28 ms·

A new breed of Chrome Apps

285 points by twapi 13y ago

josephwegner 13y ago
So, really, there's only two new features here: - Launch chrome apps directly from the desktop - Run chrome apps with out any of the browser toolbars Everything else is already possible in a regular chrome app.. Right?
- trimbo 13y ago
  It looks like they open up APIs that otherwise wouldn't be exposed, like access to the shell and devices.
  - wwosik 13y ago
    Cool, Java Applets reborn
    - untog 13y ago
      I don't see much wrong with the concept behind Java applets. Small downloadable apps that run on multiple platforms, backed by a universal runtime. The execution was awful, but still.
    - Spearchucker 13y ago
      More like ActiveX components reborn, because these things will only run in Chrome. Much like ActiveX only ran in IE.
      - jonknee 13y ago
        They run "on" Chrome, not in it. A separate icon, window, etc. You need to have Chrome installed, but it's different from ActiveX in that you're not going to see "plug-in missing" in the middle of a page somewhere.
        asifsignupfor 13y ago
        Great, phonegap for the desktop :(
      - afsina 13y ago
        Well, Activex was windows only. At least you can run in three big platforms now. And probably Android later. This is not activex, perhaps Adobe AIR is kind of similar, but it was not web centric.
  - josephwegner 13y ago
    Chrome extensions have had access to external devices for a long time, including both USB and Bluetooth. http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html NPAPI has been available for awhile, too.. Not sure if that's what they're referring to when they say shell access. https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/npapi.html https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/npapi.html
- talkingquickly 13y ago
  For me the exciting bit is being able to access devices from them. E.g. I've been waiting for this for a while because you can write an app which communicates directly with an Arduino or any other serial device. This means that a lot of special purpose desktop apps communicating with custom hardware can be written as Chrome apps and take advantage of the speed/ ease of UI development of web apps. For one of the apps I maintain this will reduce the time it takes to make UI improvements from several days to several hours.
  - josephwegner 13y ago
    Chrome extensions have had access to external devices for a long time. It's not often used, but I've done stuff implementing chrome + arduino. http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html A quick google search shows: https://github.com/BertHartm/Chromeduino https://github.com/BertHartm/Chromeduino
    - talkingquickly 13y ago
      Absolutely, I've also done some proof of concepts like that but for production use the "in browser" experience didn't really cut it for my uses.
- duncans 13y ago
  "chromeless" Chrome windows have been in Chrome since the start as far as I can remember: Tools > Create Application Shortcuts.
  - daleharvey 13y ago
    This has never actually been implemented on OSX, which surprised me when I switched from linux, I missed it a lot
alexandros 13y ago
Prediction: The much-anticipated convergence of Android and Chrome is near. These new Chrome apps are the programming model for the upcoming native Android webapps The next milestone I expect to see is V8 added alongside Dalvik as a first-class runtime for Android. Maybe in Android KitKat?
- pspeter3 13y ago
  That actually makes a lot of sense given their Android KitKat tagline which is "It's our goal with Android KitKat to make an amazing Android experience available for everybody." Google has used Play Services to update Android in the background. Since they also own Chrome, the more apps that live within Chrome the more apps are up to date and out of reach of other companies who would use Android for them, notably Amazon, Samsung and Facebook
  - bsimpson 13y ago
    It also means that many of these apps won't be usable by anyone running Android pre-4.0. Chrome launched with GoogleTV on Android 3, and that version doesn't auto-update, so it won't get apps.
    - melling 13y ago
      Yeah, someone is always quick to point out that someone is going to left behind. It doesn't matter. Mobile hardware and software is evolving quite fast. There will be a billion 4.0+ devices in a couple of years. People that aren't interested in newer devices probably aren't as interested in apps either.
  - teleclimber 13y ago
    That kitkat tagline could mean absolutely anything. It could be a kid-friendly set of features, or a more efficient OS so that cheap devices can run well so people in 3rd-world countries can have Android too. It could also mean cat-friendly interface with paw-sized touch targets.
- untog 13y ago
workbench 13y ago
Front page of the store is covered in bootleg Mario Brothers games. Classy work Google
taskstrike 13y ago
