump all the work
on tracemonkey so I doubt they'll use it. I think
Chrome will make a big impact on browsers in general,
but very little splash in the market as a whole.
It's upto you to guard your privacy. A product in and of itself has no effect. It's what you do with it, what sites you go to, what software you load and use.
Note the common word, "you", it's your actions and therefore your responsibility. If you aren't able to work out the consequences of your actions, don't take them! Or accept that any and all results of your actions are your responsibility.
Note the common word, "you", it's your actions and therefore your responsibility. If you aren't able to work out the consequences of your actions, don't take them! Or accept that any and all results of your actions are your responsibility.
RE: market penetration
All Google needs to do is desecrate their sacred search page with on teeny tiny lil' advertisement. Sell it as enhanced search, surfing the google way etc etc - With that, they'll have access to 87% of the market.
Most people don't know they can change their browsers. Hell, 10% don't know you can change your search page. How else do you explain MSN?
All Google needs to do is desecrate their sacred search page with on teeny tiny lil' advertisement. Sell it as enhanced search, surfing the google way etc etc - With that, they'll have access to 87% of the market.
Most people don't know they can change their browsers. Hell, 10% don't know you can change your search page. How else do you explain MSN?
That is hilarious! You are correct about people not
knowing they can change browsers - outside of the
computer techie people, most of America is dumb when
it comes to how a computer (and especially the
Internet) works.
I haven't ever thought about the MSN thing that way -
but you are right. If it wasn't for Microsoft
defaulting MSN on all of their browsers, I doubt they
would have any traffic!
knowing they can change browsers - outside of the
computer techie people, most of America is dumb when
it comes to how a computer (and especially the
Internet) works.
I haven't ever thought about the MSN thing that way -
but you are right. If it wasn't for Microsoft
defaulting MSN on all of their browsers, I doubt they
would have any traffic!
let us be careful in assessing technology's popularity purely by numbers in North America. India China and other populous nations are faster technology adopters with larger numbers . America stopped being the center of technology when Math and science were neglected in the school system and later when huge budget deficits were built up.
Oh my god! India and China are now using Orkut and Firefox??? Thats HUGE........North America is so far left behind in technology. I think they should start using Facebook, Myspace, Safari, Opera and Firefox too.....wait!
And with more links being built outside the US, this proportion is dropping.
The internet is no longer American controlled, it's global.
The internet is no longer American controlled, it's global.
Whilst MS continues to hold the whole of North America back, financially, technically and educationally, the rest of the world is just getting on with it.
All the time and money in the world and all the markets can create is a fat monopoly that forces shoddy products down the consumers throat. Any wonder that things are "struggling" at the moment.
Mind you, anyone with half a brain knew that all of these current problems were going to happen.
All the time and money in the world and all the markets can create is a fat monopoly that forces shoddy products down the consumers throat. Any wonder that things are "struggling" at the moment.
Mind you, anyone with half a brain knew that all of these current problems were going to happen.
I don't get this stupid article. Talk about a buggy
piece of junk IE tops them all. Google chrome is
simple, fast and I have used it for twelve straight
hours without a problem....day one of release, by the
way. Microsoft should learn something, their stuff
has been crashing and burning since I have owned
computers. Vista anyone?
piece of junk IE tops them all. Google chrome is
simple, fast and I have used it for twelve straight
hours without a problem....day one of release, by the
way. Microsoft should learn something, their stuff
has been crashing and burning since I have owned
computers. Vista anyone?
Found in Chrome's EULA: "By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any content which you submit, post or display on or through, the services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."
I agree with those who feel scared about google's
omnipresence. I'll stick to firefox, no doubt about
that. Tried Chrome; not bad; except that it has no pdf
add-on... Of course it is still beta...
omnipresence. I'll stick to firefox, no doubt about
that. Tried Chrome; not bad; except that it has no pdf
add-on... Of course it is still beta...
1: Their goal isn't to take over the browser market, merely to introduce new concepts and light a fire under the others' butts. Same thing as with how they bid on the wireless spectrum, or their investments in solar technology. Google's all about doing things that drive the industry in ways that will benefit them whether they win or lose. They've made it clear that if IE9 is as fast as Chrome thanks to Chrome, they've won, and I believe it. They don't receive any massive benefit from people using Chrome, particularly as they haven't tied their services into it. Their benefit is in improving the web experience and therefore improving the user's likelihood to view more Google ads.
2: Picasa and Google Desktop are both extremely successful in their own rights. I find Google Desktop on most client computers I sit down at, and Picasa on quite a few as well. And do you seriously want to call Gmail anything close to a failure? First off, Hotmail has, what, a decade lead on it? And how many of those users don't touch their Hotmail accounts anymore? I know all of my friends have Gmail and most once used Hotmail. Gmail is, among all of my circles, THE web e-mail provider, end of story. How is that remotely a failure? By your same logic the Mac OS is a drastically larger failure compared to Windows, yet Apple seems to be doing quite well to me.
