Please stop calling it a OS - it does not have any of the features of an operating system. The process control is still handled by an actual OS.

It cannot be a defacto interface because you will still need an OS to run underneath the application process. I am surprised you did not mention Linux as this is the most likely candidate for a real Google OS.

Think of Chrome as a desktop API competing with C# and WPF, not as a competitor to Windows. Linux (and OSX) would be the competitor to Windows. It is totally cross platform and future compatible (because it is open source). You are not tied to one OS for your applications. Thats what keeps Mr Ballmer one awake at night. One day we will not need a specific OS, and they will be interchangeable like your car oil.

Imagine a USB stick with your Chrome application data and a copy of Chrome for OSX, Linux and Windows. You would be able to use any computer as if it was yours without even knowing what the underlying OS is. Safari on the iPhone is virtually the same so if Google can convince Apple to include Gears on the iPhone then we will have real app portability.

"Who needs Vista, or Windows 7?"

Should be who needs Windows? What value does it provide if the apps are the same across all platforms and OS? Splashtop boots a Chrome compatible OS within 5 seconds, why wait 50 seconds for Vista?

My impression is that Chrome is more akin to a clean Firefox with AJAX and Silverlight types of features built into it.

In general, most web-based applications are much less functional and more clunky to use than native applications. Email (hotmail, yahoo, AOL webmail, and gmail included) are nowhere nearly as smooth and functional as good native client email applications. And web-based office applications other than calendars fall far short of their desktop counterparts (Word and OOo, for example).

HTML has its limitations. The best attempt I've seen in a browser is IE (and also Firefox on Windows with IE Tab) going to an MS Exchange email system. It's not perfect, but it's very close to providing a full client experience; spell-checking being one woeful exception. Everything else falls short, functionally speaking.

AJAX is an attempt to pull function to the client, but it falls short itself of pulling native-client functions fully into the browser. Silverlight is an admirable technical attempt, but it has Microsoft lock-in (or rather, Linux lock-out) written all over it.

If Chrome does what Google says it will, perhaps we are looking at the beginning of the open source cross-platform merge of standards-based HTML and native client behavior from a web-based application.

And if it is released as open source with an appropriate license as Google implies it will, then vendor lock-in won't be much of an issue. The only thing to fear is the lock-out of anti-competitive monopolies (of which Microsoft is only one of many). But that's a fear that I am more than willing to live with!

Nitpickers. This is great analysis, Joe.

Joe;

"A Web-based operating system that treats Windows like a shell. Perhaps the best commentary on Chrome comes from John Gruber (aka Daring Fireball) in a two-sentence blog post: "Sounds more like an application runtime than a web browser, though." He's absolutely right. Chrome isn't just Google's long rumored Web browser, it's the long rumored operating system, too."

I don't know about calling it an "OS" by any means...

I've went to the Google web site that has Chrome available for download. I went to the "Learn More..." page to see this in action. I did not download it, but looked at the available information and videos.

Personally, I'm not impressed by Google's latest attempts in comparing it with FireFox. Also, I know that this new application is just that, new. I am wondering about the security of this browser and until more information comes in, which I am sure it will, I won't be recommending it to anyone out there.

This is going to be interesting to watch. If you think of it as Google trying to march in to Microsoft territory, I can't help but think of what happened to Borland when they tried. Not only did they fail, they lost sight of what they were good at doing.

I've been entirely a Google user for all of my online activities until a couple of months ago. I noticed that I've started to gravitate over to a number of the Windows Live services. If things don't get too political inside of Microsoft, I think that they will the be one to beat when it comes to mixing the best of the desktop with the best of the web.

BTR

Douglas S. Taylor : wrote

"I am wondering about the security of this browser and until more information comes in, which I am sure it will, I won't be recommending it to anyone out there."
----------------------------------------------------

I agree, and I'll stick with Firefox on my Windows machine even though I am usually 100% in favor of alternatives to MSFT products. If a Linux version is released, maybe then I will try it.

Joe, Good analysis. But I think it will be IE taking the initial brunt of Chrome market penetration, not Firefox.