The new breed of chrome apps has a lot of flaws after I tried to convert my app over: -Previous installed chrome app matches the HTML5 api, the new chrome apps has a lot of restriction where you have to totally rewrite you code in terms of storage. i.e. Chrome.storage instead of localStorage; All chrome storage is async. -The new window format for apps are a huge UI flaw. You can not open an Chrome app in a tab anymore. Basically, you now have an extra window whenever you open a chrome app. This is very annoying since when you click on the existing window the app is hidden in the back, you have to flip through your windows on the mac to find the app you just opened again. -Javascript execution permissions are very strict, and no longer follows that of a normal webpage. The result is, you can no longer build an HTML5 app and prepare it for the chrome store, you have to specifically change the code to package it. This makes it less ubiquitous and creates extra work for developers.
- teleclimber 13y ago
  I remember from a talk at IO13 that the point of the new Chrome Apps is that they truly behave and feel like what we think of as "native" apps. Therefore, no Chrome tabs or other browser-like stuff. I'd have to look at the talk again but if I remember right they limit how and when JS can be used in order to let you safely do things you can't do in a standard webpage. This session explains it all: https://developers.google.com/events/io/sessions/326973874 https://developers.google.com/events/io/sessions/326973874
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- georgemcbay 13y ago
  Even the older breed of chrome apps had annoying flaws, IMO, when I was playing around with their APIs to get a feel for them about 6 months ago. I was mostly surprised how it felt that in many ways you were actually more restricted than you were with just a normal web app. Also the documentation was trash and confusing in a lot of ways because even prior to these changes they had made a lot of other changes via deprecating APIs and their documentation was poorly managed to the point where it was really difficult to determine which APIs were deprecated or not without trying to use them in the latest Chrome and having them fail on you. Also, there wasn't a clear roadmap as to what APIs you could expect to be pretty stable and what ones they might suddenly deprecate, breaking your app. Hearing that the "new breed" has some of these same flaws and some new ones makes me very disinclined to bother checking in with the current technology.
Achshar 13y ago
How do I get my app to be in "for your desktop" category? It's not on the developer page of my app. It's a media player app that matches most of the requirements of the new apps.
simonster 13y ago
Firefox has made stubs for web apps that can be launched directly from the desktop since Firefox 16 (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Apps/WebRT https://wiki.mozilla.org/Apps/WebRT). I guess the difference here is more (Chrome-specific) APIs and better support for running offline?
- derefr 13y ago
  Chrome has had that particular feature for just as long (look for "Create Application Launcher" in the menu; or right-click a regular chrome app, set its presentation to "Window", and click "Create Shortcuts".) This is a separate feature, about creating apps that don't appear to be "from" the web.
vondur 13y ago
"Chrome-specific code that means they won’t be able to run on other web browsers" This sounds vaguely familiar...
- dannyr 13y ago
  Familiar to what? If Google waits for other browsers to offer the APIs it needs, Chrome apps won't happen for a long, long time.
- reustle 13y ago
  I agree. I would be much more excited about this announcement if it sounded a bit more open for other browsers to join in.
  - nraynaud 13y ago
    they will be free to copy the API. much of HTML5 is standardizing stuff already existing in various browsers (ironically, a lot of IE stuff). Firefox is already working on an API for USB for example.
    - lucian1900 13y ago
      But they won't, because Mozilla hates NaCl and loves asm.js
cassidysummers 13y ago
It would be nice if the apps they recommended (wunderlist) actually worked. I have attempted 5 times to "sign up" for the wunderlist app, every time I hit the button the app freezes on the load screen. Not once has it made it past. I also have not received one email verifying my attempt to sign up. My first experience with app launcher and one of the apps would be horrible. Better get on the ball if you really wanna change the web in such a dramatic way.
- cassidysummers 13y ago
  Just and FYI, if anybody is having this same issue, if you go to the website (not using the app on your desktop) you can sign up there, then you will be able to sign in.
- danvoell 13y ago
  I encountered the same issue.
- octatone2 13y ago
  Sorry, you had issues signing up. We patched that bug within 24 hours. You shouldn't have issues signing up anymore with the packaged chrome app.
Nowyouknow 13y ago
If I could use the Hangouts extension as an app, I would be so happy. I don't like the implementation of the extension on my Mac.
- bsimpson 13y ago
