A New Browser: Google Chrome

2 Sep 2008 - 9:35am
5 years ago
94 replies
1605 reads
Alex Jones
2007

Google plans to release a new browser soon, based on Webkit, but with a new JavaScript engine, which is expected to be significantly faster than most browsers. While there are a lot of questions about it and some interesting discussion points, I am curious to see how, or if it changes the way we design and develop Web apps. It will also be interesting to see how they design the interface and flows within the browser, having stated that one major goal is to streamline and simplify the UI. The beta Windows version is to be released today, with Mac and Linux versions coming soon.

Their announcement post: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html

An introduction to the browser in comic book form: http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=frontcover

Cheers,

Alex S. Jones | User Experience Manager
_________________________________
Pluck / Demand Media
Direct: 512.519.3204
200 Academy Dr., Ste. 120
Austin, TX 78704
www.pluck.com<BLOCKED::http://www.pluck.com>

Comments

2 Sep 2008 - 10:24am
Mark Canlas
2003

I'm surprised there hasn't been any discussion on this.

Based on the material I've read so far, this could be the coming of a new
era for browsers. I hate to toss around the idea of something being the
breaking point or next gen, but I'm really sold on this idea. If this is
properly executed, it could bring performance back the number one factor in
application design.

I've always held this tenet that UI responsiveness affects how the user
feels about a given application the most out of any other factor. And most
UI speed problems can be tied to performance. If Google can deliver the
performance gains they're talking about, the Web could evolve into a
platform for first class applications.

My predictions for Chrome... The initial release will probably suck. A lot.
And there will be a lot of chatter in the blogosphere. People breaking it
apart, looking at the source, planning distros, finding bugs, nay-saying
it... But if it gets re-released continually, with incremental upgrades and
optimizations, I would go so far as to say that I could Firefox Firefox, or
supplant Firefox the way Firefox did to IE.

A lot of products and their visionaries have had similar claims and come up
way, way short, but Google has a pretty nice track record of making useful
enough apps that make people pay attention (search, maps, mail). They're
large enough and smart enough to really mean it and follow through with it.

It's a pretty exciting time.

-Mark

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Alex Jones <Alex.Jones at pluck.com> wrote:

> Google plans to release a new browser soon, based on Webkit, but with a new
> JavaScript engine, which is expected to be significantly faster than most
> browsers. While there are a lot of questions about it and some interesting
> discussion points, I am curious to see how, or if it changes the way we
> design and develop Web apps. It will also be interesting to see how they
> design the interface and flows within the browser, having stated that one
> major goal is to streamline and simplify the UI. The beta Windows version is
> to be released today, with Mac and Linux versions coming soon.
>
> Their announcement post:
> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html
>
> An introduction to the browser in comic book form:
> http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=frontcover
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex S. Jones | User Experience Manager
> _________________________________
> Pluck / Demand Media
> Direct: 512.519.3204
> 200 Academy Dr., Ste. 120
> Austin, TX 78704
> www.pluck.com<BLOCKED::http://www.pluck.com>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

2 Sep 2008 - 12:40pm
Scott Berkun
2008

The only substantive story so far here is how they've botched this launch.
The site was launched, then taken down a few hours later, with only a
generic 404 up at the moment - www.google.com/chrome. And although I wasn't
cool enough to get one, apparently they mailed, in print form, comic books
promoting the launch. http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2008-09-01-n47.html.
This was planned for weeks in advance - something went wrong.

Claiming a new era of browsers is a long stretch given this one has zero
market share, and the need for everyone to continue developing for IE and
Firefox - the impact of an amazing new browser is always muted by its lack
of standard status. It's a long slow road to gaining market share - even
Firefox, launching against a very vulnerable IE 6 in 2004, took about two
years to earn 12% share (And current stands at about 19%, according to
Marketshare.com - http://tinyurl.com/5selqw).

And I'd bet much of Google's browser share growth will come at Firefox's
expense, not IE.

Happy to see more entrants in the field and I'd love to get my hands on
this, but we're talking about vaporware at the moment, like reviewing a move
before its in the theaters. Seems best to wait and see.

And its always curious how little attention Opera (www.opera.com) gets, as
they've been the most innovative and adventurous browser company for years.

-Scott

Scott Berkun
www.scottberkun.com

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Canlas
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 7:25 AM
To: Alex Jones
Cc: discuss at ixda.org
Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] A New Browser: Google Chrome

I'm surprised there hasn't been any discussion on this.

Based on the material I've read so far, this could be the coming of a new
era for browsers. I hate to toss around the idea of something being the
breaking point or next gen, but I'm really sold on this idea. If this is
properly executed, it could bring performance back the number one factor in
application design.

I've always held this tenet that UI responsiveness affects how the user
feels about a given application the most out of any other factor. And most
UI speed problems can be tied to performance. If Google can deliver the
performance gains they're talking about, the Web could evolve into a
platform for first class applications.

My predictions for Chrome... The initial release will probably suck. A lot.
And there will be a lot of chatter in the blogosphere. People breaking it
apart, looking at the source, planning distros, finding bugs, nay-saying
it... But if it gets re-released continually, with incremental upgrades and
optimizations, I would go so far as to say that I could Firefox Firefox, or
supplant Firefox the way Firefox did to IE.

A lot of products and their visionaries have had similar claims and come up
way, way short, but Google has a pretty nice track record of making useful
enough apps that make people pay attention (search, maps, mail). They're
large enough and smart enough to really mean it and follow through with it.

It's a pretty exciting time.

-Mark

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Alex Jones <Alex.Jones at pluck.com> wrote:

> Google plans to release a new browser soon, based on Webkit, but with
> a new JavaScript engine, which is expected to be significantly faster
> than most browsers. While there are a lot of questions about it and
> some interesting discussion points, I am curious to see how, or if it
> changes the way we design and develop Web apps. It will also be
> interesting to see how they design the interface and flows within the
> browser, having stated that one major goal is to streamline and
> simplify the UI. The beta Windows version is to be released today, with
Mac and Linux versions coming soon.
>
> Their announcement post:
> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html
>
> An introduction to the browser in comic book form:
> http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=frontcover
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex S. Jones | User Experience Manager
> _________________________________ Pluck / Demand Media
> Direct: 512.519.3204
> 200 Academy Dr., Ste. 120
> Austin, TX 78704
> www.pluck.com<BLOCKED::http://www.pluck.com>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org Unsubscribe
> ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines
> ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help
> .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org Unsubscribe ................
http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............
http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help ..................
http://www.ixda.org/help

2 Sep 2008 - 11:28am
Petteri Hiisilä
2004

Alex Jones kirjoitti 2.9.2008 kello 17:35:

> An introduction to the browser in comic book form: http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=frontcover

I don't have an opinion about the browser before trying it, but the
booklet Scott McCloud has written and drawn for them is fantastic!

It manages to communicate technical concepts such as process
sandboxing, on-the-fly script compilation and garbage collection side
by side with human stuff such as "what shall we display in a new tab
by default" and "how does address bar autocomplete behave" without
missing a beat.

Petteri

--
Petteri Hiisilä
palvelumuotoilija /
Senior Interaction Designer
iXDesign / +358505050123 /
petteri.hiisila at ixdesign.fi

"In this island, everything happens for a reason."
- John Locke, LOST

2 Sep 2008 - 12:01pm
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 2, 2008, at 8:24 AM, Mark Canlas wrote:

> Based on the material I've read so far, this could be the coming of
> a new
> era for browsers. I hate to toss around the idea of something being
> the
> breaking point or next gen, but I'm really sold on this idea. If
> this is
> properly executed, it could bring performance back the number one
> factor in
> application design.

This has already been happening in the latest releases of Firefox and
Safari. Both of which have been focusing a lot on performance along
with everything else. I'm certainly curious to see where Google will
match up, but the other browser companies have certainly been
concerned with performance.

> I've always held this tenet that UI responsiveness affects how the
> user
> feels about a given application the most out of any other factor.
> And most
> UI speed problems can be tied to performance. If Google can deliver
> the
> performance gains they're talking about, the Web could evolve into a
> platform for first class applications.

Even if Google doesn't, I'd expect you'll see other browser companies
continue to focus on performance as well.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

2 Sep 2008 - 12:56pm
Dave Malouf
2005

Scott, you bring up some interesting points. Food for thought.
I think the main motivator here is that Google feels strapped by
technologies they do not control. Their cloud project is stymied by
browsers with other considerations or legacy (read as antiquated)
architectures.

