Google Chrome: It’s not about the browser

Tns said:
:p:rolleyes::eek:

haven't seen chrome yet....somehow i don't think i am missing too much
Click to expand...

It seems fast and responsive. Loads faster for me because I have so many extensions in firefox. It is nice to fire it up and check something quick. Just nice to have as a spare.
 
on the JavaScript note... I can always tell when a JavaScript page was loading in Firefox... my PC would freeze up for a few seconds... then the Java icon would appear in the taskbar... and the PC would remain sluggish after that until I unloaded the Java. happened to me on all computers.

If Chrome can improve on that... then way to go.
 
Excellent I really can't wait to have more responsive Javascript browsers out there, as I build web applications, I rely on JS heavily. I suppose the same things can be done with Flash, Flex or Silverlight, but JS, feels much more native, and is much easier to learn and deploy, and it's extensible to Adobe Air...
 
Google is not interested in winning browser market share, it’s interested in replacing entire operating systems.
Click to expand...

Sounds like more of these stupid clouds. It'll be a cloudy day in hell before I trust Google to provide my OS.
 
JBFRobisher said:
Sounds like more of these stupid clouds. It'll be a cloudy day in hell before I trust Google to provide my OS.
Click to expand...

It's not about them providing your OS, it's about making the OS irrelevant in getting the job done. Web applications is the future and google knows this, that's why they're not releasing the Google OS as so many people thought they would.
 
Garyvdh said:
on the JavaScript note... I can always tell when a JavaScript page was loading in Firefox... my PC would freeze up for a few seconds... then the Java icon would appear in the taskbar... and the PC would remain sluggish after that until I unloaded the Java....
Click to expand...

sounds like the Java plugin starting up...not the internal javascript engine.
 
moabin said:
sounds like the Java plugin starting up...not the internal javascript engine.
Click to expand...

what difference does that make to the end user? I know JavaScript can run without the Java plug-in and that they are different. But when he sees that logo in his taskbar... who do you think he is going to be cursing?
 
On the whole, a good article, but the conclusion is incorrect:

Which brings us back to the starting point: Google is not interested in winning browser market share, it’s interested in replacing entire operating systems. A JavaScript engine that enables serious functionality to be offered inside the browser is a huge step in that direction.
Click to expand...

Not quite - a browser will always need to run on an operating system of sorts - even if it is one provided by google. However, I believe google wants a slice of Microsoft's biggest market share: the office, and particularly office tools such as outlook , spreadhseet and word processing. Has anyone tried the google "office" products using chrome? It flies. Watch the next few months as more and more functionality gets enabled in chrome for these suites - and more and more collaberation (this is where Microsoft's lead in this space is biggest at the moment) features become available.

So, the conclusion is wrong: Google actually wants content dominance - they don't really care how they achieve it, and as long as they are platform independent (i.e. not reliant on any one OS), they probably don't care about replacing operating systems anyway.
 
Garyvdh said:
what difference does that make to the end user? I know JavaScript can run without the Java plug-in and that they are different. But when he sees that logo in his taskbar... who do you think he is going to be cursing?
Click to expand...

If you are seeing the Java icon in the taskbar it means the page is loading a java applet. Java has nothing at all to do with javascript. The unfortunate naming has created this confusion so perhaps using the official name of ECMAScript might help?

nelwa said:
The problem with noscript is that more and more sites use ajax and similar javascript related technologies to serve content, or to enhance the user experience. Disabling javascript will really deduct from your web experience.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately there are a lot of sloppy developers out there who do not ensure that their code degrades gracefully when JS is not present.
 
Unfortunately there are a lot of sloppy developers out there who do not ensure that their code degrades gracefully when JS is not present.
Click to expand...
Much of functionality that is available in modern web pages is provided as a result of Javascript/Flash or some form of "enhancement" to standard HTML rendering. I'd rather see my developers give a generic "this is site only designed to run with JS enabled"-message than spend/waste development time making the site compliant with the minuscule percentage of browsers who refuse to use it.

Unfortunately there are too many bold assumptions made by the author of this article to make it really credible, but I suppose it does sort of offer a saving grace for Chrome (which is my primary browser at the moment).
 
nelwa said:
It's not about them providing your OS, it's about making the OS irrelevant in getting the job done. Web applications is the future and google knows this, that's why they're not releasing the Google OS as so many people thought they would.
Click to expand...

Everyone has been saying that for years and years, and most browser based apps I have ever seen are either complete dogs, or can be completely discombobulated with a few wrong clicks. Furthermore, one would have thought that these web-app advocates would have learned from MS and their COM/ActiveX nightmare. You have miles to go before you sleep on that one!
 
JBFRobisher said:
Everyone has been saying that for years and years, and most browser based apps I have ever seen are either complete dogs, or can be completely discombobulated with a few wrong clicks. Furthermore, one would have thought that these web-app advocates would have learned from MS and their COM/ActiveX nightmare. You have miles to go before you sleep on that one!
Click to expand...

Maybe people have been saying it for years, and I think they will keep on saying it for another couple of years before it starts to happen, but it will happen. Technologically there were many hurdles in the past: crappy browsers, slow internet connections, fewer internet users, poorly defined standards, slow javascript, etc. These are all disappearing slowly, opening the door for web applications...just wait and see...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X