Comments on: The Importance Of Chrome http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/ Thu, 10 May 2012 17:22:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Frank http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235233 Frank Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:40:07 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235233 Stephan, That idea was originally what IE wanted with ActiveX. Now, look at all the problems it's causing Microsoft and Vista. The real problem of plugins is that they are often used for trivial features, ways that don't really deserve to be part of a plugin. I mean, who cares if your cursor can be changed at a whim, or that the background of a page can vary based on your MP3 list? Stephan,
That idea was originally what IE wanted with ActiveX. Now, look at all the problems it’s causing Microsoft and Vista. The real problem of plugins is that they are often used for trivial features, ways that don’t really deserve to be part of a plugin. I mean, who cares if your cursor can be changed at a whim, or that the background of a page can vary based on your MP3 list?

]]> By: Chrome just Changed the Game — Oddly Zen http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235158 Chrome just Changed the Game — Oddly Zen Sun, 07 Sep 2008 22:15:57 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235158 [...] as first-class citizens.  Our web apps will access our systems like desktop applications. We get Gears baked in (note the lack of “Google” prefix — it’s now simply “of the web”) and if you’ve read [...] [...] as first-class citizens.  Our web apps will access our systems like desktop applications. We get Gears baked in (note the lack of “Google” prefix — it’s now simply “of the web”) and if you’ve read [...]

]]> By: Stephen Martindale http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235134 Stephen Martindale Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:02:07 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235134 All Google need to do is make their plug-in experience more convenient than every other browser's. Sadly, the "bad guys" killed the plugin scene when they used early plugin mechanisms to install crap-ware on people's browsers. Today, plugins are a chore because you first have to wade through tons of security warnings and little yellow bars before you even get to the bit where the plugin starts downloading. If Google used their continent sized brain and interstellar infrastructure to create a mechanism with which signed plugins could be installed in full user-confidence with no more than one click, they'd be winning. If they could do that without the required browser restart, they'd be untouchable. Instead of this... 1. Visit Site. 2. Notice expected content is not shown. 3. Notice annoying yellow bar saying the site either needs a plugin or couldn't install a required plugin. 4. Click multiple times to dismiss the yellow bar and all the associated security warnings. 5. Wait for plugin to download. 6. Finish what you're doing on every other tab. 7. Restart browser. 8. Use page with plugin. You would have... 1. Visit page. 2. Notice that instead of the requested page you see a nicely designed page (like the default Chrome start page, which I love to bits) displaying some information about a required plugin, the fact that it is signed by a trusted CA and a single button to download and install it. 3. Click once and watch the plugin install. 4. Notice that the page you requested loaded automatically immediately after the install finished. Wow: 4 steps instead of 8, with no "secret-handshakes" or popups. It's U.I. utopia. All Google need to do is make their plug-in experience more convenient than every other browser’s.

Sadly, the “bad guys” killed the plugin scene when they used early plugin mechanisms to install crap-ware on people’s browsers. Today, plugins are a chore because you first have to wade through tons of security warnings and little yellow bars before you even get to the bit where the plugin starts downloading.

If Google used their continent sized brain and interstellar infrastructure to create a mechanism with which signed plugins could be installed in full user-confidence with no more than one click, they’d be winning.

If they could do that without the required browser restart, they’d be untouchable.

Instead of this…

1. Visit Site.
2. Notice expected content is not shown.
3. Notice annoying yellow bar saying the site either needs a plugin or couldn’t install a required plugin.
4. Click multiple times to dismiss the yellow bar and all the associated security warnings.
5. Wait for plugin to download.
6. Finish what you’re doing on every other tab.
7. Restart browser.
8. Use page with plugin.

You would have…

1. Visit page.
2. Notice that instead of the requested page you see a nicely designed page (like the default Chrome start page, which I love to bits) displaying some information about a required plugin, the fact that it is signed by a trusted CA and a single button to download and install it.
3. Click once and watch the plugin install.
4. Notice that the page you requested loaded automatically immediately after the install finished.

Wow: 4 steps instead of 8, with no “secret-handshakes” or popups. It’s U.I. utopia.

]]> By: Matt Wilcox http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235119 Matt Wilcox Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:29:45 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235119 Alex, I mean the extensions. For me, what makes Firefox an indispensable tool isn't it's stability, or it's speed, but it's extensions: Web Dev Toolbar and Firebug for example. I either missed that completely when scanning over the comic, or there's been no mention of it. I like Chrome, I like the out-of-the-way UI and the blistering speed, but I'll not use it until I can install functionality I want on-demand. Alex, I mean the extensions. For me, what makes Firefox an indispensable tool isn’t it’s stability, or it’s speed, but it’s extensions: Web Dev Toolbar and Firebug for example. I either missed that completely when scanning over the comic, or there’s been no mention of it.

I like Chrome, I like the out-of-the-way UI and the blistering speed, but I’ll not use it until I can install functionality I want on-demand.