Firefox has a very active ecosystem of Plug-Ins that users find indispensable. My OS X machines have Webkit-based Safari, but I still use Firefox because of NoScript, Developer Toolbar, Adblock, ImageZoom, IE Tab, etc., etc.

The vast majority of IE users are completely NON-TECHNICAL. They use IE because that is the way their PCs are configured by default. To them, IE IS "the internet," much the same way most AOL users thought AOL Explorer was.

The difference is that these IE users know and USE Google for search. You have to expect that the Google search page will soon have a small box suggesting that "for the best Google User experience, try using the new Google Chrome" along with a convenient download link. And they will.

Eventually, when Google gets their Plugin protocol and ecosystem established, we will start to see it eat into Firefox. But IE will get nailed first. I predict a 5-10% loss in IE market share within the first year.

I'm writing this comment in Chrome. Seems to work ok, but seems like a very bare bones browser. I guess the simplicity is good for non-technical users. But for me as a developer, it seems somehow lacking in functionality. But then do I really need easy access to JavaScript profiling or 8 million security options? Anyway, it seems reasonably quick and seems to display all the pages I've hit so far ok. Do I really need another browser? Why not.

It will be very interesting to see where google takes this. Next step obviously would be a Mac port.

Long term, this is a client container that could host XML schemas developed by google, in addition to standard HTML browsing. Up until now Google has let Microsoft and Adobe define the client-side standards. Chrome could be a vehicle down the road for Google to introduce client-side technologies that could supercede HTML/Ajax entirely. Call it GFP (Google Presentation Foundation).

Borland marching into Microsoft territory....

Yep, and the better package had to take second place. Borlands Delphi was a far better product than the godawful Visual Basic.

I have neither the interest nor the inclination to try out googles latest idea. Let MS and google fight over the metaphorical search engine carcass. Whatever the outcome, it will be detrimental to the end user in some way. The only reason why I want google to win the battle (so to speak) is so that another one of Microsoft's grubby fingers can get burned whilst sticking it into another persons pie.

* "until more information comes in, which I am sure it will, I won't be recommending it to anyone out there."

Well, Amen to that! I am generally behind the upgrade curve, letting others take most of the risks for me. All my moves to Firefox, from the first installation to the 2.X and now 3.X versions, were done only after there was a large body of consistent knowledge available. And especially from your perspective, the last thing you need to do is add risk to your customers.

But that said, I am much more upbeat than Joe's blog entry might portray. The key will be exactly how they release Chrome as open source and the license under which they release it. If done in a manner similar to Firefox, then the entire world will be able to integrate--or easily obtain the integration of others--the same features into Firefox, Opera, and IE... and also to build out their own web-based applications that use those same protocols, functions, and APIs. If not, well, the world will reject yet another non-standard locked-down browser.

My own gut feeling is that Google feels relatively confident that they are able to stay ahead of the innovation curve. Just as they don't seem to mind people using Google search to get help for Microsoft Office vrs. Google Docs, they perhaps won't mind competing hosted web-based application providers.

But as you say, I also will step gingerly into the world of Google Chrome. And I definitely won't recommend it to any of our friends until it is proven in the court of world experience. The same as with IE 8 and Firefox 3 and nearly anything else that is new and in vulnerable position.

As for the term "OS", I don't think it's really important. Yes, it's not an OS as compared to Windows NT/2000/XP/Vista, Unix, Linux, and the like. But the lines are getting blurred and it's an accurate enough term to convey the message that it is providing a relatively general client-based platform to make web-hosted applications work much more like they were running natively on the client. And, heck, Microsoft DOS stood for "Disk Operating System" and yet it was not an OS, but rather a collection of interrupt handlers with a few bundled utilities. I guess that the layman can be told Chrome is an OS, just as they were told that DOS is an OS. Only we computer science types know--and care to know-- that it's not an OS!

Joe;"You should thank whatever deity you believe in (if any) for the Yahoo merger's collapse".
Agree!.
Will Chrome Dent Windows?
It's too early to give an opinion

-----------------
This reminds me of something the Mark Shuttleworth said. Someone asked him whether he thought Linux (Ubuntu and others) would be quickly winning terrain from Ms in the OS field. His answer was that he saw it as difficult because people are used to Windows (XP). But, if IT word moved of Desktop to Internet, then things would change and the answer should be ‘yes’. Google has always been betting on the Internet, on the development of computing on the Internet. Chrome is a step further in that direction. It is not an OS, but because of its stupend functionalities it is an interesting step in the right direction.

