[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Brad Maybe because Thunderbird is just another half-hearted port that doesn't really get much Mac-specific love? It barely qualifies as a Mac app in my book, much like Firefox.

Ayup.

Tangent on Firefox: I am continually amazed how many Mac users favor Firefox. For a while I was convinced that it was mostly switchers, but I know a lot of Mac-lifers who have eschewed Safari.

I love Safari. Can someone explain to me why Firefox pulls so many Mac users away from Safari?** Every time I boot up Firefox I am astounded that people put up with a with a such a slow program with a crappy UI to boot. The amazing part is that Safari consumes a lot more resources than Firefox, but feels a lot faster. It's typically the other way around, but it's not unheard of, either. (Admittedly, this might be because I leave Safari open all the time and it's leaking memory. Safari is still harder on the CPU, though.)

Eh, Firefox's days are numbered. Google is about to spark the biggest browser war yet. Firefox will fade into obscurity and become the "power-user's" browser, which really means nobody cares about it. It is more than likely that if Chrome becomes popular enough, OEMs will preload it. (Chrome might be preloaded even though Firefox never was, since the Mozilla brand is very obscure when compared to Google.) There won't be a damn thing Microsoft can do about it since they already played that card, which was subsequently confiscated by the government. It'll come down to Safari and Chrome, and getting caught in crossfire between Apple and Google sounds like a fantastic way to die quickly and gruesomely.



** Extensions don't count. Most people don't use them.

[Partial]

Originally Posted by Kraetos Ayup. Tangent on Firefox: I am continually amazed how many Mac users favor Firefox. For a while I was convinced that it was mostly switchers, but I know a lot of Mac-lifers who have eschewed Safari. I love Safari. Can someone explain to me why Firefox pulls so many Mac users away from Safari?** Every time I boot up Firefox I am astounded that people put up with a with a such a slow program with a crappy UI to boot. The amazing part is that Safari consumes a lot more resources than Firefox, but feels a lot faster. It's typically the other way around, but it's not unheard of, either. (Admittedly, this might be because I leave Safari open all the time and it's leaking memory. Safari is still harder on the CPU, though.) Eh, Firefox's days are numbered. Google is about to spark the biggest browser war yet. Firefox will fade into obscurity and become the "power-user's" browser, which really means nobody cares about it. It is more than likely that if Chrome becomes popular enough, OEMs will preload it. (Chrome might be preloaded even though Firefox never was, since the Mozilla brand is very obscure when compared to Google.) There won't be a damn thing Microsoft can do about it since they already played that card, which was subsequently confiscated by the government. It'll come down to Safari and Chrome, and getting caught in crossfire between Apple and Google sounds like a fantastic way to die quickly and gruesomely. [/tangent]

You do development and you use Safari? When Safari gets extension support, then I'll consider it. It's useless for any sort of debugging.

Chrome? Overtake Firefox? They've got one heck of a long way to go. It's an open source world my friend.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by Partial You do development and you use Safari? When Safari gets extension support, then I'll consider it. It's useless for any sort of debugging. Chrome? Overtake Firefox? They've got one heck of a long way to go. It's an open source world my friend.

I think Chrome will overtake Firefox as well. How many oem deals has Firefox made? Google is going to get Chrome shipping on millions of new
PC. I've already read more than a few people state that once Chrome has Adblock they're moving over. Now that should be interesting hahahah Google blocking its own ads.

I think the magic bullet that Google has are it's online Google Docs and more. Once they begin to leverage that power and improve the performance and features via faster javascript they will be a force to be reckoned with.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Partial You do development and you use Safari? When Safari gets extension support, then I'll consider it. It's useless for any sort of debugging.

You've seen Safari's Web Inspector before (and formerly Drosera, which was effectively rolled into the Inspector), right?




Not completely useless.

[Partial]

I actually have not seen that, that is pretty nice.

[Partial]

Originally Posted by hmurchison I think Chrome will overtake Firefox as well. How many oem deals has Firefox made? Google is going to get Chrome shipping on millions of new PC. I've already read more than a few people state that once Chrome has Adblock they're moving over. Now that should be interesting hahahah Google blocking its own ads. I think the magic bullet that Google has are it's online Google Docs and more. Once they begin to leverage that power and improve the performance and features via faster javascript they will be a force to be reckoned with.

While I do agree that Google could do some very powerful things with the Google Docs, I don't think we'd see the benefit unless one is permanently logged in to their Google account, otherwise one would have a similar experience in FF (at least as I am envisioning it currently).