]]> By: alex http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235110 alex Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:24:35 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235110 Manuel: The stats for auto-updating browsers and plugins give me some real hope that auto-updates do, over the broader population, work. Obviously enterprises want and need control over the process, but in the main, auto-update is a Good Thing (TM) and it works (assuming the update mechanism is non-evil and continues to have user trust). Regards Manuel:

The stats for auto-updating browsers and plugins give me some real hope that auto-updates do, over the broader population, work. Obviously enterprises want and need control over the process, but in the main, auto-update is a Good Thing (TM) and it works (assuming the update mechanism is non-evil and continues to have user trust).

Regards

]]> By: Manuel http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235109 Manuel Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:50:23 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235109 <blockquote> It revs independently of browsers, implements new features without users changing their day-to-day choices, and has a (frequently exercised) auto-update mechanism. In short, it’s even more cross-platform than a browser. A plugin absolutely can (and will) help the web evolve. It’ll be gears or it’ll be Flash/Silverlight, which, written another way is “open vs. closed”. </blockquote> I know very little about Gears admittedly. However nothing you have said he turns me on. I, and many of us, don't turn on auto-updates cause more often than not, they screw things up. I would have a problem with any plugin/standalone product implementing new features without me being able to veto that update.

It revs independently of browsers, implements new features without users changing their day-to-day choices, and has a (frequently exercised) auto-update mechanism. In short, it’s even more cross-platform than a browser. A plugin absolutely can (and will) help the web evolve. It’ll be gears or it’ll be Flash/Silverlight, which, written another way is “open vs. closed”.

I know very little about Gears admittedly. However nothing you have said he turns me on. I, and many of us, don’t turn on auto-updates cause more often than not, they screw things up. I would have a problem with any plugin/standalone product implementing new features without me being able to veto that update.

]]> By: alex http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235102 alex Tue, 02 Sep 2008 20:19:06 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235102 Brad: Obviously, since you're at Google you can't just come out and say this, but I certainly does seem weird that the folks at Mozilla don't just ship Gears (and pull the same "hot patch IE if installed" trick I suggested that Chrome use). They are 100% aligned on the merits, and if Mozilla still wanted full control over the content author experience, they could simply try to create a separate distribution channel or forge a distribution deal for Gears as they have for the browser in general (say, for every Gears install via FF that also patches IE, some extra dough for MoFo). It's insane that MoFo isn't chasing down all the angles here. Regards <b>Update:</b> changed the language to more accurately reflect what I meant to say. Brad:

Obviously, since you’re at Google you can’t just come out and say this, but I certainly does seem weird that the folks at Mozilla don’t just ship Gears (and pull the same “hot patch IE if installed” trick I suggested that Chrome use). They are 100% aligned on the merits, and if Mozilla still wanted full control over the content author experience, they could simply try to create a separate distribution channel or forge a distribution deal for Gears as they have for the browser in general (say, for every Gears install via FF that also patches IE, some extra dough for MoFo).

It’s insane that MoFo isn’t chasing down all the angles here.

Regards

Update: changed the language to more accurately reflect what I meant to say.

]]> By: Brad Neuberg http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235101 Brad Neuberg Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:50:48 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235101 An interesting thing about Flash and users installing plugins: even though Flash has an autoupdate mechanism, I've heard from Flash folks that most of the version upgrade happens almost entirely by users choosing to upgrade! This happens because content authors choose to use the new features, which drives demand, which drives users to flip their plugin version faster. So good content and user demand can cause plugins to have growth. BTW, much of the 'received wisdom' about plugins was created in the late 90s, when bandwidth was slow and users were actually more conservative. Users in general are much more comfortable with the web, machines are faster, and bandwidth is much easier to download a plugin that might be several megabytes. In addition, the received wisdom was that plugins == proprietary in the 90s, which was true when they started. However, open source plugins like Gears changes this equation. If plugins are an effective way to help induce change on the web, why not use them to get some more movement going? Best, Brad Google Open Web Advocate An interesting thing about Flash and users installing plugins: even though Flash has an autoupdate mechanism, I’ve heard from Flash folks that most of the version upgrade happens almost entirely by users choosing to upgrade! This happens because content authors choose to use the new features, which drives demand, which drives users to flip their plugin version faster. So good content and user demand can cause plugins to have growth.

BTW, much of the ‘received wisdom’ about plugins was created in the late 90s, when bandwidth was slow and users were actually more conservative. Users in general are much more comfortable with the web, machines are faster, and bandwidth is much easier to download a plugin that might be several megabytes. In addition, the received wisdom was that plugins == proprietary in the 90s, which was true when they started. However, open source plugins like Gears changes this equation. If plugins are an effective way to help induce change on the web, why not use them to get some more movement going?

