Shark Bait

Knowledge Centers

Operating Systems

Networking & Internet

Mobile & Wireless

Security

Storage

Business Intelligence

Servers & Data Center

Computerworld Reports

Industry

See your link here

Preston Gralla

Seeing Through Windows

Why Chrome could be Google's worst nightmare

15 comments

TAGS:Chrome, Google
IT TOPICS:Desktop Applications, E-Business & Web 2.0, Internet, Operating Systems, Software, Windows & Microsoft

Lost in all the hype surrounding Google's launch of Chrome is this: Chrome could be the worst thing that ever happened to Google, bogging it down in hardware development work, incurring the wrath of PC users who blame the company for hardware woes, and causing the company to lose focus on its main business.

To understand why, take a look at Microsoft's problems with hardware. Unlike Apple, Microsoft doesn't have the luxury of tying its operating system directly to hardware. Windows has to work with countless computers, peripherals, graphics cards, printers, USB devices....you name it, and Windows has to work with it.

It's of course an impossible task. It's inevitable that Windows will choke at times. Microsoft hasn't always paid attention to hardware compatibility, and it's paid the price for it --- look at the fiasco of the Vista rollout, for example.

But when you write an operating system not directly tied to hardware, those problems are par for the course. And your company takes a PR hit for it.

Google hasn't had to contend with that yet. Soon it will. And if Chrome succeeds --- that is, if it ever gets put on a wide variety of hardware --- that problem will most likely be severe.

Google will have to gear up an entire development team for writing drivers and handling hardware. It will have to increase its tech support staff, and build a bigger support organization. When things go wrong with Chrome on Chrome-powered PCs, people will blame Google, even if Chrome isn't at fault. So Google's image, which is still stellar, will be damaged.

At the same time, Google will need to continue to figure out other ways to grow its business. If it doesn't, growth will slow, which Google can't afford. But Chrome will take up so much of the company's efforts, that it will be extremely difficult for Google to properly plan and staff new ventures.

The result? Possible stagnation and a long-term tarnishing of the company's image.

None of this may happen, of course. If Chrome remains only a niche product, Google's resources won't be taxed, and its image won't be harmed.

And there's the possibility, of course, that Google can pull it off, and become a big player in operating systems as well as search, without much of a hiccup.

I don't think that's likely, though. It may be that the more popular Chrome becomes, the bigger hole Google digs for itself, because of the amount of resources Chrome requires.

Google Chrome OS

Email this

Digg this

What People Are Saying

Add new comment

google chrome is the worst

Submitted by Anonymous on July 15, 2009 - 7:21 A.M.

google chrome is the worst browser..........ie and mozilla r the best.......chrome take more time to open their company sites than any other browser........

Reply | Report this comment

Just irrelavant vaporware

Submitted by Anonymous on July 12, 2009 - 10:04 A.M.

At this point, Google Chrome OS is just irrelevant vaporware.

Google's talk is cheap. Get back to me when there is an actual product to evaluate.

Reply | Report this comment

Preston Gralla is OneDumbMoron

Submitted by SunMan on July 12, 2009 - 2:48 A.M.

Rarely has somebody as stupid as Preston Gralla come around. I some to simply see what outrageous comments he makes, yet each time his stupidity out does the previous times.

This ditty he wrote would get a flying "F" in any critical thinking class, posing fallacy after fallacy on his way to building a straw house on sinking sand.

How many assumptions do you pull out of the air to come to your idiot conclusion birdbrain Gralla?

Preston Gralla is truly

OneDumbMoron!

Reply | Report this comment

Such an intelligent post-NOT!

Submitted by Mike91163 on July 12, 2009 - 7:07 A.M.

Hey SunMan, please feel free to explain exactly what you mean by "fallacies"!

Second, blogs are generally recognized as publications of the author's OPINIONS, which usually are influenced by the writer's biases, and, umm, Mr. Gralla is a published author and expert on WINDOWS...didn't you notice the title of this blog-"Looking through Windows"???? This is a blog, not a "critical thinking class"...