  It acts like an app on ChromeOS. I have a buddy list that shows up in my dock, completely outside any Chrome window.
JoshTriplett 13y ago
This is, effectively, bringing a ChromeOS-like app interface to Windows (and soon other platforms). The new app launcher looks just like it does on ChromeOS, putting Chrome Web Store apps on an equal footing with native apps started from a Start menu or equivalent.
tomjen3 13y ago
I was hoping this was away to wrap a webpage in chrome and distribute that, but it seems to require me to distribute it through there webstore. Given that they don't have a default monopoly on selling things over the web (unlike, say Android, where they have most of the users), why would I want to do that? The technology is certainly interesting, if a bit limiting.
- lucian1900 13y ago
  For the services they provide, most notably payments (priced apps and/or in-app payments) and notifications.
- lhaussknecht 13y ago
  I'm also interested in distributing my app offline to my customers, but I didn't find a solution for that yet.
gcb0 13y ago
Chrome is now a serious security risk for me. it's just waiting to happen. for now on, it will be used as the remote debugger for android browsers (until we have something native). just like i have a spare mac for running xcode for the same reason. firefox serves me well. and will not make me worry much.
- comex 13y ago
  All this functionality sounds like an increased attack surface, and it is. But when the comparison is Firefox, it's far outweighed by the fact that Chrome has a very good process sandbox, while Firefox has none. It will be years before Firefox can match Chrome's level of security.
  - sampk 13y ago
    Moreover Google has paid millions to security researchers for finding flaws in Chrome.
the_mitsuhiko 13y ago
Our game RAD Soldiers is featured up on the games page: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rad-soldiers/dkiahcckehgdocgonfdickeagmoembpe https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rad-soldiers/dkiah... You can cross play with the iOS version, feel free to leave feedback :-)
- platinum1 13y ago
  I gave it a try on my Pixel and found that the touch didn't always seem to work as expected - for instance, when I rotate the globe, it would always try to center Africa on my finger and I couldn't tap on cities. I'd prefer if the game defaulted to fullscreen and allowed me to zoom out more - I assume this is because it was originally designed for smaller screens. Also the game was capturing the ChromeOS volume, brightness, maximize keys (probably as F1-F10 keys) and discarding them. Past issues specific to the packaged app - great game! Very polished. I love X-Com and this is right up my alley. As one of the few who have actually used it, can you give us your perspective on the highlights and limitations of the packaged apps API?
  - the_mitsuhiko 13y ago
    > As one of the few who have actually used it, can you give us your perspective on the highlights and limitations of the packaged apps API? Considering we're a game there is actually very few things that we need to consider from the APIs. We have our own UI and the integration with the OS is quite limited. The reason we were interested in the Chrome version is that we're essentially a play by mail game in multiplayer so the push notifications are crucial. Unfortunately the way the push works on Chrome is a bit iffy, way less polished than it works on Android and iOS but it's not too bad. Since we're free to play there are some optional in app microtransactions to monetize the game. These all use the new Google wallet API for packaged apps and they work reasonably well. Since we allow cross play between iOS and Chrome we need to be careful with how we set the prizes and making prize matching between iOS and Chrome is hard due to differences in how tax is handled. There is on way to query the final prize for an in-app purchase through the API which makes things like "-50%" badges hard to implement. The way the game gets around it is by guessing what the final prize will be. I wish there was a nicer way but I can see why it's done that way.
jrockway 13y ago
One thing that I think is really cool about Chrome Apps is that you can write USB drivers in Javascript that will run on any platform that runs Chrome or Chromium. This means that if you want to make a hardware device that syncs with the cloud, all you have to do is write what is essentially a web app, and anyone with Windows, OS X, Linux, or Chrome OS can use your thing. I'm personally working on a Chrome SDR app for the Funcube Dongle, so you can just install an app from the Web Store, plug the thing in, and start listening to any radio transmission from .5MHz to 2GHz. (The only snag is that the HTML5 audio API doesn't give you 192kHz sound samples, so I think I'm going to have to read them directly via USB. Fun.)
- hosay123 13y ago
  Firefox OS is working on the same feature (google 'WebUSB')
- nraynaud 13y ago
  yeah, same here, I'm writing a CNC controller, the UI is a google chrome packaged app talking on USB. it's a pain to use, with all the restriction, the buggy API (it doesn't crash, it just hangs, you can't investigate) and the browser bugs (I have to use a canary for development, I'm really far from a release).