I think their big sell in the end which might help their uptake is
something that FireFox doesn't share which is direct application
integration. If I had a browser that took all of the Cloud apps
(Gmail > Docs) and fully integrated it this might be a hugely
compelling force to reckon with. Especially if said applications ran
significantly better (more stable and higher performance and possibly
with MORE functionality). I mean this is part of the GEARS project
team (which felt odd to me at first).

Andrei, you mention that other browsers are handling performance.
I'm far from an insider here so I just don't know, but the way
Scott explains it to me in this comic, it feels like (and heck
marketing is good marketing for a reason) like they are taking the
browser in a new direction under the hood. The multi-process/threaded
piece feels significant to me in its juxtaposition to what the piece
is calling the way other browsers work. Is this hype? Why?

The next interesting part is the OSS nature of it all. This feels
like a cost center to Google to support their other endeavors much
like IE for MS. So I could see (especially since they are still
financially committed) how Chrome and Mozilla might eventually merge
a bit in the future.

Now that being said, the last point is the mobile piece. It seems
that this browser being on WebKit is really about mobile and not
about desktop at all (possibly/long term). The mobile browser space
has no clear winner and if they can get this together and take on
iPhone Safari, it might really hep the Android cause. This is an area
where IE and Mozilla have failed, IMHO.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for now. Can't wait to download and
play ... Please!!!!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 1:18pm
Uday Gajendar
2007

Here's some screenshots:
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/007645.html

-uday

On Sep 2, 2008, at 10:56 AM, David Malouf wrote:
>
> Anyway, those are my thoughts for now. Can't wait to download and
> play ... Please!!!!
>

2 Sep 2008 - 1:20pm
.pauric
2006

Regarding the comic narration in and of itself. I was impressed with
the way it was able to explain the various problems/solutions and
technology concepts... but... I was very disappointed they failed
some super basic usability principles like telling me my progress or
even allowing me to link/jump to a section.

this is 2008 folks...
http://www.pageflip.hu/
dont tell me you're planning on the future of browsing with 90's
story navigation.

Also... does this mean Mozilla runs out of cash in 2011??
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/28/mozilla-extends-lucrative-deal-with-google-for-3-years/

/pauric

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 1:25pm
.pauric
2006

regarding my comic book gripes, I'm referring to the link floating
around on the internets
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

as opposed to the slightly less constrained view in the original
poster's link
http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC &printsec=frontcover

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 1:38pm
SemanticWill
2007

@daveIxD made an interesting point earlier today which I think is worth
exploring. In a "browser" built from the ground-up for delivering RIAs -- we
seem to be hitting a metaphor conflict. If we are using Chrome for RIAs,
then the browse-document mental model no longer works, and neither does all
it's associated baggage, i.e. the "Back" button.

Will apps designed for this new browser toss out the browse-doc model with
it's back, forward, and replace it with a more App-appropriate mental model
that includes a robust Action-Commit-Undo-Redo functionality? I mean -
really - in today's apps like, CS3, you don't browse - so this new Chrome
should or should not be called a browser? Not sure, but I can see the
train-wreck caused by this cognitive dissonance. Would Chrome as an RIA App
Shell rock - especially if we finally had a robust undo? Absolutely. How
about a history of actions like I have in CS3? I would love that, but for
many users, this switch requires a gestalt switch. At the most basic
metaphorical level, these are two very different models, with different user
expectations.

@daveIxD - Dude, you have been teaching RIA - how would you handle this?

PS: The comic was nice.

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:25 PM, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com> wrote:

> regarding my comic book gripes, I'm referring to the link floating
> around on the internets
> http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
>
> as opposed to the slightly less constrained view in the original
> poster's link
> http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC &printsec=frontcover
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
>

--
~ will

"Where you innovate, how you innovate,
and what you innovate are design problems"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Evans | User Experience Architect
tel: +1.617.281.128 | will at semanticfoundry.com
aim: semanticwill | gtalk: wkevans4
twitter: semanticwill | skype: semanticwill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 Sep 2008 - 1:50pm
SteveJBayer
2008

I'm downloading it (as I type this) from here:
http://www.google.com/chrome

2 Sep 2008 - 2:32pm
Dave Malouf
2005

Wow! put on the spot, eh?

I need to learn more about all this and the way it is used. On the
one hand RIAs have taken the AIR perspective whereby the rendering
engine has no required wrapper and the applications run like they
were standard desktop applications. In some ways this model is really
interesting. In this way I would see a suite of cloud apps that I want
to have integrated would create their own container ala acrobat.com
where they container can house status messaging which is where Google
puts status today in their apps' tabs.

But here's the gotchya. Not all apps are Gmail or Docs which are
fairly independent from the "browse" experience. Apps like Kayak
for example are directly connected to the global browse cloud and is
searchable from 3rd parties and the like. Amazon and other stores
also fit this model and have quite sophisticated applications (or
might want to have them).

The issues is that while the underlying technologies are the same and
we have a flexible and mixed delivery system (also the same) the
purpose and UI for what is being delivered requires different
wrappers.

So until someone gives me a grant to pay for researchers and a heck
of a lot of time, I really don't have a solid ANSWER. I just think I
understand and so far can articulate the problem space. And until
there is a browser or browser wrapper that gives a real alternative
(is this "prism?") then I'm not sure how to arrive at a real
answer.

-- dave

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 2:35pm
Shaun Bergmann
2007

It appears to be back up and available!
Woo!
http://www.google.com/chrome

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Scott Berkun <info at scottberkun.com> wrote:

>
> The only substantive story so far here is how they've botched this launch.
> The site was launched, then taken down a few hours later, with only a
> generic 404 up at the moment - www.google.com/chrome. And although I
> wasn't
> cool enough to get one, apparently they mailed, in print form, comic books
> promoting the launch. http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2008-09-01-n47.html.
> This was planned for weeks in advance - something went wrong.
>
> Claiming a new era of browsers is a long stretch given this one has zero
> market share, and the need for everyone to continue developing for IE and
> Firefox - the impact of an amazing new browser is always muted by its lack
> of standard status. It's a long slow road to gaining market share - even
> Firefox, launching against a very vulnerable IE 6 in 2004, took about two
> years to earn 12% share (And current stands at about 19%, according to
> Marketshare.com - http://tinyurl.com/5selqw).
>
> And I'd bet much of Google's browser share growth will come at Firefox's
> expense, not IE.
>
> Happy to see more entrants in the field and I'd love to get my hands on
> this, but we're talking about vaporware at the moment, like reviewing a
> move
> before its in the theaters. Seems best to wait and see.
>
> And its always curious how little attention Opera (www.opera.com) gets, as
> they've been the most innovative and adventurous browser company for years.
>
>
> -Scott
>
> Scott Berkun
> www.scottberkun.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com
> [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.interactiondesigners.com] On Behalf Of Mark
> Canlas
> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 7:25 AM
> To: Alex Jones
> Cc: discuss at ixda.org
> Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] A New Browser: Google Chrome
>
> I'm surprised there hasn't been any discussion on this.
>
> Based on the material I've read so far, this could be the coming of a new
> era for browsers. I hate to toss around the idea of something being the
> breaking point or next gen, but I'm really sold on this idea. If this is
> properly executed, it could bring performance back the number one factor in
> application design.
>
> I've always held this tenet that UI responsiveness affects how the user
> feels about a given application the most out of any other factor. And most
> UI speed problems can be tied to performance. If Google can deliver the
> performance gains they're talking about, the Web could evolve into a
> platform for first class applications.
>
> My predictions for Chrome... The initial release will probably suck. A lot.
> And there will be a lot of chatter in the blogosphere. People breaking it
> apart, looking at the source, planning distros, finding bugs, nay-saying
> it... But if it gets re-released continually, with incremental upgrades and
> optimizations, I would go so far as to say that I could Firefox Firefox, or
> supplant Firefox the way Firefox did to IE.
>
> A lot of products and their visionaries have had similar claims and come up
> way, way short, but Google has a pretty nice track record of making useful
> enough apps that make people pay attention (search, maps, mail). They're
> large enough and smart enough to really mean it and follow through with it.
>
> It's a pretty exciting time.
>
> -Mark
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Alex Jones <Alex.Jones at pluck.com> wrote:
>
> > Google plans to release a new browser soon, based on Webkit, but with
> > a new JavaScript engine, which is expected to be significantly faster
> > than most browsers. While there are a lot of questions about it and
> > some interesting discussion points, I am curious to see how, or if it
> > changes the way we design and develop Web apps. It will also be
> > interesting to see how they design the interface and flows within the
> > browser, having stated that one major goal is to streamline and
> > simplify the UI. The beta Windows version is to be released today, with
> Mac and Linux versions coming soon.
> >
> > Their announcement post:
> > http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html
> >
> > An introduction to the browser in comic book form:
> > http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=frontcover
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Alex S. Jones | User Experience Manager
> > _________________________________ Pluck / Demand Media
> > Direct: 512.519.3204
> > 200 Academy Dr., Ste. 120
> > Austin, TX 78704
> > www.pluck.com<BLOCKED::http://www.pluck.com>
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> > To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org Unsubscribe
> > ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines
> > ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help
> > .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
> >
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org Unsubscribe ................
> http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............
> http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help ..................
> http://www.ixda.org/help
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

