google chrome/unwanted and unneeded
When I returned from vacation, the first work-related thing in ran into was Google Chrome. Clearly another Google product, I lost interest in it right away. As it turned out to be a browser, it was something I couldn't ignore after all. Since then I fired it up a couple of times, so here's my obligatory 'every blogger needs a post on Google Chrome' write-up.
My main issue with Chrome is pretty clear, and has not so much to do with Google's actual product but with the current browser landscape. When things are finally stabilizing little by little, with the big four being enough trouble as it is, who needs a fifth (possibly) major competitor? The only savior of Chrome was a browsing revolution.
the chrome revolution
Main selling point of Chrome is the V8 javascript engine, rumored to be the fastest in browser land. A title which I guess it held for a whole week. There are already rumours and benchmarks putting Firefox and Safari in the lead again. And even then, while solid javascript performance is a good thing, looking at javascript as the way of the future sounds rather primitive to me.
More impressive is Chrome's threaded tab approach. Each tab has it's own thread, allowing it to crash and perform separately from the browser itself. A nifty feature, which I guess will be quickly adapted by others. But at least for a while, Chrome will have the edge there.
As I skimmed down the list of new features, I quickly ran into mentions of a "new tab system" (placing the tabs on top of the window) and similar features. In my eyes, simple bollocks to cover up the lack of more interesting things to mention. So basically, a fast javascript engine and threaded tabs is all Chrome has to offer us for now.
the chrome deception
Even though the browser is rumored to be pretty quick, I believe it feels a noticeable amount slower than other browser. Especially the lack of action and progress after clicking a link or browsing back is hugely annoying, creating a pretty laggy feel while surfing around. In comparison to other browsers, it might be quicker (in actual time), but the feel of the thing is pretty slow and convoluted.
As a web developer, there's also the question of how Chrome will be influencing our daily work. The good news is that Chrome's using a version of the WebKit engine (same one Safari is using), what worries me though is whether Safari and Chrome will continue to use the same version of WebKit. If not, this will mean more work for us web developers, having an extra browser to worry about (as if four wasn't enough already).
the chrome problem
The real problem with Chrome is that I really don't see the use of it. IE is there for your average Windows user, Safari helps the average Mac user, if you expect more from your browser you pick between the leaner Opera or the bulkier Firefox. But I honestly can't see why anyone would be picking Chrome. Not advanced users, nor average users. It has very little that separates it from other browser, nothing that will give it an edge for longer than a year, and it's severely lacking in other areas.
For me, Chrome is very much an unwanted and unneeded addition to the browser world. Maybe Google could've blogged about separate tab threads and could've invested in other people's javascript engines. I can only hope Chrome dies a fast and early death. If not, it'll be another browser on the list that needs to be checked but will never be used.
Neils,
I feel you're being a little harsh here. Although I recently blogged some fairly negative comments about Chrome (see my link), I didn't go quite as far as you have! ;-)
Although Chrome currently offers little in terms of end-user innovation, I feel there is great potential (and demand) in this area, and at least Google are stating an intent. There has been very little real innovation in user-agent land of late; tabbed browsing is NOT a web browser innovation, it's a window management one. Today's browsers still do very little other than view pages and bookmark them in various ways.
Although new features should always be considered secondary to standards-compliance, we now have 4 passable rendering engines, and a few javascript implementations of worth. By reusing the former, and making the latter fully available, Google haven't really worsened the standards-compliance issue: there should be no need to test Chrome separately than Safari, just test 'WebKit', as you would test Gecko, Opera, and IE.
I agree that there's little motive for the average Windows user to install Chrome right now, but when we see the first big round of feature improvements, I think we might all be pleseantly surprised.
Cheers!
I'm not 100% aware of how WebKit is integrated in browsers like Safari and Chrome, but I know that the browser implementations are usually far behind the nightlies of WebKit. I'm just guessing here, but it doesn't seem unrealistic that at some point Safari and Chrome would implement different versions of WebKit (depending on their own release schedule ?)
Some information about this would be appreciated though :)
Not sure about this. I for one think that most browsers have too many features already. I use my browser mainly for viewing websites, that's it. I like the idea that all other features are added through plugins and such (the FF way). I for one am not really waiting for real innovations (though I like to be surprised). I'm waiting for compliance, but maybe that's just the developer in me :)
According to my latest info, Chrome is running WebKit 525.13 whilst the latest Safari runs 525.18. Not too sure on the significance of those differences, but I'd hope it would be as little as, say, Firefox 2.0.0.15 and 2.0.0.16 - i.e. not really significant in terms of CSS support.
