Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Chrome: the New Web Platform?

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the all-in-one dept.

Chrome 290

snydeq writes "The Chrome dev team is working toward a vision of Web apps that offers a clean break from traditional websites, writes Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister, in response to Google's new Field Guide for Web Applications. 'When you add it up, it starts to look as though, for all the noise Google makes about Web standards, Chrome is moving further and further apart from competing browsers, just by virtue of its technological advantages. In that sense, maybe Chrome isn't just a Web browser; maybe Chrome itself is the platform — or is becoming one.'"

cancel ×

290 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No meat to this story (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39094927)

First of all, this was submitted by someone from Infoworld, and the article is on Infoworld, so nice spam.

Second, web platforms are dead, and native apps that call web services are the new rage. It's just a better experience. Web platforms have been tried before since the 90s--see Java applets and ActiveX--and the experience is always poor. Nobody wants ChromeOS over iOS, Android, etc. Google has offered Native Client and Dart to compete performance-wise, but those are non-standard, Google-specific technologies (Dart as a language has been criticized pretty heavily on its own), and there's just something weird about shoving the web browser into the stack as a middle-man for no reason.

Third, and this will sound flamebait-ey so take it as personal opinion, but forgive me if I'm a little uncomfortable with a multi-billion dollar web advertising company with a history of privacy violations tracking everything I do at an OS level. It'd be like installing an operating system written by DoubleClick. I'd rather limit my data exposure to the occasional web search or Gmail message, thanks.

Re:No meat to this story (5, Insightful)

x1r8a3k (1170111) | more than 2 years ago | (#39094981)

It would be installing an operating system written by DoubleClick exactly. Look up who their parent company is.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095111)

Mind...blown.

I didn't even know Google had acquired DoubleClick. Yuck.

Re:No meat to this story (-1, Redundant)

idji (984038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095347)

whoosh!

Re:No meat to this story (5, Informative)

rreyelts (470154) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095043)

How can this be +5 insightful with less than 10 comments on the entire post? It turns out that if you do a search for the phrase "a multi-billion dollar web advertising company with a history of privacy violations", you'll discover this is just spam propped up by puppet accounts. Slashdot, you need to clean house.

Mod manipulation by GreatBunzinni, aka Rui Maciel (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095059)

GreatBunzinni [slashdot.org] , real name Rui Maciel, has been using anonymous posts [slashdot.org] to accuse almost 20 accounts of being employed by a PR firm to astroturf Slashdot, without any evidence. Using multiple puppet accounts, he mods up these anonymous posts while modding down the target accounts in order to censor their viewpoints off of Slashdot. GreatBunzinni accidentally outed himself [slashdot.org] as the anonymous troll who has been posting these accusations to every Slashdot story. For example, he wrote the same post almost verbatim, first using his logged-in account [slashdot.org] followed by an anonymous post [slashdot.org] days later. Note the use of the same script and wording.

It turns out GreatBunzinni is actually a 31-year-old C++/Java programmer from Almada, Portugal named Rui Maciel, with a civil engineering degree from Instituto Superior Técnico and a hobby working with electronics. He runs Kubuntu and is active on the KDE mailing list. Rui Maciel has accounts at OSNews, Launchpad, ProgrammersHeaven, the Ubuntu forums, and of course Slashdot.

Most of the users who Rui targets have done nothing more than commit the sin of praising a competitor to Google at some point in the past. Many of them are subscribers who often get the first post, since subscribers see stories earlier than non-subscribers. After one of Rui's accusations is posted as a reply, the original post receives a surge of "Troll" and "Overrated" moderations from his puppet accounts, while the accusatory post gets modded up. Often, additional anonymous posters suddenly pop up to give support, which also receive upmods. At the same time, accused users who defend themselves are modded down as "Offtopic."

Rui Maciel's contact information
Email: greatbunzinni@gmail.com [mailto] , greatbunzinni@engineer.com [mailto] , or rui.maciel@gmail.com [mailto]
IM: greatbunzinni@jabber.org [jabber] (the same Jabber account currently listed on his Slashdot account)
Blog: http://rui_maciel.users.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
Programming projects: http://www.programmersheaven.com/user/GreatBunzinni/contributions [programmersheaven.com]

Known puppet accounts used by Rui Maciel
Galestar [slashdot.org]
NicknameOne [slashdot.org]
Nicknamename [slashdot.org]
Nerdfest [slashdot.org]
Toonol [slashdot.org]
anonymov [slashdot.org]
chrb [slashdot.org]
flurp [slashdot.org]
forkfail [slashdot.org]
psiclops [slashdot.org]
rreyelts [slashdot.org]

tl;dr: An Ubuntu fan named Rui Maciel is actively trolling Slashdot with multiple moderator accounts in an attempt to filter dissenting opinions off the site.

LOOK MOM - I JUST WROTE AN AD FOR GOOGLE (3, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095315)

It was easy. I just took the 1995 hype about Netscape Navigator as an application platform, and changed the names.

I got the idea after watching the Java guys do this, in 1996.

Re:LOOK MOM - I JUST WROTE AN AD FOR GOOGLE (1)

NorbrookC (674063) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095505)

Exactly. The first thing I thought when seeing this story was "Where have I seen this before?" Oh, yeah, that was what Navigator was going to be.