2 Sep 2008 - 2:46pm
subimage interactive
2004

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Will Evans <will at semanticfoundry.com> wrote:
> @daveIxD made an interesting point earlier today which I think is worth
> exploring. In a "browser" built from the ground-up for delivering RIAs -- we
> seem to be hitting a metaphor conflict. If we are using Chrome for RIAs,
> then the browse-document mental model no longer works, and neither does all
> it's associated baggage, i.e. the "Back" button.

Actually, playing with the beta of chrome on XP now. They have a
concept of an "application window" that has no back button. You can
even create a link to "apps" on your desktop. I'm running one for my
app Cashboard right now and it's pretty slick.

Overall I think this is a great step forward for browsers.
Firefox/safari constantly dies when I have multiple open windows for
Gmail, so any improved Javascript engine is excellent news. Google
stepping up to the plate and doing something about it is just what's
needed.

Rendering appears fine for all of my sites, which is to be expected
with them using webkit as an engine. Again, a great decision.

I'll really need to put it through its paces, but from my initial
testing Chrome looks to be a winner.

--------------------
seth - subimage llc
-----
http://sublog.subimage.com
-----
Cashboard - Estimates, invoices, and time tracking software - for free!
http://www.getcashboard.com
-----
Substruct - Open source RoR e-commerce software.
http://code.google.com/p/substruct/

2 Sep 2008 - 3:12pm
Oleh Kovalchuke
2006

pauric wrote:
> this is 2008 folks...
> http://www.pageflip.hu/
> dont tell me you're planning on the future of browsing with 90's
> story navigation.
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Except the cool kids have iPhones in 2008. The entire Flash navigation
at that site is rendered as a tiny uninteractive blue box on iphone.

Oleh

2 Sep 2008 - 3:42pm
Karri Ojanen
2008

I agree with Scott, gaining a significant amount of marketshare will
take time - Google will not be an exception. Everybody will still
need to keep developing for IE and Firefox.

But direct application integration is really the opportunity that
Google has here, as Dave pointed out. If Google manages to do that
really, really well, then the road to gaining a significant share of
the market may become shorter than I would otherwise expect.

Oleh said:
> Except the cool kids have iPhones in 2008.
> The entire Flash navigation at that site is rendered as a tiny
uninteractive blue box on iphone.

Sorry, I'm going OT here, but the lack of Flash Lite/any kind of
Flash support is what I really haven't got about the iPhone (and the
cool kids that use it ;) - Nokia S60 phones, for example, have had
Flash Lite for years now.

Cheers,
Karri

---
Karri Ojanen
IA / IxD / UXD
Publicis Modem Toronto
http://www.finnformation.net

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 4:04pm
.pauric
2006

Karri: "But direct application integration is really the opportunity
that Google has here, as Dave pointed out. If Google manages to do
that really, really well, then the road to gaining a significant
share of the market may become shorter than I would otherwise
expect."

I dont buy that spefic argument of competitive advantage given the
OSS model Chrome has been developed in. John Resig from Mozilla, and
presenting jQuery to IxDA Boston next week, is already tearing it
apart...
http://twitter.com/jeresig

I would argue that Chrome's success is solely dependent on whether
they can convince enough developers to build towards its
extensibility, including porting extensions from FF.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 4:31pm
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 2, 2008, at 12:32 PM, David Malouf wrote:

> I need to learn more about all this and the way it is used. On the
> one hand RIAs have taken the AIR perspective whereby the rendering
> engine has no required wrapper and the applications run like they
> were standard desktop applications. In some ways this model is really
> interesting. In this way I would see a suite of cloud apps that I want
> to have integrated would create their own container ala acrobat.com
> where they container can house status messaging which is where Google
> puts status today in their apps' tabs.

If this (being a platform for their own cloud apps) was the explicit
direction of Chrome, then I can see the value. But if Google wants to
keep blending the "browser" and the "web app" as it is today, then I
don't know.

Having read up a little more this morning, I can see the value of a
new engine under the hood, but how does that help in the end user
experience if the way you use the browser doesn't explicitly change?
In other words, I have no idea where the threshold has to be for end
users to make a switch to a new browser simply because the engine is
"better." And end users have no means with which to measure that
themselves. All they have is the resulting interface and how they wind
up using it. In fact, the technology sector is littered with companies
who made better tech but not better enough on the final product so as
to cause a massive switch. Be/OS anyone?

So where's the threshold? Anyone want to make some guesses?

If Google used Chrome as a means to finally split the "browser" --
where people consume effectively passive or even dead content
(wikipedia, dictionary.com, CNN, blogs, etc) with a small amount of
interaction -- from the people who need to use "web apps" and all that
rich interaction entails, with performance and security being way up
there as well, then I can see how Chrome would interesting.

As such, right now, it feels like just another browser, and while I
can now get the benefits of the new engine, even a guy like me, thick
in the weeds if you will, is kind of bored with the potential of yet
another new browser. I think Google needs to make the hard choice of
going one way or the other.

Why do we need another browser? I don't think we do, quite frankly. We
need is a platform for robust, rich apps that finally goes beyond the
browser and gives us back what was lost from the world of desktop
application design. I know AIR is going that route, so I would think
Google wants to compete with that, not with Safari or Firefox.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

2 Sep 2008 - 1:27pm
Damon Dimmick
2008

I'm fairly enthusiastic about what I have seen so far.

>From a UI perspective, the idea of flexible tabs (with content that can
be easily dragged to create new tabs) is very appealing to me, and I
suspect the same will hold for core users.

As far as market share goes, I would assume that this particular product
will primarily eat into Firefox's base of users, and less so into IE's
base. On both the OSX and Windows Platforms, people who conscientiously
choose to use Firefox are doing so with intent, either looking for
improved features, performance, or perhaps because of plugins. These are
the people who'd reach out and try a new browser when they already have
a serviceable version on their machines.

I'm using a mac as my default machine right now (no flame bate, this
just happens to be what my company uses) so I'm a little bummed that an
OSX version isn't going to be released today. But I'll certainly grab it
and run it on my windows virtual machine to see how it runs.

It'll be interesting to see how quickly it gets adopted by the developer
community. Considering Google's reputation and tech cache', I don't
imagine they'll lack for support.

-Damon Dimmick
User Experience Guy
SitePen Inc.

Alex Jones wrote:
> Google plans to release a new browser soon, based on Webkit, but with a new JavaScript engine, which is expected to be significantly faster than most browsers. While there are a lot of questions about it and some interesting discussion points, I am curious to see how, or if it changes the way we design and develop Web apps. It will also be interesting to see how they design the interface and flows within the browser, having stated that one major goal is to streamline and simplify the UI. The beta Windows version is to be released today, with Mac and Linux versions coming soon.
>
> Their announcement post: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html
>
> An introduction to the browser in comic book form: http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=frontcover
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex S. Jones | User Experience Manager
> _________________________________
> Pluck / Demand Media
> Direct: 512.519.3204
> 200 Academy Dr., Ste. 120
> Austin, TX 78704
> www.pluck.com<BLOCKED::http://www.pluck.com>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

2 Sep 2008 - 1:54pm
Damon Dimmick
2008

Hi Will,

I don't think we'll be seeing the disposal of the back/forward model
anytime soon.

The available documentation seems to indicate that there are specialized
non-browser-like capsules available in which users can choose to run web
apps. This reminds me of the Prism project
(http://labs.mozilla.com/2007/10/prism/) which essentially provides a
browser window, minus fluffery, in which to run applications. There are
other similar options available that do the same thing, and I make use
of several in order to run Gmail and facebook, which I keep as
launchable-apps in my dock.