Third, as NONE of us can accurately predict the future, wouldn't statements of future, unknown events be known as ASSUMPTIONS?

Fourth, please list your CV and published articles so we can make an informed decision as to your "qualifications".

Lastly, it's one thing to make attacks upon a person's choices and opinions; you're really getting low and losing all credibility by attacking their intelligence.

Oh, one more thing: For someone who's expressing such superiority, it might help if you proofread your comments prior to posting...your typos and poor grammar don't exactly speak of someone of high intelligence. AND, since CW "forces" you to preview your comment, there's no excuse.

Bottom line: Criticize the opinion, not the person.

Reply | Report this comment

No one is going to read

Submitted by Jens on September 14, 2009 - 10:42 A.M.

No one is going to read this, but I just couldn't let this post go unanswered.
The logical fallacy that you are looking for is that google doesn't have to worry about drivers because the drivers are either built in the kernel or attached as modules. That makes this whole blog post pure garbage.
If Gralla had only researched Chrome OS or the linux kernel even just a little bit, he would have known this. Instead he chose to write an article that is based on plain wrong information.

Your own post also has some logical fallacies. Like the part where you insult the previous commenter on his intelligence and then exit with 'Criticize the opinion, not the person'.
I don't care if you choose to defend Preston, but could you please only do it the moments that he is actually right (how rare this might be).

Reply | Report this comment

Oops!

Submitted by Mike91163 on July 12, 2009 - 7:09 A.M.

Sorry, I meant "Seeing", not "Looking" through Windows. See SunMan, I admit MY mistakes!

Reply | Report this comment

Niche Product Only

Submitted by Anonymous on July 11, 2009 - 5:10 A.M.

How many Linux distros are out there, 200+ How many years has Linux been around, 15+? What is the market penetration for Linux on the desktop/laptop/netbook? 1%, maybe. I doubt yet another (yawn) Linux distro will shake up the OS world. Everything Google makes (except its Search) is mediocre, OK stuff. They take something that is already there and put the Google spin on it. Google is hoping to stear people to Cloud Computing exclusively with this OS. It had to happen somtime, and will be interesting to see if it works. And don't forget, this OS is for Netbooks, limited use devices. Hardware drivers will be left to the OEMs to make work.

Reply | Report this comment

Teflon

Submitted by Anonymous on July 11, 2009 - 11:27 P.M.

Google will use the same protection for the Chrome OS as they have with Google apps. They'll put the beta label on it for the next decade and when people complain about it's shortcomings, Google and it's fanboys will claim it's still in beta, so you can't fault it until it reaches final candidate status.

Reply | Report this comment

Does this guy even realize

Submitted by What? on July 11, 2009 - 12:24 A.M.

Does this guy even realize it's based on Linux? He didn't mention it, and if he understood what he was writing about, he wouldn't have written this article.

Can I get a job writing for Computerworld? Seems like it must be damn easy work.

Reply | Report this comment

That is glossing over quite a bit.

Submitted by Anonymous on July 10, 2009 - 8:05 P.M.

"Microsoft hasn't always paid attention to hardware compatibility, and it's paid the price for it --- look at the fiasco of the Vista rollout, for example."

You say that as if it were an oversight on their part. The reason that the Vista drivers were horrible is after about 7 or 8 years of development releases going out for manufactures to design their hardware drivers for the OS that would be Vista; Microsoft made them start almost all over less than a year before release to a notably different specification.

To that end it show what the real problem is for Non MS operating systems are, most manufacture makes their drivers for Windows, some also do for mac and do linux as well. With windows having the most market share it gets the most effort, the linux community has go so far as to make their own drivers in some case. Apple gets around this stumbling block because they choose a small set of hardware, work with the manufacture and test the few models they support.

I don't expect it to be a major strain for Google as they are working with several OEMs and Hardware manufactures (of which most already make linux drivers) so they can choose the parts that are known to work with linux for their netbooks. Then Google can let the open source community do what they want if they people want it on other hardware.

Reply | Report this comment