The biggest problem for Ms is that it cannot even compete in the Internet. Besides its low software quality and bad service, the world in general does not want to Ms on the Internet (being tired of its Monopoly).

I've played with Chrome all afternoon and I'm not impressed. I won't be coming back anytime soon either.

Specifically with Google in the driver's seat & their adsense keeping the bills paid, I somehow don't see an adblock plug-in or any variation related to it showing up in the Dev notes anytime soon.

I'm quite happy with Firefox & the functionality I can add or remove as I choose.

Nice try Google, but you're not there yet.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..."

http://code.google.com/chromium/

This browser is built on top of the Mozilla foundation, which means Firefox. Also it has taken a good look at what Apple Safari has, and Internet Explorer. They created a new Java Virtual Engine to, what Google believes to be, host the next generation Internet Applications. Furthermore it has a lot of Google Services integrated and attached to the browser.

Software plus Services
The reason why Google is entering the browser playing field is because the browser is the platform for attaching services. A few years ago I started the Software plus Services evangelism in the OEM division of Microsoft. Microsoft is a software company. Services = software so the logical evolution for Microsoft is to focus on services. Google is a media company. They sell ads based on information and services, but lack the experience of creating real software. Nevertheless they also recognize that providing just services is not enough to win the battle. As Microsoft has already transitioned to attach Services on top of the Software, Google is starting to attach Software to the Service.

Soccer VS American Football
On a blog that I read recently there was a comparison between Soccer and Football. Whereas soccer was defined as a samba-like playing game, American Football is a strategy, tactics and execution game. In the same blog Google was compared with playing soccer and Microsoft was playing American Football. Every service that Google puts on the market is in Beta, and they just wait and see if it will be a success. As of this moment the only service that they have created that is really successful is Search. Gmail is not doing bad, YouTube is an acquisition and Google Docs is barely used. Microsoft has an established base of software and services (Messenger, Hotmail, Spaces, Windows Live etc). Microsoft thinks, plans and execute like American Football.

Focus, Focus, Focus
Realistically a lot of people just don’t care which browser they are using. They will just use the one that is preloaded on the computer. Microsoft has on a strategic and execution level great partnerships with OEMs. If Microsoft can remain their focus and evangelize Internet Explorer 8 on every machine that is put on the market, in my opinion there is little to fear. Google will gain some market share, but little over Internet Explorer, more so over Firefox and Safari. In the long run, the techsavy users will see the flaws (and no doubt the security flaws, Firefox had last year twice as much security flaws than IE7), and will switch back to IE or Firefox. Google doesn’t have the same brand identity that Apple has. Google has to work to keep end users happy. I believe it will take several years before Google catches up with Microsoft in the software game, if they ever will…

Microsoft is pretty well positioned in the IT industry. Although Microsoft has to learn what selling ads is all about (and they are learning fast), Google has to learn what software development is all about. They create a new platform to host the next generation web applications, but they don’t have a developer community around their software. A platform for new technology is worth nothing if nobody uses that platform, developers and end-users. In my opinion, whether the Google browser is going to be a success, is all depended on Microsoft and their focus with OEM.
My advice: Microsoft don’t be afraid of what might happen, focus on what you do best. Think, plan and execute. Do your thing.

@Hugo, according to Secunia (secunia.com) Firefox had 15 advisories in 2007 while IE 7 had 17. Of which 13% remain unpatched in Firefox and 24% remain unpatched in IE. To my reckoning it seems IE had more, not less, flaws than Firefox and that to date more remain unpatched.

Hugo, that was a nice thoughtful post attempt, but in the first paragraph it is evident you simply don't even know the basics of this discussion. You claim to be a MSFT employee, perhaps you and your cohorts apparent confusion regarding the most elementary of facts is why MSFT has been stumbling badly in the browser wars in recent years.