More likely, we may see some evolution in which browsers recognize the
nature of the site / app they are displaying and provide appropriate
controls, or at least control warnings. May not happen anytime soon.

I am very interested to see how Chrome handles precisely the issue you
bring up. Can't wait to install it tonight.

Good food for thought. Things are changing out there. Fast.

Will Evans wrote:
> @daveIxD made an interesting point earlier today which I think is worth
> exploring. In a "browser" built from the ground-up for delivering RIAs -- we
> seem to be hitting a metaphor conflict. If we are using Chrome for RIAs,
> then the browse-document mental model no longer works, and neither does all
> it's associated baggage, i.e. the "Back" button.
>
> Will apps designed for this new browser toss out the browse-doc model with
> it's back, forward, and replace it with a more App-appropriate mental model
> that includes a robust Action-Commit-Undo-Redo functionality? I mean -
> really - in today's apps like, CS3, you don't browse - so this new Chrome
> should or should not be called a browser? Not sure, but I can see the
> train-wreck caused by this cognitive dissonance. Would Chrome as an RIA App
> Shell rock - especially if we finally had a robust undo? Absolutely. How
> about a history of actions like I have in CS3? I would love that, but for
> many users, this switch requires a gestalt switch. At the most basic
> metaphorical level, these are two very different models, with different user
> expectations.
>
> @daveIxD - Dude, you have been teaching RIA - how would you handle this?
>
> PS: The comic was nice.
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:25 PM, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> regarding my comic book gripes, I'm referring to the link floating
>> around on the internets
>> http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
>>
>> as opposed to the slightly less constrained view in the original
>> poster's link
>> http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC &printsec=frontcover
>>
>>
>> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

2 Sep 2008 - 4:46pm
Damon Dimmick
2008

It's an interesting question, Andrei.

I'm not sure I'm prepared to make that prediction yet.

But I would ask, how much do you think this decision is based on purely
strategic considerations, say the dominance of a major competitor in the
browser market. I've read several pieces of analysis which seem to
indicate that Microsoft's Internet Explorer, as the de facto gatekeeper
tool that actually enables people to access Google, has been identified
by them as a strategic obstacle to be overcome. One has to speculate
that said conclusion is part of the decision to release this browser. I
wonder -how- much of that influenced the decision

Or am I being too cynical here?

On the other hand, I think that the ability to sandbox-off webapps, put
them into prizm like dedicated windows, and protect the browser in
general from individual site/app crashes is useful. I don't know that I
agree that Google needs to choose between either browser or app
platform, mostly because an app-platform without a robust browsing
facility would seem very limited. I think they can do both, as they are
trying.

As for success? Who knows. As a Mac user, I've only installed Chrome on
my windows virtual machine. My initial use was very pleasant, and if it
were available on OSX I probably would attempt to use it as my primary
browser in order to see what kinds of UI nits come up.

I can't wait to hear about how other's will feel about daily use of Chrome.

-Damon Dimmic
User Experience Guy
SitePen, Inc (Dojo Forever!)

2 Sep 2008 - 1:54pm
Casey Edgeton
2008

The download is up on the site now - http://www.google.com/chrome

2 Sep 2008 - 4:04pm
Kontra
2007

>
> the lack of Flash Lite/any kind of Flash support is what I really haven't
> got about the iPhone (and the cool kids that use it ;) - Nokia S60 phones,
> for example, have had Flash Lite for years now.

And yet Nokia for years now hasn't been able to produce a mobile device
nearly as good as the iPhone. As to why the iPhone avoids it:
The new UI wars: Why there's no Flash on iPhone
2.0<http://counternotions.com/2008/06/17/flash-iphone/>
--
Kontra
http://counternotions.com

2 Sep 2008 - 1:56pm
rseiji
2008

Google is announcing Chrome here in Brazil.
Cris Dias is live streaming the session (in portuguese):

http://www.qik.com/crisdias

BR,

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Will Evans <will at semanticfoundry.com> wrote:

> @daveIxD made an interesting point earlier today which I think is worth
> exploring. In a "browser" built from the ground-up for delivering RIAs --
> we
> seem to be hitting a metaphor conflict. If we are using Chrome for RIAs,
> then the browse-document mental model no longer works, and neither does all
> it's associated baggage, i.e. the "Back" button.
>
> Will apps designed for this new browser toss out the browse-doc model with
> it's back, forward, and replace it with a more App-appropriate mental model
> that includes a robust Action-Commit-Undo-Redo functionality? I mean -
> really - in today's apps like, CS3, you don't browse - so this new Chrome
> should or should not be called a browser? Not sure, but I can see the
> train-wreck caused by this cognitive dissonance. Would Chrome as an RIA App
> Shell rock - especially if we finally had a robust undo? Absolutely. How
> about a history of actions like I have in CS3? I would love that, but for
> many users, this switch requires a gestalt switch. At the most basic
> metaphorical level, these are two very different models, with different
> user
> expectations.
>
> @daveIxD - Dude, you have been teaching RIA - how would you handle this?
>
> PS: The comic was nice.
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:25 PM, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > regarding my comic book gripes, I'm referring to the link floating
> > around on the internets
> > http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
> >
> > as opposed to the slightly less constrained view in the original
> > poster's link
> > http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC &printsec=frontcover
> >
> >
> > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ~ will
>
> "Where you innovate, how you innovate,
> and what you innovate are design problems"
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Will Evans | User Experience Architect
> tel: +1.617.281.128 | will at semanticfoundry.com
> aim: semanticwill | gtalk: wkevans4
> twitter: semanticwill | skype: semanticwill
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
R. Seiji Sato
Interface Designer
http://www.rseiji.com
+55 11 8297-2930
São Paulo, Brasil

2 Sep 2008 - 2:03pm
Mary Deaton
2008

I flipped through the comic and I did notice a mention that an application
can open in its own window without the standard browser controls.Perhaps the
real question is whether the "browser" will recognize with model of display
is most appropriate, or the designers/developers have the ability to alert
the "browser" as to which model is appropriate.

There is also the question of whether the user can decide which model they
want to use to view a particular item.
On the basis of the comic book, this is an extremely exciting event in the
evolution of Web-distributed applications; it appears to bring us much, much
closer to the way in which serious applications need to function, but
removes the boundaries imposed by reliance on a local hard drive an
operating system.

Is it a serious blow against the dominance of desktop computing for business
applications?

Mary Deaton

Will Evans said:

> @daveIxD made an interesting point earlier today which I think is worth
> exploring. In a "browser" built from the ground-up for delivering RIAs --
> we
> seem to be hitting a metaphor conflict. If we are using Chrome for RIAs,
> then the browse-document mental model no longer works, and neither does
> all
> it's associated baggage, i.e. the "Back" button.
>
> Will apps designed for this new browser toss out the browse-doc model with
> it's back, forward, and replace it with a more App-appropriate mental
> model
> that includes a robust Action-Commit-Undo-Redo functionality? I mean -
> really - in today's apps like, CS3, you don't browse - so this new Chrome
> should or should not be called a browser? Not sure, but I can see the
> train-wreck caused by this cognitive dissonance. Would Chrome as an RIA
> App
> Shell rock - especially if we finally had a robust undo? Absolutely. How
> about a history of actions like I have in CS3? I would love that, but for
> many users, this switch requires a gestalt switch. At the most basic
> metaphorical level, these are two very different models, with different
> user
> expectations.

