It?s not just hype ? here?s why Google?s attempt at a browser will be the chrome bullet that takes out Firefox.
When Google engineers sneeze, someone Twitters about it 4,000 miles away. So when the company, whose name is nearly synonymous with the Web, launches its own browser, it’s understandably pretty big news.
Reviewers have dissected Chrome’s new features up and down from every angle, but the big question remains: what kind of legs will this thing get? The answer, I predict, isn’t quite as cut and clear as all the naysayers on one side and enthusiastic Google fanboys on the other would have you believe. Google won’t hold a candle to Microsoft’s dominance of the market, but it will take Firefox’s place as the enthusiast’s browser of choice in the coming years. Here’s why:
1. Google’s browser will play nice with Google’s tools.
Call it “interoperability” if you must. It’s important. Google already has significant crowds latched onto features like iGoogle, Gmail, Google Maps, and other apps. It just needs to start offering extra functionality for these Web 2.0 apps when used with Chrome, and it creates a compelling reason for hordes of people to switch. After all, how many Firefox devotees still keep a copy of IE around to work with Microsoft features, like updating Windows? To some extent, Google is already working this angle. With the existing version of Chrome, you can place links to Web apps on your desktop, like Gmail, making them easier to access. It works with more than Google Apps, but you can easily imagine more Google-centric features propelling even larger crowds toward Chrome.
2. Google can market Chrome better than Mozilla can market Firefox.
Mozilla is just another software developer. Google is an empire. Unless you were one of the techie few who followed the Mozilla Foundation prior to the popularity of Firefox, you would likely have never stumbled upon the name. Google, on the other hand, has a monolithic presence on the Web that it can shove around to get Chrome noticed. In fact, it’s already happened: depending on which source you take as gospel, Chrome already has between one and three percent market share in just one day of its launch. That’s completely unprecedented, and no one, even Microsoft, could probably pull it off besides Google.
3. Chrome is just a better browser.
As a Firefox devotee, it’s tough for me to admit, but Chrome is the superior piece of software. It’s cleaner, faster, and retains the open source element that made Mozilla such a success. And I’m not the only person who thinks so. Reviewers have generally greeted Chrome with accolades, and whatever shortcomings have turned up so far can easily be dismissed by the fact that it’s still in beta, and open source tweakers can take it the rest of the way.
4. No one will conquer Microsoft.
In nearly four years since its launch, Firefox has only managed to hack away about 22 percent of the browser market for itself, despite its vast superiority to IE in almost every measure. While that’s impressive, Mozilla is still playing David to Microsoft’s Goliath, which holds about 70 percent of the market. Chrome will fare no better, because both browsers are battling against the same insurmountable enemy: complacency.
IE users use it because it comes preinstalled on their computers, it works, and they don’t have the desire for anything better. Trying to get them to try another browser, any other browser, is like trying to convince your dog to walk down a flight of stairs to drink Fiji water instead of drinking toilet water ten feet away. Whatever’s closer, thank you. Until Microsoft’s stranglehold on the operating system market dies, IE will remain the dominant browser.
Looking Forward
While Chrome’s future remains undoubtedly bright (and shiny,) at the end of the day there’s just not much that can be done to pry the majority share of the market out of Microsoft’s iron grip. But up at the head of the tech-saviness Bell curve, where power users swap between applications freely looking for the best features and performance, Chrome has its work cut out for it. Firefox, watch your back: there’s a new sliver on this pie chart, and it’s looking for room to expand.
Showing 37 comments
RSSThose saying that Chrome targets Windows and not IE... keep on dreaming! As much as I would like M$ to loose its suffocating monopoly.... why did they (Google) make Chrome Windows-only first then? It is still to see if the promised Linux&Mac versions will be as up-to-date as the Windows one or if they will lag behind.
To make Windows redundant they first need to make Chrome NOT depend on Windows. It is still to see if they get it.
Another thing is that many applications that people and corporations use and need run only as local/rich-clients apps. And most of them are tied ONLY to Microsoft's Windows. And this is not going to change anytime soon (unfortunately) and...