  - krasin 13y ago
    any links to your code?
    - krasin 13y ago
      upd. I found it. https://github.com/nraynaud/webgcode https://github.com/nraynaud/webgcode
      - nraynaud 13y ago
        good luck, I'm making a mess.
- 13y ago
United857 13y ago
Are these apps supposed to be written in pure JS or are they PNaCl (Portable Native Client -- basically LLVM bytecode)?
- jtemplin 13y ago
  The vast majority are currently write in JS.
- nswanberg 13y ago
  Whatever runs in Chrome. Wunderlist uses javascript, while Cracking Sands uses NaCl. Though the apps run in their own windows, opening chrome://inspect in the main Chrome window lets you examine the various open apps.
- lucian1900 13y ago
  I believe PNaCl isn't supported (yet), apps are JS but are allowed to embed NaCl.
astro1138 13y ago
I've been hacking on a Chrome App for the past few weeks and have been wondering how to open a tab instead of a new window. That announcement leaves me confused: what's new exactly? Is it even possible that the new stuff has been in the docs for months?
tammer 13y ago
Brilliant that on win8 it sits in the taskbar, right where every Windows user expects a menu of applications.
- guizzy 13y ago
  That might be why Microsoft brought back the start button in 8.1 They might have been afraid that if they left this prime piece of desktop real estate, Google might take it.
millstone 13y ago
Google says that "packaged apps are written in HTML5, JavaScript, and CSS" but the first one they show, Pixlr Touch Up, is actually written in Flash. New breed, eh?
- jarek-foksa 13y ago
  From my read of the code it appears to be written mostly in JavaScript. There is one NaCl module, not sure what it does though.
  - millstone 13y ago
    Err, I guess was testing the Pixlr version in the Chrome Web Store, which I assumed would be the same thing as the “desktop” version. Is it possible that one would be Flash and the other would be something else?
    - jarek-foksa 13y ago
      Definitely, Flash is on the list of web features that are disabled in packaged apps: http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_deprecated.html http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_deprecated.html
OlavHN 13y ago
Its really awesome to see Google taking the web seriously by giving it more access to hardware, but it would be nice with some indication of where these APIs are headed. Are they "forking off the web" or just experimenting before standardising?
kolev 13y ago
Chrome is a resource hog. I don't want that on my phone, which barely lasts 4 hours idling in my pocket. Thanks but no thanks. On my Mac, Chrome with 20 open tabs is always using most of my memory and CPU.
- bluedino 13y ago
  And Firefox doesn't?
  - IanChiles 13y ago
    Firefox as of 23+ uses significantly less memory than Chrome (in my experience - your mileage may vary though)
    - scholia 13y ago
      I suspect that Microsoft Office uses less memory (and fewer processes) than Chrome ;-)
    - skeletonjelly 13y ago
      Being able to identify which tabs are hogging CPU/memory is a deal breaker to me.
      - Grue3 13y ago
        about:memory shows detailed report on which website uses how much memory.
    - kolev 13y ago
      With same tabs open for the same amount of time, Firefox uses significantly less. I hate to say this, but Safari beats Firefox, which makes it the most efficient browser on OS X.
  - scholia 13y ago
    Firefox uses less resources in Windows 7 than Chrome does, it runs more tabs, and it is much more stable. I usually have more than 50 tabs open in Firefox and often go over 60 before having a tidy up. Firefox can survive that for a couple of weeks whereas Chrome would often crash in less than a day. (Flash would crash even more often.) YMMV, but I switched back to Firefox a couple of months ago and no longer have Chrome installed....
dpweb 13y ago
Chrome/Android.. What about Chrome/Windows. Notice that every new advancement in Chrome squeezes out the need for Windows. They need to improve the APIs for developers though, a Visual Studio 6 for Chrome platform development, probably the high point in softees history. Really tie together web with more traditional native api development. No-one has cracked that yet.
mratzloff 13y ago
Sounds like Google has decided to try to compete directly with Pokki (https://www.pokki.com https://www.pokki.com).
jackspringer 13y ago
this will be a UX nightmare. windows 8 already has desktop, metro interface, and now CHROME APPS?!?
volaski 13y ago
At first i was excited that finally I can cmd-tab into a chrome app. Turns out it doesn't. I don't really get how this is so useful.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
cashmonkey85 13y ago
I made a native app for Vector Paint https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/vector-paint-app/polhblidjnpebjjpjjhmejjalalppmhc https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/vector-paint-app/p...