I take your point, and Chrome certainly does a passable impression of 'removing' (or, at least, hiding) all of those menu items. I see two really significant possibilities, though:
I think there's still plenty of potential for innovation without adding features outside of the browser's scope, and another (major) player can't really hurt in this regard.
It's bugged, and it's bugged a lot. It's almost official - http://www.votetheday.com/polls/googles-chrome-173/ I'm disappointed in Google - yeah, it's beta, but remember, how Gmail beta looked like... Looks like guys had to deliver it till deadline (10th birthday, maybe), and they were obviously short of time... It's better than IE, but FF will live excellently long until Google fixes everything and makes enough plug-inns and versions for Mac/Linux...
What I thought was funny is that so many Windows users flocked to Chrome to see what a browser using Webkit would look like. They seemingly overlooked the fact that Safari's been available for Windows for more than 6 months. Granted Safari doesn't look very well in Windows, but neither does Chrome, with their own window style. (nor does iTunes, which many people have installed as well)
As for the Webkit engine, I wouldn't be too afraid of them differing much in version between what Safari uses and what Chrome will have. I'm inclined to think Chrome might update to newer Webkit versions quicker than Apple will, as they're more into the Open Source scene with this browser as well as with Firefox (which is also a Google browser as they provide the most financial support for it)
This brings us to another point... Google already has a browser, Firefox. I wonder if they will be able to fully back 2 browsers in the future. We'll have to watch about a bit about what will happen on the Firefox front... if weblogs start to report about Firefox devs being pulled away in favour of Chrome... then we know Firefox will have tough times ahead. Of course, adding another browser to the "browser war" means diversification, which is good if you own more than one browser. I hope there'll be some sort of cross-breeding between Firefox and Chrome... and eventually both will be the same under the hood but with different GUIs to favour browser-zealots.
In the end I'm pleased Webkit's usage will rise significantly, it's a good and solid project, with in my opinion, the best standards compliancy.
To answer your fma's question: I'm pretty sure Webkit will implement HTML5 first as it's funded by Apple and they're pushing HTML5. With all this talk about HTML5 it's gained so much popularity that I start wondering whether xhtml is still worked on...
Lastly... the whole idea of Chrome of course is to provide seamless integration with Google Docs. A company like Google doesn't "just" put out a new browser, there's a long term vision connected here and it's stealing away from MS Office. Microsoft's software empire is showing cracks which started with Apple's gains in market share (both iPods/iPhones and Macs using OS X) but they have to watch out for Google as well who's actively going after their 2nd biggest moneymaker: Office.
Excuse me for the evangelism, but Chrome will not be a small, niche browser.
I don't think a new browser is a good way to bring more innovation. Google could just as well have invested in the current browsers (ie FF).
Which means rendering issues between the two could happen. I can only hope that both will keep their WebKit engines as up to date and as close to each other as possible.
But then, who is going to use it? Definitely not FF users, who love all their plugins and add-ons. Don't see rusty IE users switching either. And Mac zealots just swear to Apple software. Chrome is for geeks and gadget freaks at the moment, with very little to break into the mainstream and start harvesting %s in the browser market. It has a very long way to even come close to equalling its rivals.
Much has been said about this: It is indeed unlikely Chrome will get a big desktop share, but I believe Google is doing the right thing here. They fuel innovation and force the other players to innovate quicker and in the direction Google wants, that's the 'browser as OS' idea where JavaScript processing speed is of the greatest importance. Also don't overlook the fact that they included Google-gears in it. Probably chrome is just a tool used internally to test / develop gears applications, and now showcased so the other browser-devs can learn how it actually works (and hopefully implement gears in their products).
True, but JS as application language of the future sounds like a very bad idea to me. And ignoring that for a second, it turns out their V8 engine isn't even that fast to begin with (as it is already being surpassed by dev versions of other browsers).
The only real innovation I'm seeing now is the threaded tab idea, and I don't think they needed to release a complete browser to get that idea across to other vendors.
But we'll see. I've been toying with it some more, it's pretty buggy still and there's still nothing that really catches my eye (as a possible selling point), but maybe Google can surprise us when Chrome gets out of beta.
First of all, Online setup did not work so, I installed it offline. Reinstalled it several times but then also, No use. IE,FF and Opera works just fine but don’t know what happened to Chrome?
Занимаюсь дизайном и хочу попросить автора www.onderhond.com отправить шаьлончик на мой мыил) Готов заплатить...
Only reason I got around Chrome was to test how my site would look in it. Just another test-browser for me like FF and Safari!
Opera aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall the way, baby. >:3
Chrome is better but interface is so bad, I'll use FF3 ;)
It would be nice if similar efforts were being put into fixing the annoying bugs in the Thunderbird email client.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chrome+Zealot
* required fields