4 ms·

FTA: Google won the browser war, with the help of Mozilla. The important point here is that Google doesn't care what browser you use. They don't make money on b

• mixmax 17y ago
  Chrome's market share is minute Well, that's kind of the point I was trying to make - Google make their money on advertising and webapps, not on browsers. It doesn't matter for their bottomline which browser people use. All that matters to them is that people use google's products, and the fewer roadblocks there are the more money google makes. Chrome doesn't need to have more than a minute marketshare to drive the competition to make better browsers and more internet capable OS'es, which will ultimately be good for Google. For Google it's not about marketshare in the OS or browser business, it's about driving innovation so that users will move on to the web.
  • fiaz 17y ago
    Ok this is interesting. I agree with you about the roadblock argument to a point. I think where it breaks down is that the browser itself is the choke point for any internet based strategy as it is the gateway to the web for 99.9% of the users out there. To evolve the browser into something that is closer to the server would eliminate the roadblock of which you speak. I don't think you need to create an OS to do that. IE has a decided advantage for Microsoft as it comes pre-installed and is prominently showcased within the OS itself. The fact that you have to download and then install either Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or Opera presents a roadblock for users. Switching operating systems is an even bigger roadblock.
    • jerf 17y ago
      There will be Google-branded netbooks in Best Buy within a year. No, I'm not saying this based on any actual announcement or special inside information. Just common sense. Abstractly launching an OS doesn't do anyone any good. Google could work with Dell or something to do this, and Google could even promise to stand behind Dell if Microsoft tries to retaliate in a way that almost nobody else (like RedHat) could. (Also note that with yet another six months or a year of hardware development, the specs on these netbooks are going to be pretty good. These netbooks also won't be subject to the Microsoft XP "sell it with only 1GB" issue, or anything other netbook-hobbling plans Microsoft might concoct.)
      • roc 17y ago
        Or, more likely, one or more netbook vendors are just done rolling their own linux distros for netbooks and have asked Google to step in. They don't want Android, as Android has some hardware requirements established by the OHA that aren't appropriate for netbooks. The end business goal may be to just get Google to create a better linux option, a -marketable- linux option, so those same vendors can haggle with microsoft for better volume licensing on Windows 7 netbook, including lifting those absurd hardware restrictions. And I guess it wouldn't hurt to have plan B ready, because users aren't going to tolerate Windows performance on netbooks for long.
      • fiaz 17y ago
        I have yet to see Google branded cell phones (based on Android). If this were to happen, then I would seriously question what Google's objective is from a business perspective. To shift directions and get into (old) businesses that are quickly heading towards commoditization is a step backwards. Keep in mind, their core business is advertising and as mixmax has pointed out, they want to lower the barrier to access this advertising. Trying to convince users to switch operating systems seems to me a rather convoluted path to achieving this objective.
        • jerf 17y ago
          Point. I should have said simply that there will be Netbooks running this within the year. Which, subsequently, there has been an announcement that this will happen. All I meant to say is that I'm sure this will be concretely available for purchase in stores and not merely some abstract new Linux distro. Nobody will have to "install" it. (It may not even be possible to install it.)