1. Google Chrome is NOT "built on top of the Mozilla foundation, which means Firefox." It is based on WebKit, which is the rendering engine behind Safari. Gecko is what powers Firefox.

2. Google did NOT create "a new Java Virtual Engine" to host the next generation of Internet Apps. Google is runtime compiling JavaScript to make AJAX apps run faster. Java and JavaScript are two entirely different things. With all due respect, if you believe they are not, the "Software plus Services" division within MSFT is in more trouble than I thought.

I am inclined to agree somewhat with your point about Google still finding their way, but it sure sounds like you and MSFT are badly underestimating the tsunami shift in computing that is heading your way.

So this is how Google will cope with "offlined" web applications, build their own way into something that can operate web applications when not attached to the web. The embedding of gears can give them that allowing Web applications to be usable in the period before truly pervasive communications technology becomes available.

The key here will be getting it on to machines. As techies we were bound to try it but I know my Wife and parents would not even think about it any more than they would consider firefox, for them IE, s the web. Judging by the number of times I have to Uninstall the google toolbar though google may have a clandestine mechanism to achieve this via other app installs already in place. Chromes Simplicity is also very attractive to non technical Users so if it is tried it may stick.

All in all this is positive for All browsers and the web and we should see Some fun kick off!

Hey Dev - stop nitpicking!

That was great analysis, Hugo.

Mozilla/Gecko/Webkit/Trident - What does it matter!

Java/Javascript/AJAX/OS/Browser - They are all the same! Its just code at the end of the day... Users don't care. They all do roughly the same thing, so they can have the same name.

This is Web 2.0 forget your old skool definitions, lets mash it up for the future!

Where the heck is the HOME button?

@Hugo, I took more time to read your post and I was interested in the soccer vs American football comparison. I take it it is the one in BuzzMachine (www.buzzmachine.com /2008/08/22/ soccer-is-a-google-beta-football-is-a-microsoft-release/)

There are two key observations I see in that comparison. One is that soccer has tactics, strategy and execution. Balls don't go into the goal by themselves. The other is that Google and Microsoft share the same field. If a linebacker hits a soccer player the player is dead on the spot. Of course a fully loaded linebacker has to catch a lightly loaded soccer player for things to matter.

Imagine for a second a game between lightly geared rugby players and fully dressed American football players (I'm using rugby players because they too can use their hands to carry the ball and the ball is similar). Rugby players would be winning by a landslide. They're so light and nimble they'd easily outmaneuver their opponents (not to mention wear them out). Sure there would be a few dead by the end of the game, but they'd win by a landslide.

The desktop market is such that Microsoft can force players to come to the match dressed as they are (as American Football players) and play by the rules they set. Thus loose the "agile" advantage to the better equipped and trained "MS Team". The web on the other hand is a different ball game (no pun intended). It is a field anyone can come dressed as they please and play by the rules they please and Microsoft keeps coming fully dressed as American football players!!! (weight and gear being a good analogy for the strong software stack, tight integration and the my way or the highway mentality).

This is something I've repeated over and over again. Microsoft has to become more modular and open in their tools. Particularly their OS. Quit playing the first, second and third down game. With Vista your 4th and 32 on your 8 yard line. Windows 7 looks like your going to run it and hope you can hurdle it through 33 yards. Looks more like you're going to get sacked, again. Switch to soccer or rugby and get more agile once and for all.

That browser chart looks a bit awry...

Try this one which isn't based on guesswork...

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0

And as for IE - it is impossible to argue that it is the most proprietorial, diabolical, insecure browser ever, that even in it's next iteration can't catch up others.

Go Google, go Apple - open source will kill Microsoft.

Dev :"I am inclined to agree somewhat with your point about Google still finding their way, but it sure sounds like you and MSFT are badly underestimating the tsunami shift in computing that is heading your way."

I agree with you.

Thanks for the link, Jon T!

This supports what I heard in an interview this morning on NPR (National Public Radio). Microsoft Windows holds well over 90% of the desktop PC market, but Microsoft IE only holds about 70% of that market. Even with the full power of their monopoly stranglehold brought to bear, IE lags by approximately the percentage share of Firefox.