All of the browsers will continue to increase their javascript speed. Chrome was known for that right away when it came out, but I believe the Firefox beta that was out was equally fast if not faster. Mozilla has done a really nice job of improving their browser over time.

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Partial You do development and you use Safari? When Safari gets extension support, then I'll consider it. It's useless for any sort of debugging.

Did I say I do my development in Safari?

Also, what Brad said. It's far from useless. In fact, Safari Web Inspector does a fair number of things better than Firebug/Web Developer.

Chrome? Overtake Firefox? They've got one heck of a long way to go. It's an open source world my friend.

Yeah, that's why Linux was a roaring success.

Look, rather than reiterate Ronco Spray-On Usability in full, I'll give it to you in a nutshell:

Open Source applications almost always have bad interfaces. Even if they're passable, there's a better one out there somewhere.

Interface design is one of the single hardest aspects of software design. Interface design cannot be open- or out-sourced. The distributive and collaborative nature of open source makes for great developer-level software because it means the developers can be familiar with the code. But it works against end-user software because the user is blind to that advantage.

The disadvantage of the open-source model is crippling when it comes to the end user. A good interface cannot be designed by distributing the work across many programmers in many places, because distributing the work like that makes it very difficult to define and adhere to a set of unified guidelines, which is essential for a usable interface.

The vast majority of successful open source software is at the developer level, where the interface is designed for other programmers. The list of popular end-user open source software is:

- Firefox.

The popularity of open source software drops off fast. Is there any other end-user open source software out there that has 20% of its market? 10%? 5%?

Firefox, of course, is a fluke, made possible by the sheer awfulness of IE 6. You can not make the same argument for Ubuntu vs. Windows because there's a huge compatibility issue there. For people to be willing to give up Windows, there has to be far more practical advantages than Ubuntu provides.

Don't get me wrong, Ubuntu is great, and superior to Windows in almost every measure. If Mac were not an option I would be an Ubuntu user. But it will never overtake Windows as the dominant desktop OS, for a host of complicated reasons. One of them is, while it is more usable than Windows when taken as a whole, it is not better enough for people to give up what they're familiar with.

The open source community will continue to produce fantastic developer-end software. But Firefox was a fluke which may never happen again.

And yes, Chrome will almost certainly become the worlds dominant web browser. It's either Chrome or IE. Firefox and Safari never had and never will have a shot at dominance.

[Partial]

I love how you're making completely baseless speculation. For whats its worth, Linux IS the worlds fastest growing upgrading system.

I'm too lazy to look it up because I really don't care, but I'd bet that firefox is the fastest growing web browser as well.

With that said, the same problems that you claim to plague firefox will be prevalent in Chrome. Not only that, but Firefox has a HUGE headstart.

There is very little logic behind your words. Think about them closely and how they contradict the message you're trying to prove.

[Noel]

I love how this:

Originally Posted by Partial I love how you're making completely baseless speculation.

is followed by this:

Originally Posted by Partial I'm too lazy to look it up because I really don't care, but I'd bet...

and then by this:

Originally Posted by Partial There is very little logic behind your words. Think about them closely and how they contradict the message you're trying to prove.

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Partial I love how you're making completely baseless speculation. For whats its worth, Linux IS the worlds fastest growing upgrading system.

[citation needed]

Where are these mysterious users upgrading to Linux coming from?

They certainly aren't coming from Best Buy, where people don't even understand there's a difference between a "PC" and "Windows."

They're not coming from corporate America, which is resists new versions of Windows, much less an entirely different OS.

They're definitely not coming from Apple Stores.

Even if you're right, "fastest growing" is an awfully broad statement. Where is it growing? End users? Corporations? Governments? Programmers?

Unless you can show me that Linux is consuming a significant amount of end-user Windows market share, then your statement means something.

Good luck.

I'm too lazy to look it up because I really don't care, but I'd bet that firefox is the fastest growing web browser as well.

Yeah? And lets see what happens when Chrome leaves beta and Google starts marketing it. Google is going to spend more on marketing Chrome each month than Mozilla makes in a year. Google wouldn't have put out a browser if their goal was anything short of dominance.

With that said, the same problems that you claim to plague firefox will be prevalent in Chrome. Not only that, but Firefox has a HUGE headstart.

Claim to plague Firefox? That is, speed and UI?