...No threat to Windows => IE % of market >66% ALLWAYS!!!
The other point about Chrome copying FF (and viceversa), although true, hides the fact that there are features in Chrome that FF does not have now and will have a hard time to adquire in the future, because Chrome starts off from a cleaner set of components:
- Chrome startups at the SPEED OF LIGHT!!! And don't expect that anytime soon in FF beacuse is too tighthed to "fatty Gecko". Users will go "but this FF starts SOO Slowly!"
- Chrome multiprocess is good even for non-techies. "...oldFF used to crash completely with those flash pages, now only the flash breaks and I just reload the page" This is not easy for FF to copy either.
- Chrome uses MUCH less view space, but FF now still uses OS window decorators and a old-fashing textual-app menu that make it more screen-hungry. "With Asus EEE 901 1024x600 I don't have to scroll as much with Chrome as I needed to with my old-FF". This is also difficult for FF to adopt (but not as much as the previous ones)
google makes mad moves like when it took over youtube, or did you 4get about a lil thing called google maps. Google rewrote the book on search engines world and will do the same with chrome!
So keep play'n the game Nick and don't let the haters out there stop ya from spit'n the dt tech game with no shame!!!!
First, Google has their sights set elsewhere. Chrome may or may not continue to evolve, but it is just as likely that it will disappear as other browsers are affected by its gravity. Remember, as RobFlo indicated, Chrome's mission is limited to Google's cloud.
Second, FF (as well as IE these days) are not static. They too can evolve and are likely to adopt some of Chrome's ideas as long as Chrome continues to hold the public's attention. To hold that attentionChrome will need add blocking at a minimum, but more likely an entire infrastructure that makes it extensible. Those tasks may be outside of Chorme's original intent. With FF adopting a new JavaScript engine that seems destined to out pace Chrome, there will not be too many huge reasons to keep Chrome around.
It is to our advantage that Chrome suck as much oxygen out of the browser market as it can since that increases the likelihood that the FF development team will sit up and take notice of all the large and small shiny bits of Chrome and assimilate them.
However I believe that most commentators continue to miss the major thrust of Google's intent, "Rob Enderle - Chrome is designed to be a front end to Google's Cloud and it will allow applications that are web based to appear more similar to locally running applications." (above)
Just goto "Control the current Page" and there is the key - Create Application Shortcut!!! This is one of the key reasons for Chrome. Just log into your Gmail account and then select to create an application short cut, not only do you get an option to save it to "Desktop", "Start Menu" and "Quicklaunch" but when you do the Icon is not the typical FF or IE webpage but a custom Gmail red envelope and what is more when you open this new "application shortcut" you get an even more stripped down browser window 'less chrome' that makes Gmail/Docs/Calendar look more and more like a locally installed application all that is missing is the local offline storage with internet sync back into the Google cloud... gears is the tool for this and what to you know GG is installed as part of Chrome... is this starting to paint the picture yet.
While I agree with many of the comments about the benefits/short comings of Chrome vs FF vs IE lets keep sight of the main game, once your applications run on all OSes (in a Chrome browser) and there is both offline and cloud sync why do I even care about MS, Apple, Linux desktop, laptop, netbook, mobile my information is available where ever I need it. So long as I can trust big brother G with it. :-)
This trend applies to all technology, one clever idea revolutionises a specific part of technology then the competing MONKEY will copy them. The MONKEY wont get it rite, but they will get close.
Monkey see monkey do.
With regard to chrome betting better software wise, i think this is has been proven not to be so already, with security flaws and runtime error's already dogging this browser.
I think he has it wrong with regard to IE to being insurmountable! Does anyone remember Navigator, truly the only browser that really troubled IE. Was given it's death notice only by market wrangling by Microsoft. This is now supposedly no longer possible due to anti-trust laws.
In finishing i think it is a plus either way, every new maker brings a new life and developments in its field. So lets hope we can see the end of IE rubbish!! Long live the fox!
There is no hint of doubt that Chrome makes browsing faster n better. But ppl like me who are used to Firefox will take some time to change their habits.
As of now I have to keep two instances of browser open and juggle between the two. For instance if I have to check my bookmarks or add a new bookmark to delicious..
