I'll grant you that the article is mainly about "why Chrome?" rather than "why not Firefox?". In other words, though the title is not 100% linkbait, it does hav

I'll grant you that the article is mainly about "why Chrome?" rather than "why not Firefox?". In other words, though the title is not 100% linkbait, it does have a very high linkbait factor. But even the question "why Chrome?" isn't answered well. Here's the Larry Page answer that you refer to: Page said that the monetary benefits Google will gain from Chrome will come from the better and cheaper-to-develop web apps that its engineers can build using a better browser, as well as increased user loyalty and freed-up user time so they can search more. The meat of that response is the part about "a better browser" -- it's certainly the only part of the sentence that relates to the "why not Firefox?" question, since Google is more than capable of releasing a Google-cobranded Firefox. But what does "a better browser" mean? To answer that requires getting into details like "here's how the codebases are different", or "here's how the project management and release scheduling is different", or "here's how the overall goals of each project are different", or maybe even "here's the real political situation with Firefox vis-a-vis Chrome". But we don't get any discussion of such things. We get some warmed-over press conferences and PR-quality quotes from Larry Page.