Are you serious? Chrome is both the fastest and easiest-to-use browser in the history of browsers. And it hasn't even left beta. And now that it's left beta, Firefox is fucked.

There is very little logic behind your words. Think about them closely and how they contradict the message you're trying to prove.

I'll concede I'm not being logical when you can provide proof beyond a meaningless "fact" you haven't cited, a fact that isn't relevant since Chrome just left beta, and a statement that is the single most incorrect thing I've read all month.

[hmurchison]

http://www.google.com/chrome

It's out of beta and now Google will be looking for OEM deals.

http://www.newsoxy.com/google/article11515.html

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by hmurchison http://www.google.com/chrome It's out of beta and now Google will be looking for OEM deals. http://www.newsoxy.com/google/article11515.html

Saw that one coming. PC manufactures know that Microsoft is poison right now. If they can tell users they're shipping Chrome and not IE on those ugly little stickers they love to put on the wrist wrests, they will.

[Brad]

Note: if any of the above discussion seems disjointed, it's because this thread was split from I've Had It with Mail.app

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Brad Note: if any of the above discussion seems disjointed, it's because this thread was split from I've Had It with Mail.app

Yo dawg, I heard you like complaining about software so I put a thread in your thread so you can complain while you complain.


(sorry, couldn't help myself. I did start a thread in a thread)


P.S. I like how you remembered to grab my footnote

[Partial]

Originally Posted by Kraetos [citation needed] Where are these mysterious users upgrading to Linux coming from? They certainly aren't coming from Best Buy, where people don't even understand there's a difference between a "PC" and "Windows." They're not coming from corporate America, which is resists new versions of Windows, much less an entirely different OS. They're definitely not coming from Apple Stores. Even if you're right, "fastest growing" is an awfully broad statement. Where is it growing? End users? Corporations? Governments? Programmers? Unless you can show me that Linux is consuming a significant amount of end-user Windows market share, then your statement means something. Good luck.

Fastest Growing != largest market share. It's pretty hard to deny that linux is the fastest growing OS. The only other than is close is iPhone, and PSP. You can google it yourself. You're a big boy.

Yeah? And lets see what happens when Chrome leaves beta and Google starts marketing it. Google is going to spend more on marketing Chrome each month than Mozilla makes in a year. Google wouldn't have put out a browser if their goal was anything short of dominance.

Chrome did leave beta. How do you know what their goal is? Citation needed

But really, who knows. Competition is a good thing, and its in Google's best interest (perhaps not financial, but that doesn't coincide with their "don't be evil" philosophy anyway).

Money and marketing does not buy you guaranteed success. While I personally like Chrome, the average person has never heard of it.

Claim to plague Firefox? That is, speed and UI? Are you serious? Chrome is both the fastest and easiest-to-use browser in the history of browsers. And it hasn't even left beta. And now that it's left beta, Firefox is fucked.

You think its fucked. To this point there isn't any evidence to suggest that. Fastest? For now, maybe. Firefox has a new version coming out shortly. I'm sure it will overtake it. And since when were the browser rankings determined by speed? Otherwise why would IE have been number one!?!?!? Easiest to use? How is it any easier or more difficult than Firefox, IE, Safari? It's a web browser, not neurosurgery.

They don't even have a Mac version yet guy.

I'll concede I'm not being logical when you can provide proof beyond a meaningless "fact" you haven't cited, a fact that isn't relevant since Chrome just left beta, and a statement that is the single most incorrect thing I've read all month.

I'm not following this.

My point is this: Chrome is entering the contest as an underdog. Have you ever seen a google commercial on television? No, you haven't, so how exactly does Google intend to make Chrome a household name when it has taken Mozilla years and has finally settled into a nice niche. It's going to take a long time for Google to catch up in my opinion.

Until they have extension support, they won't win over the IT crowd. Until they win over the IT crowd, the IT crowd won't be recommending it to average joe who doesn't know a damn thing about computers.

It's got a long way to go. It certainly won't be happening any time soon, and there are certainly no guarantees that it will happen. I'd say it's less likely to establish dominance than it is more likely to.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Kraetos And lets see what happens when Chrome leaves beta...

Originally Posted by hmurchison http://www.google.com/chrome It's out of beta...

Until there's some trace of a Mac version, it's not "out of beta" in my book.