Over a period of time Chrome will come out wid a host of features / extensions. The sooner they come the better.
As web developer, I must to work with (almost) all Web browsers, either Windows, Linux or Mac.
Unfortunately, even if Chrome is (impresively) faster than any browser, and even if it has the last Javascript renderer, it has a lot of problems with some Javascripts (including Alerts, Prompts, etc.)
I don't know if that's the reason, but Chrome uses the same web renderer than Safari: AppleWebKit. And (oh, surprise!!!) I have the same problems on Safari using Javascripts.
As information, all javasripts works fine on Firefox 1.5+, Opera 9+, and even Internet Explorer 6+
I agree that Google's got way more marketing strength than Mozilla, but I was more or less thinking that although many people had tried out Chrome, this 2% market share isn't a definite "I'm switching over to Chrome now, so bye bye Firefox/IE!".
This could be just people trying out Chrome. That is just a download count; or did they actually use some method to determine that this is indeed the case that Chrome has guaranteed a 2% market share? Maybe they just use both until one really proves to the end user that it is the better one.
In the end I guess we shouldn't loose track over the fact that these are just tools/browsers and that it doesn't really matter which one you use. We shouldn't get too attached to them... they are man made after all!
I think you are missing the point. Better doesn't mean it will sell more. IE is a terrible browser, but it's the most commonly used.
Chrome will succeed BECAUSE of Google. 2-3% marketshare in a day is unheard of.
There is no doubt that FireFox is a killer browser, but without a marketing budget, or the industry clout Google has, it will be stuck in the mud.
I'm not defending FF3 nor praising Chrome, I like both but be realistic here... Mozilla has the browser-dev experts while Chrome just started. Also, Chrome needs to address certain security holes (like what they've found with the Webkit and probably other exploits we don't know about) while FF3 is already much more secure and gets fixed very quickly.
I agree that Chrome has a cleaner and simpler way of addressing most of the issues and I like the way they thought about everything, especially the TABS!!! The TABS are very intuitive! Separate processes, etc. FF3 definitely needs this!
But don't forget, Mozilla is in a better situation to adapt than Chrome. I heard that Mozilla is going to release a faster Javascript engine than Chrome's, so it must be a sign.
However, enjoy both! Chrome is faster at this stage, I agree, more pleasurable than FF but don't take the uniform route. Things change on the web really quickly! This is good competition!
One thing to think about though, and this goes back to the name Chrome which appears to have its roots in Microsoft Chrome Effects, a product that could have transformed Microsoft but failed due to internal politics, is that Chrome is actually a targeted browser and the target isnâ??t IE itâ??s Windows.
Chrome is designed to be a front end to Googleâ??s Cloud and it will allow applications that are web based to appear more similar to locally running applications.
This is, in effect, more of an effort to render Windows redundant which is why a number of common browser features were left out in favor of keeping it simple and elegant.
Eventually they will likely have control over Mozilla because they will need to control their code base as this competition heats up and that will likely result in Firefox being de-emphasized, but for now I think this is more about Windows than IE and that will make it really interesting to watch.
Firefox already has a community of thousands of extensions... Google has not so much..
I think there is room for both myself.. I think the XUL framework that Firefox on will be the main reason it survives.. It's really easy to make cross platform apps that look/operate the same where possible and natively match the base OSS conventions.. That's as good a reason to exist as any I've heard about Chrome.
You might also remember that Firefox is 3ya.. how old is IE now? I don't know exactly, but it's got to be close to 13 years since Microsoft started forcing it onto peoples desktops and it version 3 when that happened.
back then Netscape was the 800 pound gorilla with all the market share.
I work at a uni, and I've converted a good many of the staff away from IE to Firefox just for better security and features.. most are avid users now.
Google Toolbar and Google Desktop coming preinstalled on every Dell (possibly others as well) computer sold. Why not Chrome preinstalled on every computer Dell (and others) sells?
There is an underlying assumption here around IE dominance with the dog analogy. I challenge that assumption, that people cannot shift to another browser already installed on thier systems. Word of mouth is extremely powerful. These days I find novices who cannot install a piece of software on thier system download Firfox.