285 points by twapi 13y ago

So, really, there's only two new features here: - Launch chrome apps directly from the desktop - Run chrome apps with out any of the browser toolbars Everything else is already possible in a regular chrome app.. Right?

trimbo 13y ago
It looks like they open up APIs that otherwise wouldn't be exposed, like access to the shell and devices.
- wwosik 13y ago
  Cool, Java Applets reborn
  - untog 13y ago
    I don't see much wrong with the concept behind Java applets. Small downloadable apps that run on multiple platforms, backed by a universal runtime. The execution was awful, but still.
  - Spearchucker 13y ago
    More like ActiveX components reborn, because these things will only run in Chrome. Much like ActiveX only ran in IE.
    - jonknee 13y ago
      They run "on" Chrome, not in it. A separate icon, window, etc. You need to have Chrome installed, but it's different from ActiveX in that you're not going to see "plug-in missing" in the middle of a page somewhere.
      - asifsignupfor 13y ago
        Great, phonegap for the desktop :(
    - afsina 13y ago
      Well, Activex was windows only. At least you can run in three big platforms now. And probably Android later. This is not activex, perhaps Adobe AIR is kind of similar, but it was not web centric.
- josephwegner 13y ago
  Chrome extensions have had access to external devices for a long time, including both USB and Bluetooth. http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html NPAPI has been available for awhile, too.. Not sure if that's what they're referring to when they say shell access. https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/npapi.html https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/npapi.html
talkingquickly 13y ago
For me the exciting bit is being able to access devices from them. E.g. I've been waiting for this for a while because you can write an app which communicates directly with an Arduino or any other serial device. This means that a lot of special purpose desktop apps communicating with custom hardware can be written as Chrome apps and take advantage of the speed/ ease of UI development of web apps. For one of the apps I maintain this will reduce the time it takes to make UI improvements from several days to several hours.
- josephwegner 13y ago
  Chrome extensions have had access to external devices for a long time. It's not often used, but I've done stuff implementing chrome + arduino. http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_hardware.html A quick google search shows: https://github.com/BertHartm/Chromeduino https://github.com/BertHartm/Chromeduino
  - talkingquickly 13y ago
    Absolutely, I've also done some proof of concepts like that but for production use the "in browser" experience didn't really cut it for my uses.
duncans 13y ago
"chromeless" Chrome windows have been in Chrome since the start as far as I can remember: Tools > Create Application Shortcuts.
- daleharvey 13y ago
  This has never actually been implemented on OSX, which surprised me when I switched from linux, I missed it a lot

alexandros 13y ago

Prediction: The much-anticipated convergence of Android and Chrome is near. These new Chrome apps are the programming model for the upcoming native Android webapps The next milestone I expect to see is V8 added alongside Dalvik as a first-class runtime for Android. Maybe in Android KitKat?

pspeter3 13y ago
That actually makes a lot of sense given their Android KitKat tagline which is "It's our goal with Android KitKat to make an amazing Android experience available for everybody." Google has used Play Services to update Android in the background. Since they also own Chrome, the more apps that live within Chrome the more apps are up to date and out of reach of other companies who would use Android for them, notably Amazon, Samsung and Facebook
- bsimpson 13y ago
  It also means that many of these apps won't be usable by anyone running Android pre-4.0. Chrome launched with GoogleTV on Android 3, and that version doesn't auto-update, so it won't get apps.
  - melling 13y ago
    Yeah, someone is always quick to point out that someone is going to left behind. It doesn't matter. Mobile hardware and software is evolving quite fast. There will be a billion 4.0+ devices in a couple of years. People that aren't interested in newer devices probably aren't as interested in apps either.
- teleclimber 13y ago
  That kitkat tagline could mean absolutely anything. It could be a kid-friendly set of features, or a more efficient OS so that cheap devices can run well so people in 3rd-world countries can have Android too. It could also mean cat-friendly interface with paw-sized touch targets.
untog 13y ago

workbench 13y ago

Front page of the store is covered in bootleg Mario Brothers games. Classy work Google

taskstrike 13y ago

The new breed of chrome apps has a lot of flaws after I tried to convert my app over: -Previous installed chrome app matches the HTML5 api, the new chrome apps has a lot of restriction where you have to totally rewrite you code in terms of storage. i.e. Chrome.storage instead of localStorage; All chrome storage is async. -The new window format for apps are a huge UI flaw. You can not open an Chrome app in a tab anymore. Basically, you now have an extra window whenever you open a chrome app. This is very annoying since when you click on the existing window the app is hidden in the back, you have to flip through your windows on the mac to find the app you just opened again. -Javascript execution permissions are very strict, and no longer follows that of a normal webpage. The result is, you can no longer build an HTML5 app and prepare it for the chrome store, you have to specifically change the code to package it. This makes it less ubiquitous and creates extra work for developers.