Re:No meat to this story (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095077)

Google says:

No results found for "a multi-billion dollar web advertising company with a history of privacy violations"

Do you actually have a response to the points in the post, or are you just attacking the messenger?

Re:No meat to this story (1)

zidium (2550286) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095215)

Here's the link

http://www.itgawker.com/2012/02/20/we-are-not-responsible-for-them-in-any-way/ [itgawker.com]

It's an exact copy except for the first sentence.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095285)

That's some kind of content harvesting site. Every story there is taken from other blogs and comments. Giveaways: The article is dated after today, the nonsense spam link in the first sentence, and the Mad Libs last paragraph "Nicole has a passion for online technology and breaking news stories and loves writing about We Are Not Responsible For Them In Any Way"

Re:No meat to this story (2)

icebike (68054) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095097)

What does the number of comments have to do with modding +5?

You do realize that modders can't comment, don't you? There are many who prefer to mod over chirping in with a pointless comment.

And finally, why worry about mods on a thread that has no comments yet. All that indicates is SOME people with mod points are using them as new stories come out. There are heavy anti-google and heavy pro apple modders on /. that have dozens of accounts, and who jump quickly to mod stories and posts that fit their agenda. Give it some time and the true mod value will be attached as the rest of the community weighs in.

Personally, I would have modded it troll, because its based on total ignorance and hate, but that's just me.

Re:No meat to this story (4, Insightful)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095163)

You do realize that modders can't comment, don't you? There are many who prefer to mod over chirping in with a pointless comment.

But in that case at least wait until there are enough comments to mod.

Re:No meat to this story (5, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095193)

One is enough to mod.
    You are supposed to mod a comment based on its content, not score them on a curve like in grade school.

Re:No meat to this story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095197)

I used to be a modder like them until I took an arrow to the karma. First, the points went down to five points, then zero! Karma's still Excellent, though, so there must be a higher precision value behind it.

Re:No meat to this story (-1, Offtopic)

rreyelts (470154) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095115)

Ha, this is awesome. People should check out the sibling post accusing me of being a puppet account. (Just a quick look at my uid should be a pretty good idea I've been around for a while, but you can always actually read my post history). FWIW, here's just one example slashdot post about what I was describing. http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2068166&threshold=0&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=35710140 [slashdot.org] Seriously Slashdot, clear out the trolls.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095145)

Okay, the comment you're linking is from April 2011. You had to go back almost a year to find someone saying a phrase that, to be honest, isn't all that unique and has probably been uttered in some form a few times. I've seen others write similar statements, like a "multi-billion dollar advertising megacorp" or "a web advertising monopolist with a poor track record for privacy."

And besides that, let's assume the OP is the poster you're linking, and he's posting anonymously, and he's using a similar phrase he wrote nearly a year ago. So what? That's not against the rules. I have an account, yet I'm posting anonymously too...because this is off-topic.

Re:No meat to this story (2)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095117)

How can this be +5 insightful with less than 10 comments on the entire post? It turns out that if you do a search for the phrase "a multi-billion dollar web advertising company with a history of privacy violations", you'll discover this is just spam propped up by puppet accounts.

Yep. By his epithets ye shall know him. Perhaps "multi-billion dollar advertising company with..." is just bonch's version of "carthago delenda est".

Mod manipulation by GreatBunzinni, aka Rui Maciel (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095167)

GreatBunzinni [slashdot.org] , real name Rui Maciel, has been using anonymous posts [slashdot.org] to accuse almost 20 accounts of being employed by a PR firm to astroturf Slashdot, without any evidence. Using multiple puppet accounts, he mods up these anonymous posts while modding down the target accounts in order to censor their viewpoints off of Slashdot. GreatBunzinni accidentally outed himself [slashdot.org] as the anonymous troll who has been posting these accusations to every Slashdot story. For example, he wrote the same post almost verbatim, first using his logged-in account [slashdot.org] followed by an anonymous post [slashdot.org] days later. Note the use of the same script and wording.

It turns out GreatBunzinni is actually a 31-year-old C++/Java programmer from Almada, Portugal named Rui Maciel, with a civil engineering degree from Instituto Superior Técnico and a hobby working with electronics. He runs Kubuntu and is active on the KDE mailing list. Rui Maciel has accounts at OSNews, Launchpad, ProgrammersHeaven, the Ubuntu forums, and of course Slashdot.

Most of the users who Rui targets have done nothing more than commit the sin of praising a competitor to Google at some point in the past. Many of them are subscribers who often get the first post, since subscribers see stories earlier than non-subscribers. After one of Rui's accusations is posted as a reply, the original post receives a surge of "Troll" and "Overrated" moderations from his puppet accounts, while the accusatory post gets modded up. Often, additional anonymous posters suddenly pop up to give support, which also receive upmods. At the same time, accused users who defend themselves are modded down as "Offtopic."