With the reputation Google has at connecting people with the required information and the way they do it - people will be inclined to download Chrome over Firefox - far easier to use and understand.
Joe aka SeoJoe.com
Adv: it consumes less memory, downloads are easier to manage and it's a LOT easier to move around tabs. The Gui is extremely clean and I haven't even noticed the lack of options (most of them are there, just hidden away.
Dis: It has no extensions that Firefox has (like gestures), The Gui cannot be customized, there is a small bug that I just noticed as I was typing this (it doesn't correctly detect the location of text when the window is scrolled, when the window is all the way at the bottom), it is still a beta product and as such isn't completely finished.
Chrome is a fine browser for those who like simplicity over options (not that Google chrome is really missing many features, they are more hidden), but for those who want a completely controlled experience, Firefox has a range of extras to be used.
To Tim Westcott:
The browser has only being out for 3 days on Windows. They have said that they are working on getting it working on other browsers, so don't worry, you'll be able to use it soon on Linux and OSx.
1) Plays nice with Google Apps: I don't exactly know what is meant by this, but in any case, I would not switch browsers based on the fact that is "plays" with Google apps better. The apps work or they don't. They work in Firefox just as well as Chrome. Probably what Nick is getting at is the fact that you can integrate the apps into the browsers. From a purely practical point of view this is almost cosmetic. Where the app resides is almost entirely inconsequential, and this "feature" could be seen as nothing more than a gimmick to the discerning eye.
2) Google can market Chrome better: This is true. However, the Firefox community are not the type of drones that succumb to mass-marketing. The Firefox user community have a high Linux uptake and browser choice has a more sophisticated calculus. In fact, as Tim points out above (in reason 5), mass marketing and the weight of an industry giant probably hinders uptake by hard core Firefox fans.
3) Chrome is a better browser: This is arguable and highly subjective right now. It may eventually prove a better browser, but that will be determined on sheer technical merit alone to most Firefox fans. Right now it's probably to early to tell, but remember that Chrome is being compared to Firefox, not the other way around. That gives Firefox an incumbent advantage also means inertia is in its favour. That means there would have to be significant technically meritorious features (not gimmicks) in order to challenge Firefox.
4) No one will conquer Microsoft. While this may be true for the forseeable future, I can't see Chrome taking significantly from the Firefox community, but for reasons that you listed above, I can see it taking from the IE market. Google can market well and could take share from IE, but the more discerning netizen will wait until the technical merits have been settled.
I can't see Chrome challenging for Firefox just yet, but maybe taking from IE.
Also you need to continually jump the mouse from one side to the other to implement simple commands, it may come good and I hope they succeed (I love their homepage, no added rubbish).
Andrew
1) It doesn't run on Linux (yet) - Jason Howard was wrong, a Linux version has not yet been released.
2) Extensibility - there is now way I can use my Internet without my favourite extensions.
3) Lack of originality - nothing in Chrome (perhaps disregarding the tabs having their own processes) is functionality that is not in a browser like Opera, and Firefox with extensions (Much of the functionality seems to be straight from Mozilla labs).
4) Looks - while I like a clean interface, the chosen colour scheme is horrendous (this is not a major issue in itself, just another reason)
5) Trust - While I've always liked Google, I'm not sure that I'm ready to use software from a large corporation, especially considering the EULA issues (I am very pleased it's Open Source however, and this may aid the trust issues).
Despite this I am glad that a new (open source) player is on the market, as increased competition should ultimately result in a better web.
Also, come on Google! Come out with a Mac version already. They have a linux one!!
Personally, I think (as you pointed out) that Chrome's growth is so rapid that they will take a major chunk of market share. 2-3% in a day is amazing, and if early adopters like it (which they do) then I expect that number to shoot up to the 40%+ range in under 4-5 years.
Personally, I like Chrome, but have noticed a few flaws. Organizing bookmarks is a pain (how do you sort by name for example?). I also noticed that some form-fields or WSYWIG editors do not load correctly - not sure what is going on there.