teleclimber 13y ago
I remember from a talk at IO13 that the point of the new Chrome Apps is that they truly behave and feel like what we think of as "native" apps. Therefore, no Chrome tabs or other browser-like stuff. I'd have to look at the talk again but if I remember right they limit how and when JS can be used in order to let you safely do things you can't do in a standard webpage. This session explains it all: https://developers.google.com/events/io/sessions/326973874 https://developers.google.com/events/io/sessions/326973874
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
georgemcbay 13y ago
Even the older breed of chrome apps had annoying flaws, IMO, when I was playing around with their APIs to get a feel for them about 6 months ago. I was mostly surprised how it felt that in many ways you were actually more restricted than you were with just a normal web app. Also the documentation was trash and confusing in a lot of ways because even prior to these changes they had made a lot of other changes via deprecating APIs and their documentation was poorly managed to the point where it was really difficult to determine which APIs were deprecated or not without trying to use them in the latest Chrome and having them fail on you. Also, there wasn't a clear roadmap as to what APIs you could expect to be pretty stable and what ones they might suddenly deprecate, breaking your app. Hearing that the "new breed" has some of these same flaws and some new ones makes me very disinclined to bother checking in with the current technology.

Achshar 13y ago

How do I get my app to be in "for your desktop" category? It's not on the developer page of my app. It's a media player app that matches most of the requirements of the new apps.

simonster 13y ago

Firefox has made stubs for web apps that can be launched directly from the desktop since Firefox 16 (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Apps/WebRT https://wiki.mozilla.org/Apps/WebRT). I guess the difference here is more (Chrome-specific) APIs and better support for running offline?

derefr 13y ago
Chrome has had that particular feature for just as long (look for "Create Application Launcher" in the menu; or right-click a regular chrome app, set its presentation to "Window", and click "Create Shortcuts".) This is a separate feature, about creating apps that don't appear to be "from" the web.

vondur 13y ago

"Chrome-specific code that means they won’t be able to run on other web browsers" This sounds vaguely familiar...

dannyr 13y ago
Familiar to what? If Google waits for other browsers to offer the APIs it needs, Chrome apps won't happen for a long, long time.
reustle 13y ago
I agree. I would be much more excited about this announcement if it sounded a bit more open for other browsers to join in.
- nraynaud 13y ago
  they will be free to copy the API. much of HTML5 is standardizing stuff already existing in various browsers (ironically, a lot of IE stuff). Firefox is already working on an API for USB for example.
  - lucian1900 13y ago
    But they won't, because Mozilla hates NaCl and loves asm.js

cassidysummers 13y ago

It would be nice if the apps they recommended (wunderlist) actually worked. I have attempted 5 times to "sign up" for the wunderlist app, every time I hit the button the app freezes on the load screen. Not once has it made it past. I also have not received one email verifying my attempt to sign up. My first experience with app launcher and one of the apps would be horrible. Better get on the ball if you really wanna change the web in such a dramatic way.

cassidysummers 13y ago
Just and FYI, if anybody is having this same issue, if you go to the website (not using the app on your desktop) you can sign up there, then you will be able to sign in.
danvoell 13y ago
I encountered the same issue.
octatone2 13y ago
Sorry, you had issues signing up. We patched that bug within 24 hours. You shouldn't have issues signing up anymore with the packaged chrome app.

Nowyouknow 13y ago

If I could use the Hangouts extension as an app, I would be so happy. I don't like the implementation of the extension on my Mac.

bsimpson 13y ago
It acts like an app on ChromeOS. I have a buddy list that shows up in my dock, completely outside any Chrome window.