Rui Maciel's contact information
Email: greatbunzinni@gmail.com [mailto] , greatbunzinni@engineer.com [mailto] , or rui.maciel@gmail.com [mailto]
IM: greatbunzinni@jabber.org [jabber] (the same Jabber account currently listed on his Slashdot account)
Blog: http://rui_maciel.users.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
Programming projects: http://www.programmersheaven.com/user/GreatBunzinni/contributions [programmersheaven.com]

Known puppet accounts used by Rui Maciel
Galestar [slashdot.org]
NicknameOne [slashdot.org]
Nicknamename [slashdot.org]
Nerdfest [slashdot.org]
Toonol [slashdot.org]
anonymov [slashdot.org]
chrb [slashdot.org]
flurp [slashdot.org]
forkfail [slashdot.org]
psiclops [slashdot.org]
rreyelts [slashdot.org]
russotto [slashdot.org]

tl;dr: An Ubuntu fan named Rui Maciel is actively trolling Slashdot with multiple moderator accounts in an attempt to filter dissenting opinions off the site.

Re:Mod manipulation by GreatBunzinni, aka Rui Maci (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095585)

Heh, I suspected the unreliability of that list and now I know. Thanks for confirming my opinion. Tell me.... are you employed by the PR department of Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, or are you just in it for the lulz?

Re:No meat to this story (3, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095219)

Soooo...speaking the truth is bad if it doesn't fit with your perception bubble? "All go to hell except cave 76! oh and Google!~ Rah!" please. Name a single thing the guy wrote that wasn't factual. Billion dollar web advertising company? simply look up their SEC filings and it says in black and white they make more than 96% of their income from ads, and they are a multi-billion dollar company, so check there. And Google having a history [redorbit.com] of privacy [washingtonpost.com] violations? [examiner.com] I would say that's a pretty big yes. So I'm sorry if his post breaks your perception bubble but truth is truth.

As for TFA give me a damned break, we've tried that crap over and over and over and over its sucked the big wet titty. ChromeOS is going exactly nowhere,service across the country is spotty so good luck if you have anything important due soon and your connection takes a big crapola, and finally the performance sucks. As another wrote the future is rich native apps that have the ability but not the mandatory requirement of web integration. This way you have the speed of native and can choose whether or not to use the cloud for syncing or backups or getting the latest data.

Re:No meat to this story (4, Funny)

jdogalt (961241) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095577)

if you do a search for the phrase "a multi-billion dollar web advertising company with a history of privacy violations", you'll discover ...

the part of my brain that contains my sense of irony just melted...

Re:No meat to this story (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095651)

Fuck you, cunt.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

bky1701 (979071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095803)

Same with Bonch. Constantly modded up right after posting. Meanwhile, there is apparently a mod blacklist. Slashdot has serious problems which the editors need to deal with, or the last few intelligent posters will depart...

Re:No meat to this story (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095069)

This is delicious.

Re:No meat to this story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095103)

Oh web platforms are dead....how did I just read that from a web platform? OMG does this mean I'm dead? Am I a http://bit.ly/yi4QA8?

Re:No meat to this story (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095113)

It'd be like installing an operating system written by DoubleClick.

You meaan Android? Nobody seems to mind.

Re:No meat to this story (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095165)

Actually, people are abandoning Android in droves. Google encourages free ad-supported apps, resulting in lower-quality third-party software. When a bunch of people's contracts were up last year, they switched to the iPhone 4S, which is how Apple ended the year with more U.S. marketshare than Android, so sayeth NPD.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095273)

Actually, people are abandoning Android in droves

Uh, really? Q4 2001 sales figures [androidauthority.com] show more than twice as many Android phones being sold in Q4 of 2010 than 2011. If people are abandoning the platform in droves, a lot more are flocking there to replace them.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095425)

more than twice as many Android phones being sold in Q4 of 2011 than 2010

FTFY.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095563)

Wow, a "FTFY" that was actually a fix and not just some snarky re-purposing of the original post. I don't think I've ever seen that happen before.

Re:No meat to this story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095427)

As much as I love my Android...

Many phones run Android, but aren't really on the same caliber as a high power Android or iPhone. Essentially, a call-and-text-only phone with a touchscreen.

While the Android devices sold doubled, how did the overall smartphone market increase? I believe their market share is starting to lose to both iOS and WindowsPhone.

Additionally, an Android user is much less likely to buy another Android phone than an iPhone user is to buy another iPhone, and in general Android users are much less satisfied. I don't have the source for this off hand, but I'm sure I could find it if necessary.

Like I said, I love my Android phone and wouldn't give it up for free iPhones for eternity, but I don't think Android is really ready for John Everyman yet.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

Captain Hook (923766) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095497)

I don't have the source for this off hand, but I'm sure I could find it if necessary.

I think it's necessary...

Re:No meat to this story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095559)

I just found a survey, but it has a tiny sample size.

89% retention rate for Apple
55% for Android.
http://gigaom.com/apple/iphone-owners-very-loyal-blackberry-not-so-much/ [gigaom.com]

So not the best data, but no one else seems to have done any research recently.

