Comments on: Chrome OS - when pull is better than push

By: contractor web design

contractor web design — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 03:52:25 +0000

chrome is a headache! been using it for a few days and uninstall it!!

By: Chrome OS – when pull is better than push — LM Framework « sull is vocally active

Sun, 06 Sep 2009 05:42:24 +0000

[...] Chrome OS – when pull is better than push — LM Framework. [...]

By: Mark Essel

Mark Essel — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:43:27 +0000

I'd be surprised if there's much that's new to you. Fred's blog has attracted quite a following of tech trend estimators. I hope we all get wealthy learning whether we're right or wrong.

By: David Semeria

David Semeria — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:39:49 +0000

Thanks Mark. I'll check out the post and get back to you.

By: Mark Essel

Mark Essel — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 21:41:58 +0000

I've spent the last six months or so imagining what will come next. There are so many rich oppportunities for software to “learn” more about our social networks, topical likes/dislikes, and browsing habits to make the web more personalized.

David great topics and perspective, I'll spend some time catching up on your posts. In the meantime you may enjoy this post of mine: http://www.victusspiritus.com/2009/06/17/the-de...

I have older posts on social media and potential leveraging of it towards intelligent advertisements, let me know if you'd like me to dig through and find a good summary post.

By: David Semeria

David Semeria — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:02:21 +0000

That's a good question.

As far as I can tell, Wave is a multi-threaded real-time communication protocol. It could theoretically satisfy some of the goals of the open interoperability layer I'm suggesting, but perhaps not all of them.

I was thinking about something a bit more general-purpose; that could have a quasi-semantic aspect. The sort of functionality that would allow your unique list of contacts to be selectively available to all your web applications, for example.

By: Name

Name — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:11:07 +0000

“If Google really wanted some serious progress in web applications, they should consider creating a general-purpose client-side framework for the interchange of structured and semantically distinguishable information. This is what people need, this is what people want. And if things go well, and such a platform were to gain general acceptance, it might eventually be absorbed into the very fabric of the browser – to the benefit of us all.”

Does Google Wave fit that bill?

By: David Semeria

David Semeria — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:47:15 +0000

Antoine, great comments.

1) Today for the first time W3C is in advance on vendors..
Sure. I'm a big fan of the W3C, ECMA, etc working parties. But setting aside that there is a lot of politics surrounding these organizations too, I would argue that they tend to think further out. They propose things which are frequently just not possible to currently achieve - which is great. But it takes time for the proposals to solidify and then be adopted. My main point is that by creating cool new functionality using tools that are already available (eg Google Maps) it is possible to immediately stimulate the imagination of users, developers, browser makers and working groups simultaneously.

2) I'm not sure what is Google's goal with Wave...
Wave is a great example of what I'm talking about. By combining existing technologies (XMPP, XHR, etc) Google has created something innovative and cool which works now>/i>. I think Wave will be much more effective than Chrome OS (whatever form it takes) at getting more people to use web apps.

3) Google needs market share for Chrome..
Here I disagree. Google would probably like more market share for Chrome - but they don't need it. It makes little difference to Google which browsers people use to click on their adverts. What Google really wants is for people to spend most of their computer time online, hence Chrome OS.

By: Antoine Sabot-Durand

Antoine Sabot-Durand — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 10:28:59 +0000

I partially agree with your analysis. There are two important points that you missed in my opinion :

1) You talk about innovations that come chaotically from browser vendors and are adopted by others when they want or decide to. I think we're no more in this pattern (we were in it in the past when IE trusted 95 % of market share). Today for the first time W3C is in advance on vendors : HTML 5 specification is not totally completed but not far from, and most of the innovations that are coming in new browser version are W3C specification (Canvas, workers, Geolocation, new input fields types). Google announced it's commitment to HTML 5 in Google I/O and they were clever enough to show that all their new bells and whistle will work on Safari, Firefox, Opera and Chrome (who's missing ?). Tim O'Reilly article on this subject is good starting point : http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/05/google-bets-bi...

2) I'm not sure what is Google's goal with Wave. But this project looks like an Internet Explorer Wounder (it won't kill it but accelerate the lost of market share of MS in the Browser sector). Since every modern browser will support Wave (because they start to implement HTML 5) except IE. Google drives the web app that can force IE to respect HTML standards (at last) or become obsolete. MS enters in the battle with Office 2010 but they are quite late.

3) I think Chrome OS is not about innovation, it's about business. Google needs market share for Chrome (the browser) and that's a way to achieve this (since the mini-notebook market is growing very fast). The question is why a new OS, since Android exist ? I don't have the answer to this question except the buzz and Vaporware effect that MS have been using for 20 years now.