JoshTriplett 13y ago

This is, effectively, bringing a ChromeOS-like app interface to Windows (and soon other platforms). The new app launcher looks just like it does on ChromeOS, putting Chrome Web Store apps on an equal footing with native apps started from a Start menu or equivalent.

tomjen3 13y ago

I was hoping this was away to wrap a webpage in chrome and distribute that, but it seems to require me to distribute it through there webstore. Given that they don't have a default monopoly on selling things over the web (unlike, say Android, where they have most of the users), why would I want to do that? The technology is certainly interesting, if a bit limiting.

lucian1900 13y ago
For the services they provide, most notably payments (priced apps and/or in-app payments) and notifications.
lhaussknecht 13y ago
I'm also interested in distributing my app offline to my customers, but I didn't find a solution for that yet.

gcb0 13y ago

Chrome is now a serious security risk for me. it's just waiting to happen. for now on, it will be used as the remote debugger for android browsers (until we have something native). just like i have a spare mac for running xcode for the same reason. firefox serves me well. and will not make me worry much.

comex 13y ago
All this functionality sounds like an increased attack surface, and it is. But when the comparison is Firefox, it's far outweighed by the fact that Chrome has a very good process sandbox, while Firefox has none. It will be years before Firefox can match Chrome's level of security.
- sampk 13y ago
  Moreover Google has paid millions to security researchers for finding flaws in Chrome.

the_mitsuhiko 13y ago

Our game RAD Soldiers is featured up on the games page: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rad-soldiers/dkiahcckehgdocgonfdickeagmoembpe https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rad-soldiers/dkiah... You can cross play with the iOS version, feel free to leave feedback :-)

platinum1 13y ago
I gave it a try on my Pixel and found that the touch didn't always seem to work as expected - for instance, when I rotate the globe, it would always try to center Africa on my finger and I couldn't tap on cities. I'd prefer if the game defaulted to fullscreen and allowed me to zoom out more - I assume this is because it was originally designed for smaller screens. Also the game was capturing the ChromeOS volume, brightness, maximize keys (probably as F1-F10 keys) and discarding them. Past issues specific to the packaged app - great game! Very polished. I love X-Com and this is right up my alley. As one of the few who have actually used it, can you give us your perspective on the highlights and limitations of the packaged apps API?
- the_mitsuhiko 13y ago
  > As one of the few who have actually used it, can you give us your perspective on the highlights and limitations of the packaged apps API? Considering we're a game there is actually very few things that we need to consider from the APIs. We have our own UI and the integration with the OS is quite limited. The reason we were interested in the Chrome version is that we're essentially a play by mail game in multiplayer so the push notifications are crucial. Unfortunately the way the push works on Chrome is a bit iffy, way less polished than it works on Android and iOS but it's not too bad. Since we're free to play there are some optional in app microtransactions to monetize the game. These all use the new Google wallet API for packaged apps and they work reasonably well. Since we allow cross play between iOS and Chrome we need to be careful with how we set the prizes and making prize matching between iOS and Chrome is hard due to differences in how tax is handled. There is on way to query the final prize for an in-app purchase through the API which makes things like "-50%" badges hard to implement. The way the game gets around it is by guessing what the final prize will be. I wish there was a nicer way but I can see why it's done that way.

jrockway 13y ago

One thing that I think is really cool about Chrome Apps is that you can write USB drivers in Javascript that will run on any platform that runs Chrome or Chromium. This means that if you want to make a hardware device that syncs with the cloud, all you have to do is write what is essentially a web app, and anyone with Windows, OS X, Linux, or Chrome OS can use your thing. I'm personally working on a Chrome SDR app for the Funcube Dongle, so you can just install an app from the Web Store, plug the thing in, and start listening to any radio transmission from .5MHz to 2GHz. (The only snag is that the HTML5 audio API doesn't give you 192kHz sound samples, so I think I'm going to have to read them directly via USB. Fun.)

hosay123 13y ago
Firefox OS is working on the same feature (google 'WebUSB')
nraynaud 13y ago
yeah, same here, I'm writing a CNC controller, the UI is a google chrome packaged app talking on USB. it's a pain to use, with all the restriction, the buggy API (it doesn't crash, it just hangs, you can't investigate) and the browser bugs (I have to use a canary for development, I'm really far from a release).
- krasin 13y ago
  any links to your code?
  - krasin 13y ago
    upd. I found it. https://github.com/nraynaud/webgcode https://github.com/nraynaud/webgcode
    - nraynaud 13y ago
      good luck, I'm making a mess.
13y ago