Re:No meat to this story (2, Informative)

MisterMidi (1119653) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095139)

It's just the continuation of web 2.0. Like it or not, there IS a distinction between traditional sites and web apps and I think it's a good idea to have some sort of standard or guidelines of how web apps should feel and behave. That's all Google did. The guide talks about using existing and new standards like HTML5, CSS3 and Javascript, being consistent and providing a good user experience. Nowhere does it say anything about Chrome-only or Google-only features. The InfoWorld article is just sensationalism.

Re:No meat to this story (2)

RDW (41497) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095355)

The InfoWorld article is just sensationalism.

That may be so, but at least one highly respected technology news source is reporting that the 'browser-neutral' web may 'soon become a thing of the past', and there's a serious risk that 'the standards-compliant Web, as we know it, will die' [slashdot.org] Can this be prevented?

Re:No meat to this story (1)

MisterMidi (1119653) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095745)

Have you actually read the guide? I did. Go read it and then tell me if InfoWorld draws the right conclusions. And that story you're linking to is from 11 years ago. Did it happen or was it prevented?

Re:No meat to this story (4, Insightful)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095173)

"Google has offered Native Client and Dart to compete performance-wise, but those are non-standard, Google-specific technologies..."

The conditions surrounding the use of these technologies are no different then SPDY, which is being adopted by Amazon and Mozilla, and is on its way to becoming standardized.

Comparing these to MS's contributions to the Internet (e.g. ActiveX and MSIE) is not appropriate - Google's technologies' are open for adoption by anyone and they have the habit of improving the Internet, not subverting it.

Re:No meat to this story (1)

Barbara, not Barbie (721478) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095389)

and there's just something weird about shoving the web browser into the stack as a middle-man for no reason

Oh, there's a reason, all right - the same one as offering Android for free - anything that will tie people into Google's ecosphere more close.y. That's a pretty good reason to break standard.

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish ... where have I heard that before?

Re:No meat to this story (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095591)

chrome is a piece of shit.. there is no way ill ever use it. google is evil, and like to data mine and hand over info to other evil people. Fuck that.. google can go screw themselves.

Mod manipulation by GreatBunzinni, aka Rui Maciel (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39094931)

GreatBunzinni [slashdot.org] , real name Rui Maciel, has been using anonymous posts [slashdot.org] to accuse almost 20 accounts of being employed by a PR firm to astroturf Slashdot, without any evidence. Using multiple puppet accounts, he mods up these anonymous posts while modding down the target accounts in order to censor their viewpoints off of Slashdot. GreatBunzinni accidentally outed himself [slashdot.org] as the anonymous troll who has been posting these accusations to every Slashdot story. For example, he wrote the same post almost verbatim, first using his logged-in account [slashdot.org] followed by an anonymous post [slashdot.org] days later. Note the use of the same script and wording.

It turns out GreatBunzinni is actually a 31-year-old C++/Java programmer from Almada, Portugal named Rui Maciel, with a civil engineering degree from Instituto Superior Técnico and a hobby working with electronics. He runs Kubuntu and is active on the KDE mailing list. Rui Maciel has accounts at OSNews, Launchpad, ProgrammersHeaven, the Ubuntu forums, and of course Slashdot.

Most of the users who Rui targets have done nothing more than commit the sin of praising a competitor to Google at some point in the past. Many of them are subscribers who often get the first post, since subscribers see stories earlier than non-subscribers. After one of Rui's accusations is posted as a reply, the original post receives a surge of "Troll" and "Overrated" moderations from his puppet accounts, while the accusatory post gets modded up. Often, additional anonymous posters suddenly pop up to give support, which also receive upmods. At the same time, accused users who defend themselves are modded down as "Offtopic."

Rui Maciel's contact information
Email: greatbunzinni@gmail.com [mailto] , greatbunzinni@engineer.com [mailto] , or rui.maciel@gmail.com [mailto]
IM: greatbunzinni@jabber.org [jabber] (the same Jabber account currently listed on his Slashdot account)
Blog: http://rui_maciel.users.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
Programming projects: http://www.programmersheaven.com/user/GreatBunzinni/contributions [programmersheaven.com]

Known puppet accounts used by Rui Maciel
Galestar [slashdot.org]
NicknameOne [slashdot.org]
Nicknamename [slashdot.org]
Nerdfest [slashdot.org]
Toonol [slashdot.org]
anonymov [slashdot.org]
chrb [slashdot.org]
flurp [slashdot.org]
forkfail [slashdot.org]
psiclops [slashdot.org]

tl;dr: An Ubuntu fan named Rui Maciel is actively trolling Slashdot with multiple moderator accounts in an attempt to filter dissenting opinions off the site.

Re:Mod manipulation by GreatBunzinni, aka Rui Maci (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095239)

Stop spamming this shit and get a life, fucker.

Re:Mod manipulation by GreatBunzinni, aka Rui Maci (1)

thebeige (2555996) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095761)

Agree 110%, fuck off!

E3 (4, Interesting)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#39094947)

Embrace, extend, extinguish. Or is there any other way this can be interpreted?

Re:E3 (2, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#39094993)

I don't think Google has the same kind of motivations that Microsoft did, though the final effects may be the same. Microsoft was about forcefully expanding their market presence to ensure success, while Google's is to provide free services in order to track more and more personal data and deliver more ads. For what it's worth, I doubt this initiative from Google to create their own web platform will be successful.