3: People have the same attitude about Microsoft yet can't kick the habit. Many of us are pretty fond of Google's efforts and use them heavily. I trust Google a hell of a lot more than a lot of other companies and use their services heavily. Most of my friends are the same way. And most people don't even think about it enough to be nervous. Even the ones who've figured out it's cool to hate Microsoft still like Google. I think this fear exists only in the minds of online journalists and online paranoids. The rest of the world doesn't think this way.
4: This browser isn't about becoming their central platform, it's about producing a new, "better" way to access those services. If they reach their goal, then ALL browsers will improve from it, which helps them in the long run. The closest this could come to is them optimizing their JavaScript for the better performance of Chrome. But considering the small marketshare it'll have, they'd be idiots to do this. Besides, as far as compatibility goes, it's the same as Safari. Anything that works well with one will work well with the other.
5: They've done a decent job getting all their other stuff out there. Google-philes will use it, and the rest will slowly follow. Expect it to ship on all retail computers alongside Google Desktop in the not-too-distant future. Beyond that it'll be advertised at the bottom of Google search pages and more in clear, friendly terms that spell out how much faster and easier it is. Honestly, I think it'll catch on among average joes faster than Firefox has.
Currently it needs work, although it's surprisingly polished for a beta (although a little less polished than most of Google's betas). I'm still sticking with Firefox as my primary browser, but if Google manages to improve a few functions and their APIs extend it as well as Firefox I might consider a switch. So far it's better than IE and Safari by a longshot.
2: Picasa and Google Desktop are both extremely successful in their own rights. I find Google Desktop on most client computers I sit down at, and Picasa on quite a few as well. And do you seriously want to call Gmail anything close to a failure? First off, Hotmail has, what, a decade lead on it? And how many of those users don't touch their Hotmail accounts anymore? I know all of my friends have Gmail and most once used Hotmail. Gmail is, among all of my circles, THE web e-mail provider, end of story. How is that remotely a failure? By your same logic the Mac OS is a drastically larger failure compared to Windows, yet Apple seems to be doing quite well to me.
3: People have the same attitude about Microsoft yet can't kick the habit. Many of us are pretty fond of Google's efforts and use them heavily. I trust Google a hell of a lot more than a lot of other companies and use their services heavily. Most of my friends are the same way. And most people don't even think about it enough to be nervous. Even the ones who've figured out it's cool to hate Microsoft still like Google. I think this fear exists only in the minds of online journalists and online paranoids. The rest of the world doesn't think this way.
4: This browser isn't about becoming their central platform, it's about producing a new, "better" way to access those services. If they reach their goal, then ALL browsers will improve from it, which helps them in the long run. The closest this could come to is them optimizing their JavaScript for the better performance of Chrome. But considering the small marketshare it'll have, they'd be idiots to do this. Besides, as far as compatibility goes, it's the same as Safari. Anything that works well with one will work well with the other.
5: They've done a decent job getting all their other stuff out there. Google-philes will use it, and the rest will slowly follow. Expect it to ship on all retail computers alongside Google Desktop in the not-too-distant future. Beyond that it'll be advertised at the bottom of Google search pages and more in clear, friendly terms that spell out how much faster and easier it is. Honestly, I think it'll catch on among average joes faster than Firefox has.
Currently it needs work, although it's surprisingly polished for a beta (although a little less polished than most of Google's betas). I'm still sticking with Firefox as my primary browser, but if Google manages to improve a few functions and their APIs extend it as well as Firefox I might consider a switch. So far it's better than IE and Safari by a longshot.
I've seen mentions of Adults not knowing how to change
browsers, or awareness that you can change, and
reluctance to change.
But the future is with the young. Students and young
workers think Google is cool, readily adopt it, develop a
loyalty to the Google brand...and even modify their
parent's computers to add GMail and Google Apps.
BTW, expect Apple's Safari to be the quickest to adopt
features and functionality introduced by Chrome. Apple
acts faster, and Safari and Chrome are both based on
Webkit.
browsers, or awareness that you can change, and
reluctance to change.
But the future is with the young. Students and young
workers think Google is cool, readily adopt it, develop a
loyalty to the Google brand...and even modify their
parent's computers to add GMail and Google Apps.
BTW, expect Apple's Safari to be the quickest to adopt
features and functionality introduced by Chrome. Apple
acts faster, and Safari and Chrome are both based on
Webkit.
Join the conversation!
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Vendor Showcase
Facebook Activity