Besides, "beta" is (unfortunately) a completely arbitrary label these day. Google's Gmail is still "beta" after being out for four and a half years, fercryinoutloud.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Partial My point is this: Chrome is entering the contest as an underdog. Have you ever seen a google commercial on television? No, you haven't, so how exactly does Google intend to make Chrome a household name when it has taken Mozilla years and has finally settled into a nice niche. It's going to take a long time for Google to catch up in my opinion.

You mean a Google ad besides their Android/G1 campaign? Which I see way more often than I see iPhone commercials, btw.

[Partial]

Originally Posted by Ryan You mean a Google ad besides their Android/G1 campaign? Which I see way more often than I see iPhone commercials, btw.

Isn't that a T-Mobile ad?

I would be interested in knowing how much of a code base Chrome and mobile Chrome? (is that what is on G1) share?

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Partial Isn't that a T-Mobile ad? I would be interested in knowing how much of a code base Chrome and mobile Chrome? (is that what is on G1) share?

I don't know who's actually buying the ad time, but it's basically an ad for Google's integration with the phone.

http://androidcentral.com/tag/commercial/

[Is it 1981?]

Originally Posted by Partial Have you ever seen a google commercial on television? No, you haven't, so how exactly does Google intend to make Chrome a household name when it has taken Mozilla years and has finally settled into a nice niche.

We may not see Google ads on TV, but I'd say Google is, if not a household then at least a mainstream name, far more so than Firefox and Mozilla; a few surveys over the past few years don't seem to include Mozilla or Firefox in their results.

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Partial Fastest Growing != largest market share. It's pretty hard to deny that linux is the fastest growing OS. The only other than is close is iPhone, and PSP. You can google it yourself. You're a big boy.

....

I didn't say anything about overall market share. Every single comment I made was w/r/t growth.

Perhaps you misunderstood my comment "consuming a significant amount of end-user Windows market share," but I thought my phrasing and the context made it clear: consuming means "is incrementally taking from on an ongoing basis."

Oh, and I did Google "fastest growing OS" and the answer was Vista. That was only one forum post, though, and it wasn't mentioned anywhere else. But it makes sense to me. The results page was inundated with articles about how Linux is the fastest growing smartphone OS, but we're not talking about smartphones, were talking about desktops, which is why I'm going ignore your third sentence and assume you understand comparing desktop OS growth and smartphone OS growth is an apples-and-oranges comparison and therefore completely invalid.

Chrome did leave beta. How do you know what their goal is? Citation needed But really, who knows. Competition is a good thing, and its in Google's best interest (perhaps not financial, but that doesn't coincide with their "don't be evil" philosophy anyway). Money and marketing does not buy you guaranteed success. While I personally like Chrome, the average person has never heard of it. You think its fucked. To this point there isn't any evidence to suggest that. Fastest? For now, maybe. Firefox has a new version coming out shortly. I'm sure it will overtake it. And since when were the browser rankings determined by speed? Otherwise why would IE have been number one!?!?!? Easiest to use? How is it any easier or more difficult than Firefox, IE, Safari? It's a web browser, not neurosurgery. They don't even have a Mac version yet guy.

What else would their goal be? Why would Google release a web browser and then sit around with their asses in their chairs going "well guys it's good stuff but we're never gonna beat IE, are we?" You don't need to cite common sense.

"The average person has never heard of it." It's three months old.

You know what the best part about that comment is, though? In Chrome's first month, it consumed 1% of browser market share. Don't let the bizarrely negative tone of the article confuse you, the fact that a 4-week old browser had between 1-2% of the market is astonishing.

Look, this is about to get ugly. Google and Apple are billion-dollar companies who exclusively hire the best and the brightest. (I know, I've tried. ) Mozilla is a company that survives on the crumbs that Google leaves behind and has four full time employees.

The web is the future of computing. Your web browser is the door to that future. Google and Apple are not going to sit around and let Mozilla or Microsoft control that door. They have the resources and the talent to fight to fight nail, tooth and bone for it. Is this really a fight you think a miniscule company like Mozilla can stay in for very long?

Things are about to heat up. Speed is going to be a lot more important as JavaScript becomes more and more complicated. TraceMonkey is impressive but V8 is shipping. TraceMonkey is not. And honestly, advanced JavaScript is just the beginning.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but Safari and Chrome both use WebKit. Firefox and IE do not. This means that there is a tipping point where, once Chrome and Safari together comprise more marketshare than Firefox and IE combined, developers will utilize more and more of the advanced features that Apple is adding and will continue to add to WebKit, which IE and Gecko will have no access to until they implement it themselves, at which point WebKit will have moved on again. (Another safe bet: Google is about to become the second-largest contributor to the open source WebKit engine, behind Apple, and that's only because it's maintained by Apple in the first place.)