Re:E3 (4, Insightful)

houghi (78078) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095201)

Mod parent up (even tough I disagree with his point of view)

I don't think Google has the same kind of motivations that Microsoft did, though the final effects may be the same. Microsoft was about forcefully expanding their market presence to ensure success, while Google's is to provide free services in order to track more and more personal data and deliver more ads. For what it's worth, I doubt this initiative from Google to create their own web platform will be successful.

They are both companies. Their natural goal is to make as much money as possible. This will mean that they will be wanting to expand their market share. At some point this will happen with force.

Also: Google's thing is not to provide free service. Their goal is to sell ad space. The free service is just to lure the product they sell (the people using it) so they can sell more of it.

Re:E3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095235)

Also: Google's thing is not to provide free service. Their goal is to sell ad space. The free service is just to lure the product they sell (the people using it) so they can sell more of it.

That's what I was getting at with the harvesting of personal data, which is the reason for giving out free services. I understand that they're both companies trying to make money, but my point was that I disagree that Google is attempting to Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. Microsoft specifically did that in order to expand market dominance. Google is doing this because they want users on their advertising platform, and market dominance is just a side effect.

My comment was actually a slight defense of Google's motivations, but the moderators hate me so it doesn't matter.

- bonch

Re:E3 (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095681)

but my point was that I disagree that Google is attempting to Embrace, Extend, Extinguish

And my point is that it is. At least in the same way is it is Microsofts or any other company that is large enough.

Re:E3 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095727)

almost everything that google does to embrace and extend is open source. That is a huge difference from microsoft. in fact, if ms was open source in their plots, no one would have minded. Again, not everything is open source for google, just the areas where they are supposedly embracing,extending,extinguishing, so the argument that they are attempting this is pretty weak.

Re:E3 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095203)

why are you modded down as troll but the person you're replying to is modded insightful?

Re:E3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095457)

No, Googles motivation is, one browser to rule them all.

Was the idea in creating chrome, ever, anything other than that?

Google Chrome - How can I screw you over Platform (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39094949)

Google now a days has become a company that will do anything to screw their audiences. Sorry I am not believing anything they are trying to sell it for free.

Re:Google Chrome - How can I screw you over Platfo (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095259)

Hey, at least somebody finally wants to screw me!

Another 'standard' to contend with? (3, Funny)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39094963)

How about we all just stick with official standards and co-habitate?

Re:Another 'standard' to contend with? (3, Informative)

mspohr (589790) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095697)

If you will read the "Field Guide" you will discover that it is all based on HTML5 which is a standard that all browsers should support.

ie6 (2)

bobibleyboo (13303) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095025)

Yeah! Back to ie6..

Re:ie6 (4, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095149)

You know what is ironic?

IE 9 and 10 are fully open standards compliant with XAML the only semi proprietary thing in it for Metro hooks. Oddly I am considering going to IE 10 when it comes out because it is the the most standards compliant, secure, and best browser and I am afraid to get locked into an eco system.

I feel I just walked into the twilight for even saying this! But I feel it is exactly 10 years ago all over again with IE 6 and that fear of the web being closed off. Those were some dark days.

Companies like Apple have proved that once they are in a dominate position can quickly turn into the bad guys. 10 years ago I never would have imagined Apple doing anything as crazy as they are today. Google just might pull it off as IE and FF usage is declining.

Yes this is all very nice (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095033)

And we can all imagine a future where everything is on the cloud and that.

But I've already seen a couple of cloud services go and take all my acquired know-how with them (and one time, a chunk of my workflow).

Has anyone here tried using grooveshark lately? Notice how it works like shit and there's not a thing you can do about it?

Well, there's web apps for you.

I like it (4, Interesting)

Lussarn (105276) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095035)

It's pretty obvious Google are trying to make a "web platform" with Dart and NaCL. Most people spend a lot of time using the web, probably most of the time in front of the computer is web-time. When I use the web, which is a lot I want a better experience, I want native speed, I want real apps and games delivered on the web. If Google can give me that, more power to them. So far their technologies is open source, so I see little wrong from their doings. I don't like installing crap on my computer, phone or "pad", if apps can be delivered over the web, all the better.

Seeing the web as a glorified publishing tool as it is today is old school. Google should have WOW ported to NaCL, that would give it a boost.

The Answer is Simple: No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095037)

The only people who will fall for this are clueless CEOs who still have their heads in the cloud.

What is wrong with traditional webpages? (4, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095079)

Nothing that I can see. Lean and serves the purpose very well. Just as useful as paper and as easy to handle.

Of course there are always those that want to blink and animate and visually scream at you in order to capture your attention. That is something traditional webpages do not do or do not do well, and that is actually one of their advantages, as really the only purpose this serves is advertising. Personally, I have blocked any animated add for years now, and the web has a cleaner, calmer and far more pleasant look to me because of it. (Blocking is via Opera integrated content-blocker.) For me, the web is a library, and the clean look of wikipedia the ideal. I do not want another wannabe television surrogate. I have dropped TV more than 10 years ago, because it became intolerable.