I think Dev and Marco have nailed it with their "tsunami shift in computing" reference.

Joe, i've resisted posting on your site lately because you seem to not mind that your readers are being juked but again I think your readers should be educated and since this is on-topic, i'm leaving it here.
--------------
(By Portuno Diamo)
As far as the Microsoft settlement goes I can be optimistic because the history with Microsoft settlements is very lucrative.

And then we have the Google "browser"... the very beginning of the first of Web operating systems. Google's Chrome is a beautiful container for what patents 744 and 521 do.

Microsoft's only hope to be able to compete with something like Chrome lies in their license for 744.

How much do you think that patent is worth to Microsoft?

(url removed)
Google aims for Microsoft's heart with the new browser

Kiruba Shankar / New Delhi September 04, 2008, 1:49 IST

"When I began to realise that it is in fact a real project, the enormity of consequences for us internet users slowly began to sink it. This is what many people call a ?Game Changer?."

(more at URL-sorry had to remove it)
-------------------------------
This version of Chrome is a minimalist version with a great deal of room for enhancement including parallel determinism - the kind of thing that would turn clustered processors connected by the web into supercomputers for the common user.

You've never demonstrated any ability to address any of these issues. All you can do is dribble your little one liner smurf lines.

Microsoft had better get their act together and learn to use 744 to the best of their little technical heart's abilities. Without it Sharepoint is toast.

So, how much do you think Microsoft wants Sharepoint to succeed against future enhanced versions of Chrome and many more like it to come? Without 744 Sharepoint will remain an expensive web server. It has to come out with distributable user interfaces and client-side processors (what Gears and patent 621 does).

Based on past history, settlements with Microsoft are very valuable and this one has such obvious key locations in Microsoft products. That much is easy to read from marketing information, from the patent language and VCSY marketing descriptions and from simple diagramming of Sharepoint, .Net, and Oslo architectures.

And those are only three Microsoft projects we know about. There are many more including Windows 7.
-----------------------------
If you'll look into the Google Chrome comic book explaining how the system works, you'll recognize some of thethemese from the 744 and 521 patents. I am saying Google's chrome is a beautiful container for what 744 and 521 can do.

Google has been at this for quite some time...curiously, letting the project leak shortly before 744 patent was granted in November 2004:

(url removed)
Google Envy Is Fomenting Search Wars
By JOHN MARKOFF

Published: October 18, 2004
Google is also rumored to be developing a Web browser as part of its strategy to defend itself against Microsoft, whose new Web search service will almost certainly be integrated into Internet Explorer.

"If you drive by the Google buildings in the evening," said a person who has detailed knowledge of the company's business, "the lights that are still on are the ones on the floor where they are working on the browser."

(more at URL)
----------------

You say "No thanks on Chrome, I prefer not to have big brother sit in my living room and watch everything I do. "

Corporations feel differently inside their own businesses.

What Chrome will grow into will be far superior to a monolithic OS like XP or Vista. With 744 and 521, Chrome can become any number of oeprating systems running in parallel sessions.

While much was said about Google's WebOS work in later 2006, Google stopped all discussion about their "WebOS" at the time VCSY sent the cease and desist to Microsoft in February 2007.

Don't believe it? Look it up. I wrote about it a great deal at the time.

I believe Google received a similar notice and complied.

Because you know so little about software construction, you're hopelessly unprepared for this entire discussion since you can't even imagine how multiple operational sessions in various tab containers can become much more powerful and useful than something like Vista or XP.

Read the comic book that introduces Chrome. The application building methods are echoes in both 744 and 521.

Did you know the 744 patent is an outgrowth of McAuley's work in online comics in the 1990's? I thought that was an interesting coincidence.

It's just as coincidental as Adobe use the codename "Apollo" for AIR, which echoes VCSY's Apollo smartcard system built with Emily/MLE which is 521 (I guess you overlooked the part Emily plays in the 521 patent).

If you don't realize 744 and 521 are so important, nobody can help your old-fashioned ignorance.

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=9436&mid=9472&tof=8&rt=2&frt=2&off=1&p=HTy_CyXAWsTY9v2MsJqtF_xizrjIqviFgAvskpFb.dCNW_2wgggWelw-

The fake I-Man's efforts to deceive the readers is very telling.