Best,
Brad
Google Open Web Advocate

]]> By: The Privacy Place » Google’s New Browser: Chrome http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235100 The Privacy Place » Google’s New Browser: Chrome Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:45:28 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235100 [...] is difficult to predict what sort of impact Chrome will have on the browser market, web application development, or Internet privacy, but if Chrome will have any impact, then it must compete with the “big [...] [...] is difficult to predict what sort of impact Chrome will have on the browser market, web application development, or Internet privacy, but if Chrome will have any impact, then it must compete with the “big [...]

]]> By: Brad Neuberg http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235099 Brad Neuberg Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:42:40 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235099 Just to add what Alex wrote about Gears, if you notice Gears and HTML 5 have been revving very fast against each other. Not only can Gears get new features across the existing installed base of the web (including IE), but those features are migrating into small standards that are vetted by the wider community. For example, Gears 0.4 just launched with a Geolocation API. The team then worked to write this up into a short spec, submitted it to the W3C, and its being revved by several others. Firefox 3.1 is planning to implement this spec, as far as I know. This is a good example of Gears, HTML 5, and web browsers working together to rapidly innovate and do standardization work (plus get actual shipping code for developers to use!). Best, Brad Neuberg Google Open Web Advocate Just to add what Alex wrote about Gears, if you notice Gears and HTML 5 have been revving very fast against each other. Not only can Gears get new features across the existing installed base of the web (including IE), but those features are migrating into small standards that are vetted by the wider community. For example, Gears 0.4 just launched with a Geolocation API. The team then worked to write this up into a short spec, submitted it to the W3C, and its being revved by several others. Firefox 3.1 is planning to implement this spec, as far as I know. This is a good example of Gears, HTML 5, and web browsers working together to rapidly innovate and do standardization work (plus get actual shipping code for developers to use!).

Best,
Brad Neuberg
Google Open Web Advocate

]]> By: Ajaxian » Google Chrome, Chromium, and V8 http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235095 Ajaxian » Google Chrome, Chromium, and V8 Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:00:22 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235095 [...] Russell also has some good thoughts on the importance of Chrome, and Christopher Blizzard (Mozilla) also has some thoughts on how this shows the browser market is [...] [...] Russell also has some good thoughts on the importance of Chrome, and Christopher Blizzard (Mozilla) also has some thoughts on how this shows the browser market is [...]

]]> By: alex http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235094 alex Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:14:25 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235094 Matt: Not sure I understand your comment...the Chrome comic talks a LOT about their plugin infrastructure, and the plugin API across browsers is pretty much settled science. Are you referring to Firefox's lighter-weight extensions mechansim? If so, that is very much up in the air as far as anyone can tell. Should be interesting = ) Aaron: Adobe had a distribution deal with Microsoft to include Flash with Windows up until a year or two ago (Vista and OEM XP's no longer include it, but the bootstrap is done). Regards Matt:

Not sure I understand your comment…the Chrome comic talks a LOT about their plugin infrastructure, and the plugin API across browsers is pretty much settled science. Are you referring to Firefox’s lighter-weight extensions mechansim? If so, that is very much up in the air as far as anyone can tell. Should be interesting = )

Aaron:

Adobe had a distribution deal with Microsoft to include Flash with Windows up until a year or two ago (Vista and OEM XP’s no longer include it, but the bootstrap is done).

Regards

]]> By: Matt Wilcox http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235093 Matt Wilcox Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:33:31 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235093 If Chrome doesn't have a plug-in capability, then it will simply be a two-bit player. The one thing that really separates Firefox from any of the other browsers, and that elevates it from 'good secure browser' to 'indispensable tool', is the plug-ins available for it. Firefox without plugins is great, but not really anything special. Firefox with the plugins I want is light-years ahead of the competition, because it's the plugins that make it relevant to me. Chrome needs an open plug-in architecture. If Chrome doesn’t have a plug-in capability, then it will simply be a two-bit player. The one thing that really separates Firefox from any of the other browsers, and that elevates it from ‘good secure browser’ to ‘indispensable tool’, is the plug-ins available for it.

Firefox without plugins is great, but not really anything special. Firefox with the plugins I want is light-years ahead of the competition, because it’s the plugins that make it relevant to me. Chrome needs an open plug-in architecture.

]]> By: Aaron http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235089 Aaron Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:01:24 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235089 Dean: As I understand it, flash did not achieve the majority of its ubiquity through distribution deals. It got there because people wanted to see the whizzy animations, games, and other stuff they needed flash to. Dean:

As I understand it, flash did not achieve the majority of its ubiquity through distribution deals. It got there because people wanted to see the whizzy animations, games, and other stuff they needed flash to.

]]> By: Dean Edwards http://infrequently.org/2008/09/the-importance-of-chrome/comment-page-1/#comment-235088 Dean Edwards Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:29:04 +0000 http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=747#comment-235088 I'm, saying that people don't install plugins. Period. Flash is the exception because it is *pre-installed* on most machines. I thought you knew that. I’m, saying that people don’t install plugins. Period. Flash is the exception because it is *pre-installed* on most machines. I thought you knew that.

]]>