This angle would also explain why Google wants to break away from it: Their main business is wasting peoples time, i.e. serving them ads. (Which is, in itself pretty evil, all things considered. But hey, nobody believes the "don't be evil" mantra anyways today.) This also includes getting as much statistical data as they can. Both the serving and the snooping works far better when you leave traditional webpages behind.

Re:What is wrong with traditional webpages? (2)

jader3rd (2222716) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095367)

Their main business is wasting peoples time, i.e. serving them ads.

I don't see that. Googles main business is providing relevant search results. The result of that being that peoples time is not wasted. Many find Googles search results to be productivity boosters. They make money by monetizing search results, but that will only work so long as the search results are relevant and don't waste peoples time.

Re:What is wrong with traditional webpages? (0)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095555)

the parent was right and you are wrong.

they are NOT in the business of providing search. that's NOT a business. advertising IS a business. that is how they make over 90% of their income. search is just the candy to get your eyeballs to their site.

there is a distinction. not sure if you are avoiding this because of fandom to google or if you don't believe that they are first and foremost an advertising company.

like darren in bewitched, if you are having trouble picturing an ad-man. except scale it to the modern time (give him jeans and sandals instead of a suit and tie).

People are so short-sighted (4, Insightful)

DavidinAla (639952) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095085)

People who worship Google as a paragon of virtue are no smarter than people who worship any other company, whether it's Apple of Microsoft or Red Hat or whoever. Every company's agenda is to compete and win, gaining power and making money. I have no problem with that. That's just the way the market works. The problem comes when gullible people believe a company's PR rhetoric about peace, love and freedom -- or whatever they're selling that day. Google isn't your friend. Google is a huge corporation that provides services in its effort to win more dollars in the long run. Those who think that Google is doing "open" things out of the goodness of their hearts in order to make the world a better place are either stupid or naive. They're a huge company that's competing to own as much as it can. If you like its services, use them. But understand this. When you are using "free" services, the company is making money some other way -- and it's almost always the case that YOU have become the product that they're selling to someone else. If that's OK with you, fine. But you need to understand reality instead of thinking you're getting something free. You pay in one way or another. With Google, you pay by giving up your information and privacy. But that's your choice.

Re:People are so short-sighted (1)

Nethead (1563) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095683)

The only company I worship anymore is the Bell System. They invented the transistor and wired a nation. They are dead and gone and can't break my heart. (Looking at you HP and Motorola.)

Hello - WebKit? JavaScript? (5, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095091)

Last I checked, Google didn't really control the development of WebKit, and JavaScript is based on standards - so unless there's evidence Chrome intends to start down the old proprietay-extensions path Microsoft blazed 10-15 years ago with Internet Explorer, I'm not sure how "web apps" became synonymous with "Chrome as an exclusive platform".

Now - as the article points out - Google has proposed some ideas (e.g. Dart) that break from the past; but 1) as far as I can tell, they haven't tried to lock others out, and 2) there's currently no evidence these new ideas will ever gain any real-world traction (actually, #2 is probably the more important point by far). Many of us are old enough to remember the pain Microsoft's proprietary browser caused - and most of us will steer clear of anything that looks like an attempt to bring back that model.

Re:Hello - WebKit? JavaScript? (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095127)

You mean blazed by Netscape, right?

Re:Hello - WebKit? JavaScript? (5, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095249)

Google has proprietary CSS and Javascript as "enchancements". Yes webkit is open source but the CSS 3 implementations are not w3c standards. THey propose replacing HTTP with SPDY and already violate RFC implementations of http that can flood routers that are not configured properly in order to make it appear faster. Now everyone is doing it.

To me Chrome feels a lot like IE 5 or 5.5 where cool AJAX was introduced and IE at the time was a great browser that was faster and sleeker. However, proprietarness crept in at those releases just like it is with Chrome.

IE did its work in the corporate market with tie in. Chrome is doing it in the consumer market. Oddly, IE 10 is one of the most standards compliant browsers that is being developed. It is the total opposite of 10 years ago but Chrome will be stuck with many webmasters a decade from now who will wine like they do today with supporting IE 6.

Re:Hello - WebKit? JavaScript? (1)

oever (233119) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095381)

Here's an interesting blog [robertnyman.com] by a mozilla developer on the subject of the -webkit prefix.
Basically he is reminding people that the extensions should move into W3.

Re:Hello - WebKit? JavaScript? (1)

kangsterizer (1698322) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095321)

Err all the html apps you get on the chrome store are, chrome only.
Stuff like gmail offline storage (reading emails offline) only works on chrome, despite the offline storage works on other browsers.
NaCl of course only works on Chrome.
It goes on and on.

Of course one could take Chrome and push it into their browser to be compatible, since most of it is open source, right? Well that's one of the point of the article actually: Google becoming the platform.

Ive been useing Crome on Ubuntoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095093)

But Google analytics to track http://Lenny.com but it doesn't work properly I have to switch back to windows to see the charts.
I updated Flash but it still won't work
any suggestions?

Chrome is the new Internet Explorer . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095101)

. . . and Google is using the same old monopolistic devices to sell it.

