Chromatic Hyperbole

Tagged:

It would be impossible to miss the excitement over Google's Chrome, though I would assume we would wait to actually see the product, first, before wetting our pants.

Yes, Google entering the browser marketplace is news, but some of the things I've been reading are, well, frankly asinine. For instance, Computerworld breathlessly writes, Google's Chrome aims to kill Windows, make Web the OS of choice. A bit hard, wouldn't you say, when Chrome requires Windows just to be able to run?

Let's kill off Windows with our Web OS.

Cool.

...later...

Well, Windows is dead.

That's great! 

*pause* 

Uh, where's Chrome?

Well, you see...

Do we also need to remember our concerns about Google? You know, the whole privacy thing? Or are we a modern day bunch of Pavlovian dogs, trained to drool on cue whenever Google is involved?

There are issues associated with this browser, babes. First of all, as great as it is that Google is using Webkit for its infrastructure, it's also coming out with its own JavaScript engine. My first question is: is Google going to conform to standards? Or is it going to go its own little way, and just assume we'll tag along? Then there's the issue of the engine being multi-threaded—and here I thought Photoshop was going to be the only pig on my system.

My concerns aren't just related to JS. As I read somewhere—who knows where—we can now see why Google is footing the bill for Ian Hickson to head up the HTML5 effort. However, now that Google is "one of the browser competitors", how will this change the dynamic in all these standards groups? I'm not going to necessarily give HTML5 over to Google to define to its own Chrome standards. I imagine that some of the browser companies would feel the same.

And about those privacy concerns...exactly what kind of information is Google going to be collecting about us as we use the damn thing?

Frankly, I'm all for anything that weakens the abysmally tenacious hold IE6 and IE7 have on desktops, but I'm not sure yet another player in the field is what we need. Especially a player who, frankly, exhibits many of the same tendencies towards arrogance, as well as interest in complete dominance, as the company they supposedly "hate". I can understand Google's impatience with the other browser companies—but Google also has a tendency to act impulsively, and leave the rest of us to pick up the pieces.

As for web applications taking over the world, we're just now starting to hit against issues of broadband caps, not to mention the problems we've had with centralized services recently. Does Twitter ring a bell with you folks? How about Amazon's S3? GMail? In the last month, we've seen outages at a considerable number of centralized web services, and we haven't even started putting our critical operations into "the cloud".

Do you really want your business to hit a stand still because you've lost your internet connection, hit a broadband cap, or "the cloud" is not playing nicely at the moment? Seriously?

Look, yes. Get interested, yes. Peer around under the hood, and take it for a spin, most definitely yes. But get a grip--the web world as we know it hasn't suddenly come to an end just because Google has decided it wants to play the browser game, too.


Downloaded. Installed. Works fast. Chrome doesn't work on the Mac. Thanks to WebKit it does support XHTML and SVG. However, I've hit an odd rendering error for this page, which I don't get with my nightly WebKit download.


Matt Cutts did respond to privacy concerns about Chrome, though I wish he wouldn't categorize these concerns as being the paranoid ramblings of conspiracy theorists.

Comments

Yeah, they're using an older version of WebKit as there is at least two aberrations on my site that I thought were long gone. In the webcast, they did mention that their intention is to eventually build updates of Chrome against the tip of WebKit.


Regarding there being no Mac OS X builds, one could always just build it from source:

http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/build-instructions-os-x

-or-

http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/build-instructions-linux

It is unclear to me how closely these builds will mimic today's "polished" Windows binary release... but I guess I'll find out when I get home this evening.

-s


Nevermind, I see now that the OS X build process is incomplete... (as the wiki indicates.) :-/

Still, the test harness is fun to play with...


If I step back, I note:

1. We now have three major browser projects using the open source rendering engine, webkit: iphone, android, chrome

2. The last two of these are fully open source down to the UI.

3. The new javascript engine V8 is open source.

4. Privacy concerns only relate to the binary Google distributes. Though, that does not mean much for the average user. However, there is stealth mode which goes a long way toward resolving many real privacy concerns.

5. The rethink of the UI is refreshing, though I think it needs to evolve. Bookmarks are a sore point.

So, overall for me, it's a plus to have this. Generally, you just don't make much progress unless you have facts on the ground. The world works through empires. It's good to have them clash a bit and attempt to win.

I would not see this win if it were not open source. I do think someone needs to step up and create a black hole privacy browser that gives you complete control of your data. Chrome does have elements of that, but I think that browser needs to come from somewhere other than Google.


Bud, stealth mode is between you and your computer, not the application and Google.

However, Matt Cutts has come out and documented the communications between the application and Google, which was my main concern.


I'm aware of the limitations of stealth mode. However, it does go a long way in limiting a number of real privacy concerns. Erasing cookies does at least make your personal computer less searchable.

At the end of the day, you can't really be stealthy regardless. Every act of web browsing is done in public over the Internet. You can make yourself harder but not impossible to track.

The main plus I see here is the salvo fired in support of standards. Here's another good interview:

http://apcmag.com/chrome_is_the_autodefrosting_refrigerator_of_browsers_...


I know it's always fun to piss on the parade of a shiny new product, but seriously; privacy concerns? It's open source, if there is any hint of foul play it'll be dragged out, yelled about, removed and redistributed.

They're trying to be open, they're using V8 which is not only open but also has guidance for developers to use and abuse it in whatever way they see fit; non adherence to standards will be noticed. Besides this, Google is a company based upon content -- it survives by adhering to standards and by making sure everyone can see its applications and its ads.

I'm not some screaming Google fan; I'm even marginally miffed that I can't test Chrome out right now as I'm at work on a Windows 2000 box, and can't even test it out tonight on my Linux laptop. But it seems like you're just complaining about scenarios you've dreamt up with no hint of a root in Google's actions.

In summary your article seems opportunistic an uninsightful.

Well done on being amongst the first to complain pointlessly and without foundation -- I'm sure the internet will applaud you; which is probably the most depressing thing about your article.


And Adam, protests aside, you're probably a fan boy who sees the shiny object, goes "Oooo, pretty!", and doesn't stop to think of the impact. Like most of the people who have, so far, gushed over this product.

We see the technology but we don't see into the actual implementation of Chrome. We hear the words, and see the pretty pictures, but underneath all of this, there will be an impact: on existing browsers, including Firefox (more likely) than IE. Impact, as well, in how Google is perceived as a member of standards organization.

And no, I didn't expect to have any notice of what I wrote. So, sorry that your umbrage is wasted. But don't say my concerns are without foundation just because I write, "hold on", and you wanted to only see happy, happy thoughts.

Google has a right to dump yet another browser on the world. But I also have a right to not accept it without reservation.


So I'm "probably" a fan boy and, you assert; "wanted only to see only happy, happy thoughts."

It seems that pulling things out of your ass is a trend you wish to continue. I won't be checking back.


"I won't be checking back."

Oh, wow, that's really too bad. I should just quit because you won't be back.


Hi Shelley,

Ok, I tested it. I also get some SVG rendering errors. Some SVGs have jaggies like being rendered with low or without anti-aliasing. My page about Sierpinski triangles is broken in Chrome.

Chrome installed a GoogleUpdate.exe. It sucks! I wasn't asked to get another thing running on my machine :(

Greetings from York @ Alphane Moon


I like the fact that it's multiprocessing and if one tab dies the others stay alive. The Google Gears thing is interesting and obviously has something to do with Google's bid for the desktop of cloud computing clients. Is some open (FreeBSD?) OS/Chrome/Google Gears the Microsoft killer?