2 Sep 2008 - 2:06pm
rseiji
2008

Online:

http://www.google.com/chrome

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Ricardo Seiji <ricardo at rseiji.com> wrote:

> Google is announcing Chrome here in Brazil.
> Cris Dias is live streaming the session (in portuguese):
>
> http://www.qik.com/crisdias
>
> BR,
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Will Evans <will at semanticfoundry.com>wrote:
>
>> @daveIxD made an interesting point earlier today which I think is worth
>> exploring. In a "browser" built from the ground-up for delivering RIAs --
>> we
>> seem to be hitting a metaphor conflict. If we are using Chrome for RIAs,
>> then the browse-document mental model no longer works, and neither does
>> all
>> it's associated baggage, i.e. the "Back" button.
>>
>> Will apps designed for this new browser toss out the browse-doc model with
>> it's back, forward, and replace it with a more App-appropriate mental
>> model
>> that includes a robust Action-Commit-Undo-Redo functionality? I mean -
>> really - in today's apps like, CS3, you don't browse - so this new Chrome
>> should or should not be called a browser? Not sure, but I can see the
>> train-wreck caused by this cognitive dissonance. Would Chrome as an RIA
>> App
>> Shell rock - especially if we finally had a robust undo? Absolutely. How
>> about a history of actions like I have in CS3? I would love that, but for
>> many users, this switch requires a gestalt switch. At the most basic
>> metaphorical level, these are two very different models, with different
>> user
>> expectations.
>>
>> @daveIxD - Dude, you have been teaching RIA - how would you handle this?
>>
>> PS: The comic was nice.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:25 PM, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > regarding my comic book gripes, I'm referring to the link floating
>> > around on the internets
>> > http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
>> >
>> > as opposed to the slightly less constrained view in the original
>> > poster's link
>> > http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC &printsec=frontcover
>> >
>> >
>> > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> ~ will
>>
>> "Where you innovate, how you innovate,
>> and what you innovate are design problems"
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Will Evans | User Experience Architect
>> tel: +1.617.281.128 | will at semanticfoundry.com
>> aim: semanticwill | gtalk: wkevans4
>> twitter: semanticwill | skype: semanticwill
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ________________________________________________________________
>> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
>> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
>> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
>> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
>> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>>
>
>
>
> --
> R. Seiji Sato
> Interface Designer
> http://www.rseiji.com
> +55 11 8297-2930
> São Paulo, Brasil
>

--
R. Seiji Sato
Interface Designer
http://www.rseiji.com
+55 11 8297-2930
São Paulo, Brasil

2 Sep 2008 - 2:10pm
david grubman
2008

The download is now available.

Happy surfing...

- david grubman

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Will Evans <will at semanticfoundry.com>wrote:

> @daveIxD made an interesting point earlier today which I think is worth
> exploring. In a "browser" built from the ground-up for delivering RIAs --
> we
> seem to be hitting a metaphor conflict. If we are using Chrome for RIAs,
> then the browse-document mental model no longer works, and neither does all
> it's associated baggage, i.e. the "Back" button.
>
> Will apps designed for this new browser toss out the browse-doc model with
> it's back, forward, and replace it with a more App-appropriate mental model
> that includes a robust Action-Commit-Undo-Redo functionality? I mean -
> really - in today's apps like, CS3, you don't browse - so this new Chrome
> should or should not be called a browser? Not sure, but I can see the
> train-wreck caused by this cognitive dissonance. Would Chrome as an RIA App
> Shell rock - especially if we finally had a robust undo? Absolutely. How
> about a history of actions like I have in CS3? I would love that, but for
> many users, this switch requires a gestalt switch. At the most basic
> metaphorical level, these are two very different models, with different
> user
> expectations.
>
> @daveIxD - Dude, you have been teaching RIA - how would you handle this?
>
> PS: The comic was nice.
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:25 PM, pauric <radiorental at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > regarding my comic book gripes, I'm referring to the link floating
> > around on the internets
> > http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
> >
> > as opposed to the slightly less constrained view in the original
> > poster's link
> > http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC &printsec=frontcover
> >
> >
> > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ~ will
>
> "Where you innovate, how you innovate,
> and what you innovate are design problems"
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Will Evans | User Experience Architect
> tel: +1.617.281.128 | will at semanticfoundry.com
> aim: semanticwill | gtalk: wkevans4
> twitter: semanticwill | skype: semanticwill
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
david grubman
david.grubman at gmail.com

2 Sep 2008 - 2:22pm
John Reeve
2008

Unless Chrome gains significant market share, I doubt we'll need to
alter the way we develop web apps much. That said, it is still a good
idea for developers to take a look under the hood for two reasons. 1)
We'll be better prepared to mobilize our apps to Chrome when and if
it becomes more accepted, and 2) as developers, we have the
opportunity to do something really cool.

Here is the page for web developers:
http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/webmasters.html

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 5:34pm
Sterling Koch
2008

Whatever the arguments on the direction of Chrome/Google or it's viability with new users based on new usability conventions, it is fast! All that stuff about seperate memory blocks for different processes isn't just hype. I just ran it on Yahoo Mail, which can really slow down Firefox/IE when you try to run several commands in quick succession and Chrome fairly flew through them.

I'd use it just based on how close it comes to making internet apps come close to desktop apps in speed.

- Sterling

2 Sep 2008 - 6:54pm
Josh
2006

It would be nice if it was available on Mac right now so I could try
it. I won't even open Windows for an exciting new app like this.

Playing devil's advocate:

1. Do we really need a new Web browser (or Web application launcher)?
I think, and a lot of HTML/CSS folks might agree that we already have
a few too many. Chrome better be really designer/developer friendly.

2. It better be faster than Safari or IE and have more add-on than FF
or they're going to be hard pressed for market share. The success of
Android might be an exception.

3. They've got some serious catching up to do, so they better have a
killer app - or at least a killer reason for people to switch. Even
then most IE users won't be switching because the Internet is the
"E" icon. FF and Apple haven't gotten the core IE audience to
switch, so what can Google offer that will?

4. Security? Any word on security yet? Last thing I'm going to do my
online banking on is an early beta browser (Web app launcher).

All that stuff said. My real threshold is speed. If it renders sites
quicker than the competition and doesn't crash, I would consider
switching real quick.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 8:00pm
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 2, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Josh Viney wrote:

> 1. Do we really need a new Web browser (or Web application launcher)?
> I think, and a lot of HTML/CSS folks might agree that we already have
> a few too many. Chrome better be really designer/developer friendly.

As long as Google keeps it web standards compliant, this shouldn't be
too much of an issue. However, yes, we have too many browsers already
that aren't 100% compliant. Compliance is key.

> 2. It better be faster than Safari or IE and have more add-on than FF
> or they're going to be hard pressed for market share. The success of
> Android might be an exception.

Early reports are that it's much faster. The trick here is what's the
threshold. It currently takes me about 2-3 seconds to load a content
home page like NYTimes or CNN. Is loading that page in less tab a
second going to make a difference for anyone to the degree to switch?
I have no idea. However, the speed increases for web apps would be
dramatic, so the larger question is what is Chrome for? Is it another
browser or is it going to be an application platform? Can it be both?
Well... that gets back a large number of issues, not the least of
which I think Google may underestimate a backlash that they are
quickly becoming the new monolithic Microsoft.

> 3. They've got some serious catching up to do, so they better have a
> killer app - or at least a killer reason for people to switch. Even
> then most IE users won't be switching because the Internet is the
> "E" icon. FF and Apple haven't gotten the core IE audience to
> switch, so what can Google offer that will?

Good question.

> 4. Security? Any word on security yet? Last thing I'm going to do my
> online banking on is an early beta browser (Web app launcher).

The new engine and model that Chrome is built on should make security
even better. But there's that threshold question again. How much
better does it have to be to get people to switch away from what they
already have?

> All that stuff said. My real threshold is speed. If it renders sites
> quicker than the competition and doesn't crash, I would consider
> switching real quick.

It certainly a ton faster at the moment. I have no idea how compliant
it is though. I've only looked at a few sites with it.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

2 Sep 2008 - 8:58pm
subimage interactive
2004

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Josh Viney <jviney at gmail.com> wrote:
> It would be nice if it was available on Mac right now so I could try
> it. I won't even open Windows for an exciting new app like this.

You don't have parallels or vmware fusion? I loaded it up in parallels
and it runs great.

> 1. Do we really need a new Web browser (or Web application launcher)?
> I think, and a lot of HTML/CSS folks might agree that we already have
> a few too many. Chrome better be really designer/developer friendly.

It uses webkit - same as Safari. If your site runs fine in Safari, it
appears to look the same in Chrome. Really, this is a weak argument
these days. Most browsers are fairly compatible if you code to
standards.

> All that stuff said. My real threshold is speed. If it renders sites
> quicker than the competition and doesn't crash, I would consider
> switching real quick.

In my very limited testing it appears to be much faster - especially
with multiple instances of heavy JS apps open. I had 4 different Gmail
accounts logged in all running smooth, and a couple of MySpace windows
open for good measure :). Generally that test takes out Firefox or
Safari pretty quickly.