Hugo. I enjoyed reading your note. But I would say you are a bit blind-sided by the work you do. It's not all about the OEM, especially not today with the high bandwidth we have.

But at the core of the goog vs msft battle there is financial growth. they both need to tap into each other's cookie jars to help their dominance and therefore growth % nubmers so that wall street will reward them. Unfortunately this is what it boils down to.

Users/customers will only embrace a new paradigm if this adds value to what they do. Cloud changes the paradigm a bit (from desktop) but life is almost never black and white. It's mostly gray. So desktop functionality will still ahve its value and cloud will build on top of that. although they may have a bit of overlap, desktop and cloud are really addressing different computing needs. So google seems poised to add value in the cloud space because it wants to expand its dominance on the internet selling more ads which is what pays their bills. but they will eventually want a piece of the desktop pie and - gosh forbid - the corporate back end pie that NT so nicely dominates now (kinda what msft did to ibm way back when and took out novell as collateral damage...). Well, I am getting a bit ahead of schedule here relating to which direction goog development is headed for say the next decade (just look at the network develpment gurus goog hired away from msft, and don't forget who their ceo is...). Ultimately google aspires to become a dominant empire. obviously. But that's to say the least a long shot given the entrenched position of msft today.

But for now, with chrome goog is making an attemp to create an ecosystem (chrome=runtime+apis+thirdparty web apps) around the google paradigm. a more rich environment to better serve the google cash cow web advertising. and unlike the runtimes of the past which miserably failed because of the limitations of the extra layer, x challenges, etc, cloud makes things much more elegant because most of the stuff is done at the backend w/ powerful unix/nt/whatever servers.

in my view the challange for microsoft will be to effectively enter the internet media space because that's where growth lies for them. so they'll need to make the next versions of windows and explorer more natively embrace be cloud space. but it's not enough. they will need to figure out how to make money on the web. they have shown to lack the vision to do this. not just steve but also bill. the challange for goog is to become a software company with the credibility to provide solutions not only in a cloud (assuming they will manage that), but also on the desktop and corporate computing. but goog has many years of growth even if they don't tap into the classic computing space because the media ad market they have tapped into has very deep pockets. let's say msft has more of a sense of urgency. just look athe the msft stock price for the past 8/9 years. the good news is that now consumers of technology really will benefit from a birage of great stuff being developed not only by these two great companies, but by all of the third parties that will add value.

This is a notice to all commenters:

This afternoon I deleted some comments about VCSY, and I unpublished 22 comments believed to be from the Fake I-Man (based on the IP address). I have not removed comments from portuno as some commenters requested. I did remove links in some portuno comments pointing to blogs he wrote about VCSY.

There is no censorship at Microsoft Watch, but spam is deleted. The posts on VCSY are endless, and they should have stopped when the settlement was reached. Any future VCSY comments will be treated as spam and deleted. If they persist, the poster will be banned.

Douglas Taylor and Tom Berber asked for some respite from portuno. Again, I don't censor comments. If it were my choice--and it's not--there would be no anonymous commenting at Microsoft Watch. Douglas and Tom both identify themselves through links. Portuno does not. The weak often hide and from their secrecy attack those in the open.

Portuno is right when he says that I have his e-mail address. But that doesn't really identify who he is, although the information wasn't that hard for me to get. I strongly suggest that portuno clearly identify himself and his associations if he wants to attack the integrity of others.

As for the others, like Douglas and Tom, don't let portuno's insinuations and accusations bother you. He's looking for reaction, methinks. Why feed his need to bleed you?

I found the VCSY posts to be mildly assuming and somewhat annoying. I watched the banter with other commenters and portuno, who clearly sought reaction. Neither he nor either of the I-Mans is getting a reaction from me. I've stepped in because plenty enough time has passed since the VCSY settlement and enough regular commenters have requested action for me to do something. So I'm taking action and will step in again and again until all this nonsense stops.

I am posting this comment on the 10 most recent Microsoft Watch blog posts.

My thanks to all the regular commenters,

Joe