Lets not forget that "surviving on Google's crumbs" part. Google isn't about to yank 80% of Mozilla's income, because that's evil, and Google isn't evil. But if Firefox loses market share, Mozilla loses revenue. Google, Apple, and Microsoft don't have that problem.

Here's your problem: you're thinking in terms of now. Now is not what matters. Firefox is a decent browser for todays internet. The internet is going to become a whole lot more than it is, a whole lot faster than you think. You're assuming that the web will continue to be a useful extra where you can find information quickly, take a look at your address book, and maybe jot down a note or two. It's not.

Office suites have already moved to the internet. Photo editing. Instant messaging. This is just the beginning. What happens when 3D gaming makes the jump? Advanced photo editing? Video editing? Or, how about.... everything? Because that's where it's going. We haven't even begun to realize the full potential of the internet. Google and Apple are leading the charge from what the internet is to what it could be. Obviously they want control of the doors as well.

That's where your "It's a web browser, not neurosurgery" comment comes into play. As the things we do on the web become more complicated, the interfaces we use to interact with them will adapt out of necessity. More than technical proficiency, bad UI will be Firefox's death knell. As the web becomes more advanced, Firefox will try and throw everything and the kitchen sink into Firefox citing that its more powerful, in true OSS fashion. Meanwhile, Google and Apple will be making very, very careful design decisions about what goes into Chrome and Safari as more becomes available.

The only reason Firefox can keep up today is because IE is slowing everyone down. Once that shackle is gone Chrome and Safari will take off and Firefox will be left in the dust. Mozilla will stay in the fight as long as they can and I expect them to fight well. But in the long run there's simply no way that Mozilla can expect to fight Google and win, especially considering that Mozilla is completely dependent on Google in the first place. Firefox was doomed the second Chrome was announced.

I know I keep tossing around the phrase "Firefox will die" but thats mostly for emphasis: Firefox will live on, but their place in the browser market will be analogous to Linux's place in the desktop OS market. If you can call that life.

No, they don't have a Mac version yet. News flash: Mac users are less than 10% of computer users.

Google has their priorities straight. The Windows version is what matters in the here and now. The Windows version is going to have the easiest time attracting users because the dominant browser on the platform is so god-awful. The Mac and the Linux versions can wait.

Furthermore, the Mac and Linux versions have an additional hurdle: while Google has a clean slate to do whatever the hell they want interface-wise on Windows, the right way to do things on Mac and Linux is to follow the rules and use Cocoa and GTK+. This might not be the fastest or the cheapest way, but the right way is how Google does things, and doing it right today means they don't have to fuck with it in the future.

(This last paragraph is one that I'm not actually completely sure about; Google could be prepared to reinvent the wheel again for Mac and Linux, but I certainly hope they aren't. Creating a revolutionary and radically different UI on Windows is a great way to draw users away from the interface-ghetto that is Windows, but doing the same on a Mac is a great way to alienate Mac users. Even Mozilla knows this; just look at how valiantly they attempted to make Firefox 3 "fit in" in on the Mac. If Firefox extensions weren't completely dependent on XUL, they probably would've gone with Cocoa.)

I'm not following this. My point is this: Chrome is entering the contest as an underdog. Have you ever seen a google commercial on television? No, you haven't, so how exactly does Google intend to make Chrome a household name when it has taken Mozilla years and has finally settled into a nice niche. It's going to take a long time for Google to catch up in my opinion. Until they have extension support, they won't win over the IT crowd. Until they win over the IT crowd, the IT crowd won't be recommending it to average joe who doesn't know a damn thing about computers. It's got a long way to go. It certainly won't be happening any time soon, and there are certainly no guarantees that it will happen. I'd say it's less likely to establish dominance than it is more likely to.

Let's pretend it's 2004 and that I am you:

"My point is this: Firefox is entering the contest as an underdog. Have you ever seen a Mozilla commercial on television? No, you haven't, so how exactly does Mozilla intend to make Firefox a household name when it has taken Microsoft years and has finally completely dominate the market? It's going to take a long time for Mozilla to catch up in my opinion."

It's going to take Chome a fraction of the time it took Firefox to get where it is. The difference is, Chrome isn't going to stop at 25%.