--------------------
seth - subimage llc
-----
http://sublog.subimage.com
-----
Cashboard - Estimates, invoices, and time tracking software - for free!
http://www.getcashboard.com
-----
Substruct - Open source RoR e-commerce software.
http://code.google.com/p/substruct/

2 Sep 2008 - 10:21pm
Jared M. Spool
2003

On Sep 2, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote:

> Having read up a little more this morning, I can see the value of a
> new engine under the hood, but how does that help in the end user
> experience if the way you use the browser doesn't explicitly change?

I think it's pretty simple, actually.

If you provide a platform (and Chrome, because of it's under-the-hood
enhancements, is a radically new platform) that is substantially
better, people will create apps for it that can't run anywhere else.

Get a killer app in that space and (to quote Steve Jobs) "boom",
you've got a migration.

What makes it more impressive is this platform (unlike be/os or
Windows) is free *and* open source, which means that the competition
is free to see how the technology works and improve on it.

So, whether people migrate to Chrome or not, every browser developer
is going to pay attention to how Chrome works and we'll see the good
parts go forward.

If you know anything about how operating systems work, you'll
recognize that they've put all the essential components into the
browser. Years ago, someone (was is Marc Andreeson? Maybe Steve
Gillmor?) said that the browser will become the next operating system.
Chrome seems to have all the essential components of an operating
system built in.

I think Chrome is really important and is going to change interaction
design in a big way.

Jared

3 Sep 2008 - 1:27am
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 2, 2008, at 8:21 PM, Jared Spool wrote:

> If you provide a platform (and Chrome, because of it's under-the-
> hood enhancements, is a radically new platform) that is
> substantially better, people will create apps for it that can't run
> anywhere else.

This is not always true. There are far too many examples in the past
that prove better technology doesn't always win. Again, the Be/OS
example comes to mind in direct relation to your own statement. The
Apple OS offerings has largely been better more than WIndows for more
of the time and yet it hardly breaks a certain threshold on market
penetration. Beta versus VHS anyone?

> Get a killer app in that space and (to quote Steve Jobs) "boom",
> you've got a migration.

This I agree with this. So the question is what's the killer app? Is
it basically Google's own Office suite? Not sure that compelling
enough until Google online apps get even a little more robust than
what they offer today, which I'm sure is in the works.

> What makes it more impressive is this platform (unlike be/os or
> Windows) is free *and* open source, which means that the competition
> is free to see how the technology works and improve on it.

True. But the entire web has been like that up to this point. What
people make for Chrome by nature works for the other browsers. So
there'll be nothing inherently unique for it near as I can tell. The
question will seem to ride on pure performance: Is something fast
enough to make it worth switching? I mean... outside of that, what the
compelling reason for normal users to change? Seriously?

If we're talking about loading CNN.com 1 second faster than it already
does, I'm just not sure. Maybe that's enough? I honestly don't know.
(And yes, when I hit CNN.com, the site renders on my MacBook Pro in
less than 2 seconds generally speaking.)

> So, whether people migrate to Chrome or not, every browser developer
> is going to pay attention to how Chrome works and we'll see the good
> parts go forward.

How so? For speed only? Again, what does Chrome provide that is
inherently unique? It's very premise is that what you make for it
works for other things since it's standards and opensource based, right?

Now, if Google decided to take purposefully *away* from being just
another browser, I'd get excited. In this regard, things that you'd
need in Chrome would be:

* Multiple window support
* Sme form of clipboard data transport support, with the ability to go
to the OS, other windows, drag and drop to desktop, etc.
* Ability to let devs to completely take over all keyboard
interaction, no matter what defaults to the browser itself are
* OS services that give you access to the hardware; file save, etc. (I
don't know enough about Gears, so I admittedly need to catch up on that)
* Palette windows and other OS windows like alerts and print dialogs,
etc.

Then I'd get excited. Then you can do things that are even more app
like while also having a lot of web technologies available to you to
round out what you can build from stuff you're already developing for
the web (which is lot more than it used to be these days). The trick
here that Google has to play is how to make it divergent but not so
much, right? How can it move away from normal web browser experiences
while still letting people do enough of what they want with a browser?

> If you know anything about how operating systems work, you'll
> recognize that they've put all the essential components into the
> browser. Years ago, someone (was is Marc Andreeson? Maybe Steve
> Gillmor?) said that the browser will become the next operating
> system. Chrome seems to have all the essential components of an
> operating system built in.

And yet, they made basically a "web browser." Not excited yet, but I
could get there... It'll certainly be interesting, and if anything,
Google has the staying power to see it through the necessary adoption
curve that will invariably be needed for such a switchover.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

3 Sep 2008 - 1:30am
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 2, 2008, at 11:27 PM, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote:

> * Multiple window support

To clarify real quickly here, I mean windows that know about each
other so you can do things like drag and drop data between them, or do
other operations that tie the windows together because they are aware
of each other. I don't mean ripping tabs off and creating multiple
windows.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

3 Sep 2008 - 7:17am
Paul Bryan
2008

Google is not about advancing the performance of web browsing, any more than Microsoft is about making people in offices more productive. Google is about the proliferation of targeted, context-aware, paid advertising. (Microsoft is about creating a permanent, ever-increasing dependence on techies to complete the most basic work tasks.)

Creating a browser is the next logical step toward being the home rather than the destination. It's like network TV in the 1950's. The shows, few as they were, had a lot of cool factor for the people who had previously needed to go to a cinema to see moving pictures and stars. But the networks owned the experience, and the ad platform.

The next logical step for Google is to develop an operating system that understands evolving media and ties it all together into a "start your day here and stay here" experience: blogs, podcasts, video streams, IM, music collection, push to talk, web conference, collaborative document creation, mobile-desktop-web sync. With an intravenous supply of ads.

A good place to establish the operating system beachhead: mobile.

Hey, who are you guys...wait...no...

3 Sep 2008 - 6:58am
.pauric
2006

The killer feature is not the apps that can/will run on this
platform.. its the 'task manager' feature.
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/google_chrome_screen_05.jpg

I appreciate that is going to raise an eye or two among the task &
user centered design crowd.

Today, managing pages isnt a major concern. If a specific site
causes a problem you just restart the entire browser. As the browser
becomes the OS for the cloud, managing individual apps and turning off
the bad threads while keeping your other tasks safe is going to be
critical to happy times online.

Every operating system needs a task manager, its not a sexy feature,
it is however an essential fact of life. This is the first proper
instance in the browser domain and will change the 'average'
user's mental model of the internet.

It might possibly be a tad ahead of its time but tools become more
sophisticated, and therefor more prone to problems, any browser a
year or two from now without this feature will be at a massive
disadvantage.

This isnt 'just another browser', the new architecture goes much
deeper than that. Jared summed it up.

/pauric

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

2 Sep 2008 - 10:39pm
Kontra
2007

> Chrome, because of it's under-the-hood enhancements, is a radically new
> platform

How "radical" it really is debatable.

What's not debatable is that a generation ago Marc ("Windows is just a bag
of drivers") Andressen made the same breathless assumption and
promotion...and lost.

Chrome seems to have all the essential components of an operating system
> built in.
>

It's missing so many "essential" components of an OS that it's not even
funny, as I explained in:

Why Google Chrome is not a "Windows Killer"
http://counternotions.com/2008/09/02/chrome/

--
Kontra
http://counternotions.com

2 Sep 2008 - 8:21pm
Graham Mitchell
2008

I just snagged it and my first impression is "weird" - it's kind of got
me off-balance from the get-go with the lack of familiar features like
drop-down File, Edit, etc. menus. However, could be a positive for those
who aren't already accustomed to those menus. I'm going to try it out a
bit as I'm really intrigued by the thought of not having giant wodges of
Java periodically bringing my browser to its knees.

Feature-wise, I'm a little bit skeptical about its relative adeptness
(adeptitude?) with cookies - rather than Firefox's
allow/block-with-exceptions model, it's got "restrict how third-party
cookies can be used" with no obvious exception lists. Guess we'll see if
this feature gets developed a little further.

2 Sep 2008 - 9:25pm
jan cohen
2007

> All that stuff said. My real threshold is speed. If it renders sites

> quicker than the competition and doesn't crash, I would consider
> switching real quick.

It's incredibly fast in comparison to IE7 and Firefox 2 & 3. I also like the fact that the browser (window) maximizes use of screen real estate. Minimal fancy gadgets, no bottom bar, and fairly intuitive tabbed browsing (given that a lot of folks have already been exposed to tabbed browsing by way of IE7 and Firefox). Then there's that "incognito" option that's probably driving the folks at MS crazy right about now, what with IE8's "porn mode" sales pitch...

