Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Preston Gralla's picture
Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Chrome 1.0: Google's biggest blunder yet

Google's releasing the not-yet-baked Chrome as 1.0, rather than continuing to develop it as a beta, is the company's biggest blunder yet. It's also a disturbing indication that the company has started to emphasize marketing over technology --- always the first sign of a company in decline.

Put simply, Chrome isn't ready for prime-time. By no stretch should it be considered a finished product. It's not that Chrome is buggy --- it's that the browser is simply not done yet.

What's missing? Start off with an RSS reader. Both Firefox and Internet Explorer have one --- Chrome doesn't. Or look at what happens when you find a file online, such as a PowerPoint presentation. Both Firefox and Internet Explorer give you the option of reading the file or downloading it. Chrome only lets you download it.

Then there's the application shortcut feature, which lets you use Chrome to run Web-based applications so that they look and function much like desktop applications. Great idea, but in practice, it leaves a lot to be desired. Depending on what Web-based application you use, it works differently. In Gmail, when you click a mail message, it opens directly inside the window. But in Google Docs, when you click on a document, the new document opens in a new browser instance, including the normal browser interface.

The beta of Chrome had this problem, and it still hasn't been fixed. It's not part of what I'd call a 1.0 release.

In addition, some users have said the 1.0 release simply isn't stable, according to Google Chrome ditches beta label in Computerworld.

Google also doesn't yet have the add-in architecture that Firefox has. Google says it's working on it, which should mean beta of the browser, rather than final release.

So why did Google rush Chrome into final release after only three months, even when some of its software, such as Gmail, is far more feature-rich and stable and has undergone several years of testing?

In a word, marketing. Google wants to make deals with PC makers so that Chrome will be the default browsers on their PCs. It can't do that with a beta label. So it simply called Chrome ready for release.

Google has built its reputation and business on launching the best technology. Its search is far superior to anyone else's, which is why it so quickly dominated the search market.

That's why it's so disconcerting to see a company built on great technology compromise like it has in Chrome. Marketing, for the first time, trumped technology. And that may be a bad sign of things to come.

What People Are Saying

Chrome is as ready as IE

I've had 10 years of buggy IE and you tell me Chrome isn't ready. Don't you remember the YEARS of IE 5 5.5 and 6 and finally a version 7 that comes close to internet standards.

IE has so many holes in it they should should call it Microsoft Cheddar Cheese Browser.

As soon as MS is seriously threatened, they start to clean up their act a for awhile. We will never have stable computing/browsing until there is equal parity in consumer usage. The sooner the better.

Since when does # of Features = Stability?

It looks like everyone that is complaining about this release is doing so because the browser doesn't contain the features they would like it to have. I have been using Chrome since it's initial release both at home and at work and I have yet to see it crash on any page.

Preston, even in your article you claim, "It's not that Chrome is buggy --- it's that the browser is simply not done yet".

Well tell me this...what browser IS 'done'? Are the developers of IE and FF sitting around twiddling their thumbs? Or are they constantly working to add more features to their browsers?

Let's look at this another way. My car does not have power windows, power locks or even a button to pop the trunk open. Most cars do, especially 2005 models like mine is. Does this mean my car is incomplete because it does not have these features and most do?

Features are a luxury. Yes it's nice to have them but they are not necessary to have a complete browser. Especially if the browser does so many other things better and faster than it's competition.

I think the only blunder to take place here is Preston Gralla producing an article about something he obviously doesn't understand.

Bloggers and RSS

I think it is funny that most every blogger I have seen that calls Chrome lacking in features first mention RSS, a feature that is used by less than 10% of internet users. It is just that it is big in their niche so they whine about it.

Would it be nice to have one sure. Would it be better they spend most of their development on security and the things every user does, I think so. Minor features will probably come.

Another note: work/excel in browser is a plug in not part of the browser.

Not often I agree with Preston but this time yes.

The big blunder here by Google is not the release of Chrome 1.0 but Chrome period. We thought about trying Chrome but as soon as we found out that it all goes through Google, NFW. WTF was Google thinking?

It seems feature complete to

It seems feature complete to me. Not sure why anyone would want their browser to also be an RSS reader. That seems to be the point of Chrome, ditch the stuff we don't need, let each app does what it does best. Want an RSS reader, go get the one you like best, don't suffer with what's built into the browser.

Wish the website compatibility was a little better though.

Chrome is just enough for 1.0 - more is on its way...

I've been using Chrome from its debut, and I really like it. It's fast, it's stable, and I can see that Google team is constantly working on it. Most importantly though, it integrates seamlessly with other Google Apps. Don't forget, Chrome in its 1.0 does much better than any other browser with the same version number. Don't you think so?

It's not that bad

It's definitely a little early for a 1.0 but chrome definitely has the potential to be right up there with IE and Firefox so a little marketing would help

Google Chrome

1) What kind of a program that doesn't tell you where it installed.

2) Bypassing UAC under Vista very unwise.

3) Now hackers have a new best friend.

You seem to be overestimating what it is doing

It isn't really installing a program. They are web pages/apps that run with all the restrictions of a web page/app in a browser for safety. It is much closer to having a shortcut on your desktop to a website than installing a desktop application. Hackers can not do anything that they could not do the first time you visited the page.

windows 1.0? who said

windows 1.0? who said anything about windows 1.0? You have no better comment to make but chuck in a reference to software that was released in November 1985?

Wow.