Been tried before (1)

perlchild (582235) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095107)

Starting a real web platform's been tried before(netscape)
Its much harder than it looks, and ultimately, we're protected by those firms still using ie6 in this day and age. They slow down adoption enough for people to breathe and smell the roses.
At the end of the day the relationship between user, platform builder and 3 rd party dev has(so far) always been much more contentious than expected, and usually to the detriment of anyone but the app devs

Oh Chrome is Becoming a Thing? (0)

Elbow Macaroni (315256) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095121)

Oh Chrome is Becoming a Thing? Bitch Please. Tell that to all the IE users. Here's a thing: THING [bit.ly]

Chrome Rulz (1)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095137)

I have two laptops. A MacBook Pro with an Ubuntu partition, and Samsung Chromebook, I really like both. Many here comment negatively about Chromebooks and my guess it is mainly those that do not won them. I use my MacBook in reality as a desktop, and when I travel I PREFER the Chromebook. I would like to see a Chrome tablet, and would prefer that to an iOS or Android platform for the tasks tablets do. Until you use a Chromebook in real life, and see most of the negative " can't do anything without internet access " are over blown, don't knock it.

What technical advantages? (4, Interesting)

roca (43122) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095155)

Almost everything in the "Field Guide" is supported across browsers --- which is good and proper, but it's not pointing the way to Chrome-only applications like the Infoworld article suggests.

Apparently in the Infoworld article, Chrome's "technical advantages" are NaCl and Dart (not mentioned in the "Field Guide"). NaCl is bad for the Web in multiple ways. It ties Web apps to specific processor architectures. (PNaCl is going nowhere because LLVM bitcode is not actually architecture-independent.) Worse, it creates a huge new set of Web APIs ("Pepper") for NaCl applications that mostly duplicate the functionality of the standards-based APIs we already have. This is a lot of unnecessary bloat, complexity and attack surface, plus a lot of extra standards work that would have to be done if NaCl were to be come a real cross-browser standard (which it won't, because no other browser vendor has shown interest in implementing it). The performance advantages of NaCl are overrated; C-to-JS compilers like Emscripten are rapidly improving, the JS language and implementations are rapidly improving, and for a lot of modern apps you want to be offloading to the GPU anyway.

Dart is unnecessary and will simply be overtaken by improvements to Javascript.

Re:What technical advantages? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095423)

Is the Field Guide actually a real book? If so then they should fire their proof readers.

Re:What technical advantages? (1)

Tanaka (37812) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095619)

I dont really like being forced into using JavaScript. If NaCl would become a standard across browsers, then we would have an explosion in new developer languages and tools to develop content. Why limit ourselves?

Re:What technical advantages? (1)

SiMac (409541) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095791)

If NaCl would become a standard across browsers, then we would also have an explosion in new, proprietary, closed-source web libraries and applications that work only on certain platforms. The current state of the web forces just about everything to be open source and work everywhere. This is a good thing!

On top of this, if you are doing something so processor-intensive that empscripten or a transpiler isn't satisfactory, then you probably shouldn't be doing it in a web browser. NaCl isn't platform-independent, and PNaCl isn't any less of a hack than emscripten, just a bit faster.

Google would certainly like to (1)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095181)

The goal of Google is to move everything into the cloud, which is their domain. But they are not stupid, and while they are certainly trying, they won't force stuff like that when it doesn't work. So while Google will certainly try to make Chrome a new platform, whether it becomes one or not doesn't depend only on them.

Apps are the past. (5, Interesting)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095241)

Apps are not the future. They are the past.

Webapps or just web pages, as we used to call them, are the future of software. You just enter an address or click a link and you get to the most up to date "app". No installation, no updates, no permissions, no specific OS or hardware necessary. It works everywhere by everyone and all the time with no hassles.

The reason apps made a comeback is because you can charge for apps. An app is a defined thing and an installation is a chargeable privilege. So thank Apple and all the me-too followers for burdening us with software deployment and management just as we were about to escape those unnecessary activities.

Apps as platform is not driven by mobile OSes, browsers or other modern technology. It is driven by capitalism.

Re:Apps are the past. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095403)

Coming from a company who said no to apps and went all in on their mobile website, only to have to go back and create apps because our users demanded them, I'm not sure if you are right. As far as we are concerned the customer is always right and the bottom line is that customers want to run local apps.

Re:Apps are the past. (1)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095507)

See my other reply [slashdot.org] .

Re:Apps are the past. (3, Insightful)

jader3rd (2222716) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095411)

The reason apps made a comeback is because you can charge for apps.

I don't think that's it. I think apps made a comeback because there were fancy new devices which were a different form factor which didn't match the paradigm used by most websites. Company's wanted a good experience and found it easier to provide that experience by creating an app, having access to OS api's, than by creating a version of the website that worked well with the hand held, touch, form factor. Plus, many consumers only look for a companies app, they don't consider there might be a decent handheld website experience.

Re:Apps are the past. (3, Insightful)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095495)

Webpages had to evolve to small form factor and become "richer", which is what's happening now with HTML5 and better CSS definitions. Unfortunately, that didn't happen fast enough, so obviously the native approach gained traction. It's the low-hanging-fruit coupled with greed. Now, I'm not saying native apps were a mistake. I'm saying it's not something to strive for in the future.