And as for the comic book "user guide," as I've heard it so aptly described in some of the other circles I spin around in, it's not. A user guide, that is. Like most other apps, the browser comes equipped with a link to ajaxified online help at, well, you know where.

If it doesn't crash while I test it the next few days, they'll probably make a convert out of me.

jan c.
usabledocs.com

3 Sep 2008 - 7:16am
Todd Warfel
2003

On Sep 3, 2008, at 2:27 AM, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote:

> There are far too many examples in the past that prove better
> technology doesn't always win. Again, the Be/OS example comes to
> mind in direct relation to your own statement. The Apple OS
> offerings has largely been better more than WIndows for more of the
> time and yet it hardly breaks a certain threshold on market
> penetration. Beta versus VHS anyone?

That's in the past. Times are changing. Firefox has changed things.
The iPhone has changed things. Apple's OS and laptops are changing
things. Apple's #1 in laptops, #3 or #4 in desktops, depending on the
source, and has more than doubled their market share in recent years.

Just saying using examples that are a decade old aren't necessarily
relevant anymore.

Cheers!

Todd Zaki Warfel
President, Design Researcher
Messagefirst | Designing Information. Beautifully.
----------------------------------
Contact Info
Voice: (215) 825-7423
Email: todd at messagefirst.com
AIM: twarfel at mac.com
Blog: http://toddwarfel.com
Twitter: zakiwarfel
----------------------------------
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice, they are not.

3 Sep 2008 - 7:40am
Jared M. Spool
2003

On Sep 3, 2008, at 2:27 AM, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote:

> True. But the entire web has been like that up to this point. What
> people make for Chrome by nature works for the other browsers. So
> there'll be nothing inherently unique for it near as I can tell. The
> question will seem to ride on pure performance: Is something fast
> enough to make it worth switching? I mean... outside of that, what
> the compelling reason for normal users to change? Seriously?
>
This isn't a user switchover play. It's a developer play. That's clear
from the comic book which was aimed only at people who could
appreciated segmented process management, fast garbage collection, and
an integrated real-time compiling virtual machine.

Yes, all these things have been around for years. Hell, I had them on
my Symbolics 3600 in 1985.

What made them cool then and what makes them cool now is that these
are grown-up tools for serious development, something that has not
been present in the browser space before. And developers *will* do
something with them.

> If we're talking about loading CNN.com 1 second faster than it
> already does, I'm just not sure. Maybe that's enough? I honestly
> don't know. (And yes, when I hit CNN.com, the site renders on my
> MacBook Pro in less than 2 seconds generally speaking.)

We're not talking about CNN loading 1 second faster. We're talking
about applications more sophisticated than Gapminder (http://tinyurl.com/5o5jsp
) loading and running as fast as CNN.com, not running out of memory,
and being stable for days on end.

>> So, whether people migrate to Chrome or not, every browser
>> developer is going to pay attention to how Chrome works and we'll
>> see the good parts go forward.
>
> How so? For speed only? Again, what does Chrome provide that is
> inherently unique? It's very premise is that what you make for it
> works for other things since it's standards and opensource based,
> right?

The world of sophisticated web app development right now is full of
hacks. Some of these are because of browser incompatibility (which
Chrome, because it's based on webkit, fixes a little, but not
completely). But many of these are because of performance.

Hacks take time to implement, debug, and maintain. That's time away
from more important activities. Eliminate the need for hacks and you
can apply the resources to innovative interactions and technologies.

> Now, if Google decided to take purposefully *away* from being just
> another browser, I'd get excited. In this regard, things that you'd
> need in Chrome would be:
>
> * Multiple window support
> * Sme form of clipboard data transport support, with the ability to
> go to the OS, other windows, drag and drop to desktop, etc.
> * Ability to let devs to completely take over all keyboard
> interaction, no matter what defaults to the browser itself are
> * OS services that give you access to the hardware; file save, etc.
> (I don't know enough about Gears, so I admittedly need to catch up
> on that)
> * Palette windows and other OS windows like alerts and print
> dialogs, etc.

You need to read up on Chrome and AIR. Between the two, you now have
all of these things in some form. (This spring, Adobe was demoing drag
& drop to/from the desktop, cut & paste (using the OS pasteboard
servers), file save, local resource utilization (like print dialogs),
etc.) It's there. And folks like Nasdaq and Fedex are already
developing apps that make use of it.

I think this is a key point. I expect that AIR and Chrome are
signaling a major change in capabilities for developers. Interaction
designers need to be on top of this, so they can be there to help make
great designs. Otherwise, we'll be back in the world of "we
implemented it because we could" experiences.

> Then I'd get excited. Then you can do things that are even more app
> like while also having a lot of web technologies available to you to
> round out what you can build from stuff you're already developing
> for the web (which is lot more than it used to be these days). The
> trick here that Google has to play is how to make it divergent but
> not so much, right? How can it move away from normal web browser
> experiences while still letting people do enough of what they want
> with a browser?

Again, doesn't matter. The fact is that MS won't let the critical
features in chrome be absent from IE9. Nor will Mozilla.

Doesn't matter if Chrome gets any serious marketshare here. What
matters is the proved the underlying tech could be done. And that's
how they are selling it.

>> If you know anything about how operating systems work, you'll
>> recognize that they've put all the essential components into the
>> browser. Years ago, someone (was is Marc Andreeson? Maybe Steve
>> Gillmor?) said that the browser will become the next operating
>> system. Chrome seems to have all the essential components of an
>> operating system built in.
>
> And yet, they made basically a "web browser." Not excited yet, but I
> could get there...

Andrei: You know I love you dearly. However, there are few things I
care about less than whether Chrome excites you or not.

It excites me a lot and that's what *I* care about.

One of us will be right about this. Tell ya what. In 10 years, let's
meet in the bar at the Bellaggio and the loser will buy the winner a
drink. (Personally, I like my girly drinks. I'll take a Tropical
Breeze http://tinyurl.com/58hs8s please.)

:)

Jared

3 Sep 2008 - 9:57am
Sachendra
2005

Google's Chrome is aimed at Windows, not IE

This is no longer about browser but about the an entire marketplace
spread between desktop, mobile and web. With Chrome, Google's taking a
shot at Windows, not Internet Explorer

I've covered this in more detail on my blog
http://sachendra.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/googles-chrome-is-aimed-at-windows-not-ie/

- Sachendra Yadav
http://www.sachendra.com

3 Sep 2008 - 10:02am
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 3, 2008, at 5:40 AM, Jared Spool wrote:

> You need to read up on Chrome and AIR. Between the two, you now have
> all of these things in some form. (This spring, Adobe was demoing
> drag & drop to/from the desktop, cut & paste (using the OS
> pasteboard servers), file save, local resource utilization (like
> print dialogs), etc.) It's there. And folks like Nasdaq and Fedex
> are already developing apps that make use of it.

For the record, we built a fully featured web page editor that is pure
JavaScript, using no fancy tricks with Flash, Java or any other web
technology at Websketch.com. It's drag and drop, direct manipulation
for layout and resizing, multiple Undo and has all sort of features
you expect in a traditional desktop app. (Unfortunately, our client
got over aggressive with the browser sniffing so we need to get them
to remove the limitation to check it with Chrome.) We're also in the
midst of finishing a full redesign of McAfee's consumer product line
where fully interactive prototypes are built using AIR.

Trust me, I get the developer stuff and am reasonably well versed on
what they can and cannot do well.

> I think this is a key point. I expect that AIR and Chrome are
> signaling a major change in capabilities for developers. Interaction
> designers need to be on top of this, so they can be there to help
> make great designs. Otherwise, we'll be back in the world of "we
> implemented it because we could" experiences.

The thing I think you are missing is that Chrome is still a "browser."
That's the crux of problem. Unless Google makes an explicit break from
being a web browser and being more of an application environment, all
I see is a 4th browser that I have to worry about for compatibility
checking. That's not what the web design world needs right now.

Worse, if Google adds new functionality that is only available in
Chrome, then we have the Microsoft IE situation from 2000-2005 all
over again, and even Microsoft lost that battle. So if Chrome is
purely web standards based, what exactly is new about it other than
performance?

I'm not saying it's not cool. I'm questioning what we're supposed to
do with it, and if it's browser #4, I can pretty much tell you not
much new is going to be done with it. All we'll do is build stuff that
works across all the browsers, and be happy it's faster on Chrome. I'm
not sure how that makes for innovative work.