Most users don't care about extensions. The IT crowd has next-to-no influence over what the average joe buys; if he did, we'd all be using Linux.

It has a long way to go. but it will happen sooner than you think. I don't see this ending in any other way than Chrome as the dominant browser, especially after Google convinces everyone to let them ship it as the default browser, something that Mozilla will never accomplish.

The OEMs will begin to ship Chrome. There's no doubt in my mind that if Firefox can make it to 25%, so can Chrome. If Chrome is at 25%, it cant be ignored. Finally, Microsoft is marketing poison right now. Whether or not Vista is good doesn't actually matter; everyone thinks it's bad and that isn't going to go away. Not only is there no reason to believe that Microsoft can ship Windows 7 before 2010, there isn't any reason to believe it's an improvement over Vista. On the other hand, Google is the tech industries golden boy. If Dell/HP/Acer/Lenovo can find a way cover up that Windows sticker with a Google sticker, they will. If one of them does it, the rest will follow.

Chrome hasn't reached the mainstream yet, so the majority of the people aware of Chrome are nerds. The same kind of nerds who embrace Linux. Nothing they've ever embraced has ever become as popular as Firefox. So they cling. But the fact is, end-user open source software rarely successful, and Firefox was a fluke made possible by truly pathetic competition. Now that the competition is heating up, Firefox will join the rest of it's open-source brethren in relative obscurity.

Arguing that Firefox can survive in the face of intense competition is the argument in defiance of normal software adoption patterns. The state of the web browser market is very abnormal for all the reasons I just cited. I am simply pointing out that things will return to normal.

[PB PM]

I don't think Chrome will do that well. It still has less than 2% of the market, which when it first came out there was a big surge to 2-3%, quickly followed by it going back down to less than 2%. Main reason I heard, no extensions, or additions. That was coming from people who I would never have thought would even know of such things.

[Robo]

I think Chrome will succeed.

Google wants to own the internet. That is their platform; everyone claiming that they're still working on Goobuntu or some other super secret OS is missing the point (I mean, they might be, but it's not really related to their core mission). Google doesn't want to replace Windows with Goobuntu, Google wants to replace all of the computing you do in Windows with computing you do in your web browser. They don't want to make a Google Office program, they want to make Google Docs online. That's where Google's been heading all along, and a browser is part of that.

[Dorian Gray]

Interesting article at The Register suggesting that the Firefox-Google relationship is getting tricky.

Personally I think it will be a long time, if ever, before Chrome overtakes Firefox. Not everything Google touches turns to gold. Firefox probably has more brand loyalty than any common browser. Everyone who uses Firefox had to make a real effort to do so, unlike most IE and Safari users.

[Gargoyle]

I don't think Chrome will overtake anything...

1. The rendering engine is webkit, so it will render pages pretty much inline with Safari. Hopefully anything Google discover in this respect they will put back into the webkit project.

2. I think it is more a proof of concept that javascript can be multi-threaded (to a degree) and to just push the envelope a bit. Safari, Firefox and probably even IE will significantly upgrade their javascript engines to match.

...at which point Chome will have served it's purpose, and it can be retired.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Gargoyle I think it is more a proof of concept that javascript can be multi-threaded (to a degree) and to just push the envelope a bit. Safari, Firefox and probably even IE will significantly upgrade their javascript engines to match. ...at which point Chome will have served it's purpose, and it can be retired.

Another reason for Chrome's existence is the integration of Google Gears. Gears may be available as an installable add-on for IE, Firefox, and Safari, but Chrome has it built-in.

There's also the matter of keeping Chrome as a mobile browser for Google's Android.

I'm sure there are more less obvious reasons I'm not recalling, too.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Brad I'm sure there are more less obvious reasons I'm not recalling, too.

You mean like making the world that much shinier? It's a good reason!

[PB PM]

How many people use Google Gears though?

[Brad]

Originally Posted by PB PM How many people use Google Gears though?

None that I know personally, but that doesn't mean it's not a part of Google's overarching strategy.

[Kraetos]

Originally Posted by Gargoyle 2. I think it is more a proof of concept that javascript can be multi-threaded (to a degree) and to just push the envelope a bit. Safari, Firefox and probably even IE will significantly upgrade their javascript engines to match. ...at which point Chome will have served it's purpose, and it can be retired.

So Google is going to release a browser, wait for everyone to steal one it's features, and then kill it off?