United857 13y ago

Are these apps supposed to be written in pure JS or are they PNaCl (Portable Native Client -- basically LLVM bytecode)?

jtemplin 13y ago
The vast majority are currently write in JS.
nswanberg 13y ago
Whatever runs in Chrome. Wunderlist uses javascript, while Cracking Sands uses NaCl. Though the apps run in their own windows, opening chrome://inspect in the main Chrome window lets you examine the various open apps.
lucian1900 13y ago
I believe PNaCl isn't supported (yet), apps are JS but are allowed to embed NaCl.

astro1138 13y ago

I've been hacking on a Chrome App for the past few weeks and have been wondering how to open a tab instead of a new window. That announcement leaves me confused: what's new exactly? Is it even possible that the new stuff has been in the docs for months?

tammer 13y ago

Brilliant that on win8 it sits in the taskbar, right where every Windows user expects a menu of applications.

guizzy 13y ago
That might be why Microsoft brought back the start button in 8.1 They might have been afraid that if they left this prime piece of desktop real estate, Google might take it.

millstone 13y ago

Google says that "packaged apps are written in HTML5, JavaScript, and CSS" but the first one they show, Pixlr Touch Up, is actually written in Flash. New breed, eh?

jarek-foksa 13y ago
From my read of the code it appears to be written mostly in JavaScript. There is one NaCl module, not sure what it does though.
- millstone 13y ago
  Err, I guess was testing the Pixlr version in the Chrome Web Store, which I assumed would be the same thing as the “desktop” version. Is it possible that one would be Flash and the other would be something else?
  - jarek-foksa 13y ago
    Definitely, Flash is on the list of web features that are disabled in packaged apps: http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_deprecated.html http://developer.chrome.com/apps/app_deprecated.html

OlavHN 13y ago

Its really awesome to see Google taking the web seriously by giving it more access to hardware, but it would be nice with some indication of where these APIs are headed. Are they "forking off the web" or just experimenting before standardising?

kolev 13y ago

Chrome is a resource hog. I don't want that on my phone, which barely lasts 4 hours idling in my pocket. Thanks but no thanks. On my Mac, Chrome with 20 open tabs is always using most of my memory and CPU.

bluedino 13y ago
And Firefox doesn't?
- IanChiles 13y ago
  Firefox as of 23+ uses significantly less memory than Chrome (in my experience - your mileage may vary though)
  - scholia 13y ago
    I suspect that Microsoft Office uses less memory (and fewer processes) than Chrome ;-)
  - skeletonjelly 13y ago
    Being able to identify which tabs are hogging CPU/memory is a deal breaker to me.
    - Grue3 13y ago
      about:memory shows detailed report on which website uses how much memory.
  - kolev 13y ago
    With same tabs open for the same amount of time, Firefox uses significantly less. I hate to say this, but Safari beats Firefox, which makes it the most efficient browser on OS X.
- scholia 13y ago
  Firefox uses less resources in Windows 7 than Chrome does, it runs more tabs, and it is much more stable. I usually have more than 50 tabs open in Firefox and often go over 60 before having a tidy up. Firefox can survive that for a couple of weeks whereas Chrome would often crash in less than a day. (Flash would crash even more often.) YMMV, but I switched back to Firefox a couple of months ago and no longer have Chrome installed....

dpweb 13y ago

Chrome/Android.. What about Chrome/Windows. Notice that every new advancement in Chrome squeezes out the need for Windows. They need to improve the APIs for developers though, a Visual Studio 6 for Chrome platform development, probably the high point in softees history. Really tie together web with more traditional native api development. No-one has cracked that yet.

mratzloff 13y ago

Sounds like Google has decided to try to compete directly with Pokki (https://www.pokki.com https://www.pokki.com).

jackspringer 13y ago

this will be a UX nightmare. windows 8 already has desktop, metro interface, and now CHROME APPS?!?

volaski 13y ago

At first i was excited that finally I can cmd-tab into a chrome app. Turns out it doesn't. I don't really get how this is so useful.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

cashmonkey85 13y ago

I made a native app for Vector Paint https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/vector-paint-app/polhblidjnpebjjpjjhmejjalalppmhc https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/vector-paint-app/p...