On Sep 3, 2008, at 10:49 PM, Kontra wrote:
Google cares only about dataflow between end-users and its servers.
For them, that's where the money is. They don't give a hoot what the
user-agent is, it could be a browser, app platform, heck, even a
mobile-device OS. If they could wire up your walking shoes, they
would.
From the WIRED article:
"When Microsoft's Internet Explorer and the codebase at the heart of
Firefox were originally conceived, browsing was less complex. Now,
however, functions that previously could be performed only on the
desktop — email, spreadsheets, database management — are increasingly
handled online. In the coming era of cloud computing, the Web will be
much more than just a means of delivering content — it will be a
platform in its own right. The problem with revamping existing
browsers to accommodate this concept is that they have developed an
ecology of add-on extensions (toolbars, RSS readers, etc.) that would
be hopelessly disrupted by a radical upgrade. "As a Firefox developer,
you love to innovate, but you're always worried that it means in the
next version all the extensions will be broken," Fisher says. "And
indeed, that's what happens." The conclusion was obvious: Only by
building its own software could Google bring the browser into the
cloud age and potentially trigger a spiral of innovation not seen
since Microsoft and Netscape one-upped each other almost monthly."
So now we have a problem:
1) Chrome is currently shipping as Browser #4 and as such, *by
definition* what you build for it is supposed to work for all the
other browsers. And yet in this snippet, we have Google openly
claiming they want to move past the browser.
2) If Chrome remains a "browser" and they try to push new things, they
either attempting to force everyone to do what they want do as the new
standard, or they would have to do what Microsoft tried to do with
older versions of IE and break away from the standards in an attempt
to build a robust app dev platform. Neither directions will go over
very well if they try to play their current game of having their cake
and eating it too.
Now, in 2008, which one is *easier* to introduce, a "browser" or a
new application platform? Especially, if you can hide the latter in
the former. If quotes are needed:
This is key: Application Platform.
Why? Because they are Google! Absolutely NO revenue is at stake for
them with this product. Specifically because of who they are and where
their future strategy is heading, it specifically behooves them to
stop referring to Chrome as a browser and start referring to it as an
application platform that happens to have browser capabilities.
Or if you want: Web 3.0
Of all the people who can do that, get away with it and make it work
in that new direction, it would be them. But they are openly and maybe
inadvertently about to start a new set of browser wars, and there's
literally no need to.
Google co-founder Sergey Brin said Chrome was designed to address
the shift to using software from within a Web browser rather than as
locally installed computer applications running inside Microsoft
Windows or some other operating system.
"We (Web users) want a very lightweight, fast engine for running
applications," Brin said.
Great. So stop calling the damn thing a browser!
Every time people do, Chrome is Browser #4 and as such must comply by
the browser compliance rules or get into the browser war games. What
good does that do anyone? Browser Wars are pointless time sinks for us
in the trenches.
Let's get this straight: There are three very big companies who have a
lot at stake with the "browser" and admittedly Google wants to evolve
past what you can do. So do they force the others to follow suit which
does nothing but rock the boat, or do that play a different game where
they encourage more web apps like Google Docs, Maps, etc by offering a
platform that doesn't have to play by browser interface rules but can
take advantage of browser technologies and then some?
They are currently doing the latter in architecture, but in marketing/
promotion/discussion they have tied themselves to the browser wars. A
huge mistake imho.
Again. This stuff matters. For a guy like me in the trenches, Chrome
as it stands right now at this very moment effectively becomes browser
#4 to check against. Being Browser #4 means I can only do so much to
innovate, because the very nature of the browser wars is that we have
to build for the lowest common denominator. And the very nature of the
browser is limiting as an interface paradigm compared to RIA+.
This ignores the *enormous* evolution of the "browser" from what it
was half a decade ago. We run a huge range of *applications* through
a web browser all over the world in every imaginable domain. It's
not perfect, but what is? Just a few years ago, nobody would even
believe the kind of expressive, fluid stuff modern browser can do
without using plug-ins like Flash. Yes, I'd like to spec my own app
platform from scratch too, but good luck with that.
Again... you're talking to a guy who did the interface design for the
Adobe Creative Suite. I have extensive experience here. Further, my
company is building all sorts of prototypes and products as AIR apps
and browser based apps, not the least of which was an rich web page
editor that comes as close as one can to a full fledged application
while still being in the browser and requiring absolutely no plugins.
I know the differences between them and while the browser with
JavaScript can indeed do lots of things, it is still *nothing* like
creating the interface for a product like Photoshop or InDesign.
Further, I already said that I agree that the "browser" platform can
do a lot and be more than sufficient for many things, like word
processing and email, etc. But that *still* does not make it anything
like traditional desktop application design.
Heck, even Adobe has been trying to clean up its palette craze in
each successive version of Photoshop.
I'll suggest you read:
http://www.designbyfire.com/?p=33
--
Andrei Herasimchuk
Principal, Involution Studios
innovating the digital world
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
c. +1 408 306 6422
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