Re:Apps are the past. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095539)

Sometimes you are not connected.
But there are enough free and open source software.

I think Chorme OS + Android, as future mobile computers will have will change a lot the scene.

You can plug - or wireless plug - your phone to a keyb, mice and a monitor or TV now and run Ubuntu, Arch or Fedora via VNC, in future Android 5, you will not need to be a geek, you will have Chrome OS, and with a little bit of geek you will be able to install GNU apps, from GIMP & LibreOffice to Quake Live.

Linux desktop X Windows will begin to raise from our pockets. And after X Windows it came Wayland. But that is another chapter.

Re:Apps are the past. (1)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095613)

Connectivity is not a problem with caching, local storage, and offline logic. Besides, we're heading towards a world where internet connectivity is pretty much ubiquitous. Even if you're on a plane, riding a train through a tunnel, hiking in the middle on nowhere or on the high seas.

Re:Apps are the past. (1)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095731)

Connectivity is not a problem with caching, local storage, and offline logic.

Which means you're basically writing an app that is installed (sorry, cached) via accessing a link rather than clicking an "install" button on a webstore. Not much difference between a cached, fully-offline-capable webapp and an actual app. Yes,w ebapps get the latest version each time you visit the page - but then, these days app auto-updates are pretty much par for the course as well.

Besides, we're heading towards a world where internet connectivity is pretty much ubiquitous. Even if you're on a plane, riding a train through a tunnel, hiking in the middle on nowhere or on the high seas.

Hell no. Ok, we might be heading there, but its still far, far off. I still hit black spots roaming around a suburb within my local metro area. Granted, that's because my provider sucks, and the only decent one is twice the price, but I still prefer local-running apps for that reason.

In addition, webapps can be pulled at any time by their maker. I don't want my apps just vanishing off my phone because someone's decided it's too much of a hassle to keep supporting a legacy app.

Re:Apps are the past. (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095757)

It works everywhere by everyone and all the time with no hassles.

So long as you have an internet connection.

Re:Apps are the past. (1)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095797)

See my other reply in this thread.

Welcome to SlashdotOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095251)

Imagine being able to do all your work in the form of Slashdot discussions. With SlashdotML, Slashdotscript, SlashdotOS and libSlashdot. We even have a javascript-to-slashdotscript in the works. Get your Slashdotbook and Slashdotpad today.

Re:Welcome to SlashdotOS (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095341)


SlashdotOS terminal
Kernel version 1.0.1
login: anonc
pass: ****

You have logged in: valid commands are post, get, mod, newuser, submit, troll, goatse, friend, foe, journal, shillpost
anonc@slashdot$ post -storyid=1917220 -parentid=390905251 -message="fp from slashdotOS"
enter captcha: depicts

SlashdotOS: Your comment has been posted.

anonc@slashdot$ troll -user=johnkatz
SlashdotOS: Error, you can't troll the trolls.

anonc@slashdot$ newuser -name=hotgrits
SlashdotOS: Error, username already taken, Slashdot will now self destruct.

You have been logged out, Windows Vista being reinstalled.

Common prediction (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095325)

This is a pretty common prediction. I remember back in the 90s IE and Netscape were going to be the new application platform. Five years ago there were claims Firefox was going to be its own platform. Now Google is going to make Chrome the new platform? No, it never works out that way. Locally running apps calling web services is certainly possible, but the browser isn't (and hasn't been) a good platform for application development.

Browser as Platform - again (4, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095429)

They said that 10 years ago. The browser was to break the MS monopoly, obsolete the OS, really soon now everything would be running in the browser, yada, yada, yada.

Every few years, someone digs up a dead horse and runs it through town again.

Re:Browser as Platform - again (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095715)

"They said that 10 years ago. The browser was to break the MS monopoly, obsolete the OS, really soon now everything would be running in the browser, yada, yada, yada.

Every few years, someone digs up a dead horse and runs it through town again."

You mean like salesforce.com, SAP, Google Docs, Gmail, Office 365, Iphone apps?

Re:Browser as Platform - again (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095729)

But every time the dead horse is run through the town, the town has changed and the horse is becoming a little less dead than before. Sit down it might come as a big shock to you. MS is no longer having the strangle hold monopoly. Don't get me wrong, it is still the king in desktops and corporate office application markets. But the town has expanded so much in the tablet, mobile phone arena, that the original fiefdom of MS has shrunk in percentage, even though it has expanded in size!

The iPhone is the new walled garden proprietary Microsoft. Android is the linux barbarian at the gate.

The horse is alive and well. (1)

earls (1367951) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095741)

The reason it went away "10 years ago" was due to bandwidth - now that the bandwidth is here, we're ready to move forward. The web platform and can will deliver on it's the promises - it's already making significant waves

Oh boy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39095711)

So I'll be able to control my my MIDI synthesizer in real-time? And I won't even have to have an OS? Smoke that Obama gold crack cocaine my friend. Keep smoking it.

Tracking (1)

Corson (746347) | more than 2 years ago | (#39095779)

Let us not forget that Google is _the_ corporation that makes its money by knowing as much as possible of what users (and that includes you) do on the Web. It is their business model.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>