4 ms·

The Mac and Linux versions will follow soon. At least the sandboxing is nontrivial to implement across the OSes.

by tuukkah 18y ago

SwellJoe 18y ago
"At least the sandboxing is nontrivial to implement across the OSes." Far less trivial on operating systems that have no "fork", like, say, Windows. It would be easier to implement on any UNIX, including Linux and Mac OS X, and would be more alike on any UNIX. And, of course, it would definitely not be evil to release only for Linux with plans to release for closed systems soon after. I'm of the opinion that releasing first for only Windows smells of evil, even if only when the wind is blowing right.
- arockwell 18y ago
  What is evil about releasing to the largest install base first?
  - SwellJoe 18y ago
    It serves the opposite purpose of encouraging openness in platforms. However, if the purpose hinted at by several articles (i.e., "Windows killer") is not, in fact, the purpose of the project...then it is a less interesting project (yet another browser is not interesting), but simultaneously makes more sense. mechanical_fish' reply is, I think, very astute. I can't argue with the logic at all, if the purpose of Chrome is merely to encourage more people to use decent browsers. Since all the shitty browsers (IE 6, IE 7, etc.) are on Windows, obviously any efforts towards getting people using better browsers should be focused on that platform.
- mechanical_fish 18y ago
  The timing seems good for a Windows launch; they're about to launch IE8, so there's going to be a bunch of marketing buzz about how much fun it is to upgrade your browser. As they say in various marketing books: The best place to open a carpet store is often right next to all the other carpet stores, where the customer who is looking for a carpet will see you on his way in or out. Similarly, the best time to come out with a new browser is just slightly ahead of your competition's big browser marketing push. The other advantage of doing Windows first is that the win is bigger. The users of dinosaur browsers are all Windows users. Moving an IE user to Chrome is a huge win for Google -- now all Google's apps run better on that machine. Moving a Safari user to Chrome might barely be a win at all, since they're both Webkit based.
  - SwellJoe 18y ago
    Now this is the first good argument I've heard. The fact that pretty much all the people using crap browsers are running Windows means that any effort to get people onto better browsers ought to be focused on the Windows platform. I think you may have just convinced me. When it is being presented as "Windows killer", it makes no sense to further increase the strength and maintain the popularity of Windows by providing new products only for Windows. But, if the purpose is merely to "make life easier for web developers" and enable modern applications for as many people as possible, then Windows would be the perfect first target.
    - mechanical_fish 18y ago
      As a Web developer, I don't care if Windows lives or dies. But I want Internet Explorer killed, and the sooner the better. It's costing me and my clients a fortune, in time and in frustration. If it weren't for Dan Cederholm and John Resig IE might have driven me to drink by now. [1] [1] I should say "John Resig and the entire jQuery community". Bless you all!

The Mac and Linux versions will follow soon. At least the sandboxing is nontrivial to implement across the OSes.

by tuukkah 18y ago

The Mac and Linux versions will follow soon. At least the sandboxing is nontrivial to implement across the OSes.

"At least the sandboxing is nontrivial to implement across the OSes." Far less trivial on operating systems that have no "fork", like, say, Windows. It would be easier to implement on any UNIX, including Linux and Mac OS X, and would be more alike on any UNIX. And, of course, it would definitely not be evil to release only for Linux with plans to release for closed systems soon after. I'm of the opinion that releasing first for only Windows smells of evil, even if only when the wind is blowing right.

arockwell 18y ago
What is evil about releasing to the largest install base first?
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  It serves the opposite purpose of encouraging openness in platforms. However, if the purpose hinted at by several articles (i.e., "Windows killer") is not, in fact, the purpose of the project...then it is a less interesting project (yet another browser is not interesting), but simultaneously makes more sense. mechanical_fish' reply is, I think, very astute. I can't argue with the logic at all, if the purpose of Chrome is merely to encourage more people to use decent browsers. Since all the shitty browsers (IE 6, IE 7, etc.) are on Windows, obviously any efforts towards getting people using better browsers should be focused on that platform.
mechanical_fish 18y ago
The timing seems good for a Windows launch; they're about to launch IE8, so there's going to be a bunch of marketing buzz about how much fun it is to upgrade your browser. As they say in various marketing books: The best place to open a carpet store is often right next to all the other carpet stores, where the customer who is looking for a carpet will see you on his way in or out. Similarly, the best time to come out with a new browser is just slightly ahead of your competition's big browser marketing push. The other advantage of doing Windows first is that the win is bigger. The users of dinosaur browsers are all Windows users. Moving an IE user to Chrome is a huge win for Google -- now all Google's apps run better on that machine. Moving a Safari user to Chrome might barely be a win at all, since they're both Webkit based.
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  Now this is the first good argument I've heard. The fact that pretty much all the people using crap browsers are running Windows means that any effort to get people onto better browsers ought to be focused on the Windows platform. I think you may have just convinced me. When it is being presented as "Windows killer", it makes no sense to further increase the strength and maintain the popularity of Windows by providing new products only for Windows. But, if the purpose is merely to "make life easier for web developers" and enable modern applications for as many people as possible, then Windows would be the perfect first target.
  - mechanical_fish 18y ago
    As a Web developer, I don't care if Windows lives or dies. But I want Internet Explorer killed, and the sooner the better. It's costing me and my clients a fortune, in time and in frustration. If it weren't for Dan Cederholm and John Resig IE might have driven me to drink by now. [1] [1] I should say "John Resig and the entire jQuery community". Bless you all!