If Chrome is a competitor to AIR then LOTS can be done with it.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

3 Sep 2008 - 10:08am
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 3, 2008, at 7:57 AM, Sachendra Yadav wrote:

> Google's Chrome is aimed at Windows, not IE
>
> This is no longer about browser but about the an entire marketplace
> spread between desktop, mobile and web. With Chrome, Google's taking a
> shot at Windows, not Internet Explorer

I think people need to consider pulling back on their use of "Chrome
is the next operating system" type statement. As long as Chrome RUNS
on Windows or Mac OS, it's an application development environment. The
day it boots up on it's own hardware and can run on its own -- which
includes a vast number of features not the least of which is drawing
its own windows -- is the day it becomes an operating system.

Now, if you all mean Chrome is the next major ecosystem, that's fine.
That's just not an operating system.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

3 Sep 2008 - 10:29am
.pauric
2006

I think it would further the conversation is we dispatched with the
notion that people 'browse the internet' and start thinking in
terms of Interacting with the Cloud. Saying this is just another web
'browser' misses the point completely.

As Jared pointed out.. "I think Chrome is really important and is
going to change interaction design in a big way."

Whether Chrome is around in a few year or not is irrelevant, it has
set in motion a fundamental change in mindset of both developers and
end-users in what it means to perform tasks online.

I've linked to this graph before and while its a little out of date
and gets a somewhat vague beyond 2010 I still feel it fundamentally
holds true
http://novaspivack.typepad.com/RadarNetworksTowardsAWebOS.jpg
I'm a little apprehensive in using the label and will probably get
torn another one for saying it... but this is probably the start of
3.0

/pauric

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

3 Sep 2008 - 10:13am
Jared M. Spool
2003

On Sep 3, 2008, at 11:02 AM, Andrei Herasimchuk wrote:

>> I think this is a key point. I expect that AIR and Chrome are
>> signaling a major change in capabilities for developers.
>> Interaction designers need to be on top of this, so they can be
>> there to help make great designs. Otherwise, we'll be back in the
>> world of "we implemented it because we could" experiences.
>
> The thing I think you are missing is that Chrome is still a
> "browser." That's the crux of problem. Unless Google makes an
> explicit break from being a web browser and being more of an
> application environment, all I see is a 4th browser that I have to
> worry about for compatibility checking. That's not what the web
> design world needs right now.
>
> Worse, if Google adds new functionality that is only available in
> Chrome, then we have the Microsoft IE situation from 2000-2005 all
> over again, and even Microsoft lost that battle. So if Chrome is
> purely web standards based, what exactly is new about it other than
> performance?
>
> I'm not saying it's not cool. I'm questioning what we're supposed to
> do with it, and if it's browser #4, I can pretty much tell you not
> much new is going to be done with it. All we'll do is build stuff
> that works across all the browsers, and be happy it's faster on
> Chrome. I'm not sure how that makes for innovative work.
>
> If Chrome is a competitor to AIR then LOTS can be done with it.

Ok. I get where you're coming from and I think we agree.

My understanding is that Chrome is a platform that lets things like
Gears and AIR run more effectively. It should be compatible, just more
robust and less "hacky". Gears and AIR run everywhere (except on my
iphone, but that's a different problem), so this just lets them run
better.

But, we've now left the realm of what I know and are in the realm of
conjecture (at least for me). I'll wait and see if Chrome actually is
something more than Browser #4. (Does that demote Opera to #5?)

Jared

3 Sep 2008 - 10:37am
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 3, 2008, at 8:29 AM, pauric wrote:

> As Jared pointed out.. "I think Chrome is really important and is
> going to change interaction design in a big way."

You got, me Pauric! I'm now utterly convinced.

> Whether Chrome is around in a few year or not is irrelevant, it has
> set in motion a fundamental change in mindset of both developers and
> end-users in what it means to perform tasks online.

As opposed to what? Were people not developing JS heavy web apps
before Chrome showed up? Were Google's own web apps a figment of my
imagination? Were the rich interactions that people have been doing
using it that translate directly over to Chrome not possible before
somehow?

What mindset change are we talking about specifically here? Especially
after *one* single day?

> I'm a little apprehensive in using the label and will probably get
> torn another one for saying it... but this is probably the start of
> 3.0

"3.0" has been underway for some time.

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

3 Sep 2008 - 10:42am
SemanticWill
2007

Chrome is aimed at Windows?

Really? So you think Google has been talking to intel? Is google writing
kernel extensions, or lower level processes like mach_init to bootstrap the
kernel?

You really aren't arguing that google is writing an OS from scratch, are
you? Apple didn't even do that - they built upon BSD - so I am not sure what
you mean. Google wrote a browser/application chrome - not an operating
system.

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Sachendra Yadav <sachendra at gmail.com>wrote:

> Google's Chrome is aimed at Windows, not IE
>
> This is no longer about browser but about the an entire marketplace
> spread between desktop, mobile and web. With Chrome, Google's taking a
> shot at Windows, not Internet Explorer
>
> I've covered this in more detail on my blog
>
> http://sachendra.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/googles-chrome-is-aimed-at-windows-not-ie/
>
>
> - Sachendra Yadav
> http://www.sachendra.com
> ________________________________________________________________
> Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
> To post to this list ....... discuss at ixda.org
> Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
> List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
> List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
>

--
~ will

"Where you innovate, how you innovate,
and what you innovate are design problems"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Evans | User Experience Architect
tel: +1.617.281.128 | will at semanticfoundry.com
aim: semanticwill | gtalk: wkevans4
twitter: semanticwill | skype: semanticwill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 Sep 2008 - 11:13am
.pauric
2006

Andrei: "What mindset change are we talking about specifically here?
"

Hi Andrei, there are two specific innovations in Chrome that I
believe will change the perception of the landscape a little.

First, the Task Manager. By empowering 'average' users to first
understand problem sites (sessions, threads, processes, widgets,
plugins.. whatever you want to call it) and take more granular
control of their tabs, it will underline the mutlithreading
capabilities. This will in my view change the preceptions the time
spent online as a single activity and users will start managing time
in terms of parallel activities. Something not really feasible
today.
Developers, conversely, will now have the finger pointed directly at
them as opposed to the browser crashes taking flak for their bad
code.

The second is the combination of the ability to pull out a tab to its
own window and minimise the omnibar, blurring the lines between cloud
and desktop even further. As a mac user I've yet to really play
with this second feature so please be gentle when you pass comment.
Again though, I'm talking about tipping point changes in perception,
not implemented complexity in google apps or high end JS tricks
specifically.

You are right to say that there may not be a lot of earth shattering
going on in chrome... 'web 3.0 has been under way for a while'.
Agreed, however I said this could be the dawn of 3.0, something we
can point to and say 'it was around about this point where we really
started to see the webOS story illuminated in the general populations
mindset'

All the best /pauric

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Posted from the new ixda.org
http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=32535

3 Sep 2008 - 11:34am
Andrei Herasimchuk
2004

On Sep 3, 2008, at 9:13 AM, pauric wrote:

> First, the Task Manager. By empowering 'average' users to first
> understand problem sites (sessions, threads, processes, widgets,
> plugins.. whatever you want to call it) and take more granular
> control of their tabs, it will underline the mutlithreading
> capabilities. This will in my view change the preceptions the time
> spent online as a single activity and users will start managing time
> in terms of parallel activities. Something not really feasible
> today.

Normal people don't use the Task Manager in Windows today. And when
introduced to it, it's usually in the "bad use case" flow, which gives
them a negative connotation of what it is. In other words, when they
have to use the Task Manager it means something is broken. The only
perception the Task Manager in Google Chrome might bring to the
average user in my opinion is that the browser is now as broken as
Windows is.

> Developers, conversely, will now have the finger pointed directly at
> them as opposed to the browser crashes taking flak for their bad
> code.

And that works so well in the rest of the software world, doesn't it?

> The second is the combination of the ability to pull out a tab to its
> own window and minimise the omnibar, blurring the lines between cloud
> and desktop even further.

How is this any different than opening a new window (via menu or right
click or the code doing it for you) and removing the chrome? Which you
can do and have been able to do in all the browsers for at least 8
years?

--
Andrei Herasimchuk

Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world

e. andrei at involutionstudios.com
c. +1 408 306 6422

Syndicate content Get the feed