Now, What About Chrome For iOS?

“It’s a tough question for us.”

That’s what Google SVP of Chrome Sundar Pichai told me when I asked him about the possibility of Chrome launching on iOS one day. I ask, of course, because Chrome just launched in beta for Android users (well, Ice Cream Sandwich users) today.

Pichai elaborated to say that there’s a lot of stuff they would want to do with Chrome for iOS but cannot due to Apple’s limitations. For example, they couldn’t use their V8 JavaScript engine. 

But not all hope is lost. Because both Chrome and Safari are built upon the same WebKit layout engine it should be easier to bring Chrome to iOS than say, Firefox, which uses Gecko. Apple and Google are both big contributors to WebKit itself. 

Still, a Chrome app for iOS would likely be largely what the other browsers available on iOS are: re-skinned versions of Mobile Safari (a wrapper for UIWebView). But that might not be all bad — Mobile Safari still offers a smoother browsing experience when compared to this new Mobile Chrome, as I laid out in my review.

It would be fantastic to get some of the Mobile Chrome UI elements on iOS. For one thing, the multi-tab experience is much better (and sort of Apple-like). And, of course, sync across browsers would be killer to have on iOS devices as well.

I suspect Google is thinking about Chrome for iOS more closely than they lead on. Chrome directly leads to more searches, which is what Google is all about. And it would do that on iOS as well. But if we do see anything, it will probably be a while. 

    • #tech
    • #apple
    • #chrome
    • #google
    • #ios
    • #browsers
  • February 7, 2012
  • 18
  • Permalink
  • Share
    Tweet

Chrome For Android: The Browser For The 1%

My title is literal, figurative, and facetious all in one. I just hope Google has a good sense of humor about it — because they have a good product on their hands.

First of all, yes, Chrome for Android is here. Second, it’s only compatible with Ice Cream Sandwich which is currently on — wait for it — 1% of Android devices. But in an attempt to add some silver-lining to the 1% joke, I will say that Chrome for Android is of a much higher class than the previous Android browser, the aptly-named and horribly icon’d: Browser.

Browser is dead. Long live Chrome.

Read More

Chrome Heads To The Penalty Box For Roughing

Following up on the story from yesterday, what a nightmare. I’m happy Google did (at least partially) the right thing in demoting the Chrome download site for 60 days — but I’m still not convinced it shouldn’t have been an outright ban, and for longer.

We all knew that everyone was going to pass the buck on this. Google hired a company to produce Chrome ads. They apparently thought they’d only be video ads, but they ended up (through another company) in paid posts. Yuck.

Google’s legal department has the other companies involved saying the right thing (which is an exact echo of what Google itself is saying), but I’m still not sure how they couldn’t be aware of at least the possibility of this happening. I think my back-and-forth with Frederic Lardinois sums this up pretty well:

@fredericl right. that’s like saying you hired a hitman to “clean”, then being surprised that he killed someone.

— MG Siegler (@parislemon) January 3, 2012

Passing the buck drives me insane. Again, I’m glad Google is taking some action, but they should fully fess up to this. They fucked up, pure and simple. Why are they advertising Chrome through third parties that clearly do shady things? Because it will hep market share? Barf. 

Again — and I’m going to keep harping on this — there’s too much overlap in Google’s different businesses now. What seems like a good idea to one area of the company, turns out to be one of the dumbest things Google has ever done. 

This is only going to get worse.

spacer
Pop-upView Separately

Why Hasn’t Safari Skyrocketed Like Chrome Has?

Howdy, “Partner”

Yesterday, in response to my post about the intrigue behind the new Google/Mozilla search deal, Peter Kasting, a founder member of the Google Chrome team, took to Google+ to respond. It’s a good response that you should read. And the comments are illuminating as well. 

But it doesn’t change anything that I wrote.

As David Ulevitch (who I quote in the original article) points out in the comments, nothing Kasting or I say is really in conflict. Kasting is actually just responding to one small piece of the bigger puzzle (which he himself notes in a follow-up comment). He takes exception to the notion that Google and Mozilla are competitors with Chrome and Firefox, respectively. “Google is funding a partner,” he writes (and italicizes for emphasis).

That’s a nice view. I might (and will) argue that it’s a little too straightforward — so much so that it borders on naiveté — but I believe Kasting and many of the other people working on Chrome believe it. That view is why they do what they do. And it’s why they’re great at what they do. They’re not just building a product, they’re helping the web. 

But I don’t work on the Chrome team. I work on the reality team. And to ignore the other layers here would be foolish. 

Read More

Pay To Stay

I’ve been thinking more about Google’s renewal of their search deal with Mozilla for Firefox. It’s fascinating on a few different levels. Most notably: Google is committing close to a billion dollars to bankroll a browser which is a rival to their own browser. 

Why?

Well, on the surface, they do get something out of the deal — something quite substantial. Firefox is a browser used by millions of people. Thanks to this deal, it means that almost all of those users will also be Google (Search) users by default.

I don’t know what the exact percentage of searches flowing through Firefox is, but you can bet it’s massive. Google searches mean Google ads shown. This is still by far their primary way of making money. Makes sense. Got it.

Okay, but…

Read More

Google Triples Their Firefox Pay To Keep Microsoft Away

Looks like the thought that Bing could step in as the new Firefox benefactor weren’t far off the mark at all. In fact, Microsoft tried to make such a deal happen, Kara Swisher reports. 

Ultimately it didn’t happen for one reason: money. At $300 million a year (with a minimum three-year contract), Google is nearly tripling their annual payments to Mozilla to keep Microsoft away.

Also interesting: Yahoo was bidding for the contract as well. But they didn’t have enough money to throw at Mozilla to compete with Google or Microsoft. Considering Bing powers Yahoo search, you’d think the two could have worked together on a bid to displace Google. Though who knows how high Google would have been willing to go. 

On the other hand, considering how much Microsoft spends to try and make Bing competitive each year, you’d think they’d be willing to go all-in on such a deal. 

Regardless, Mozilla played this well. Historically, over 80 percent of their revenues have come from their Google deal, and that will be much higher now as revenues will likely triple as well. 

Q:Which browser do you use the most regularly these day? I've been a Chrome addict for a while but Google has me worried lately.

spacer mlapida

Definitely still Chrome. But I’m with you — the browser certainly seems to be getting more buggy (and bloated) rather than less. This troubles me.

    • #tech
    • #chrome
    • #browsers
    • #google
  • November 17, 2011
  • 16
  • Permalink
  • Share
    Tweet

Opera Browser Gets a Dev Channel, Too

Funny. Next up, The IE dev channel!

*Shudder*

    • #tech
    • #ie
    • #opera
    • #browsers
  • May 3, 2011
  • 2
  • Permalink
  • Share
    Tweet
Related searches:
google chrome firefox browser permalink
gipoco.com is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its contents. This is a safe-cache copy of the original web site.