digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at linuxjournal.com —

GEARS+ANDROID+CHROME+LINUX: Everything Makes Sense Now!

linuxjournal.com — Until Chrome came along, Google's Master Mobile Plan didn't quite add up. Now it does. Chrome -- Google's new superbrowser -- is cream on the top of a new mobile software stack. Let's call it GACL, for Gears, Android and Chrome on Linux.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • YodaJones, on 09/22/2008, -26/+195Hey Ballmer, who's the bitch now?
  • TheWindBlows, on 09/22/2008, -9/+74This is Direct Profit, no "?????" involved.
    • feshmania, on 09/22/2008, -11/+6The Underpants Gnomes have finally won.
  • bgmowen, on 09/22/2008, -32/+45Replacing one computer superpower with another will never make us happy.
    • zeblith, on 09/22/2008, -1/+49... I didn't know we were capable of being happy.
    • sjmulder, on 09/22/2008, -6/+13I, for one…
    • JQP123, on 09/22/2008, -5/+23MS wants your money, Google wants your privacy ... which they can exploit to earn money.

      Which is more insidious?
      • zdiggler, on 09/22/2008, -3/+6Google want Money and Privacy. MS try to get our Privacy but they got sued.

        more of the same
      • JQP123, on 09/22/2008, -1/+7"MS try to get our Privacy but they got sued."

        Privacy was not at issue in any MS lawsuit that I recall. Also, I don't recall giving MS access to my email, email address, phone number, or any personal info as a pre-condition for using their products.
      • FredFredrickson, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1zdiggler - you obviously have no idea what the MS suit was about.
    • KibibyteBrain, on 09/22/2008, -3/+5Well, Android is pretty much its own little enclosed closed shell on top of Linux, so if this is true, then Google is just as much of an enemy to FOSS as MS, except using FOSS's own weapons against them.
      Plus, I think this is a bit over the top. Google merely has the chess pieces on the board. Apple has had a competitive OS with Windows for years now and it hasn't made that much of a difference other than getting in MS's head. And in the 90's Linux distros and other oses like NeXT and BeOS were at times far and away superior to MS's offerings, but it never seemed to make a difference.
    • mauriceh, on 09/22/2008, -9/+14There is a BIG difference:
      With M$, you buy a computer with an OS.
      WITH the OS comes the browser, and you can not remove it.
      Sure, you can install another browser, but lots of things will still open up in IE.
      Just try removing IE.
      It is embedded in the OS.

      With the Google software, you can run what apps you want,
      on the OS of your choice.

      With M$ Office, you create documents that are not portable.
      Sure, you can import them into Open Office, but those filters only work partially.

      With the alternatives you are not nearly so locked in.
      With Google Docs, they do not even provide a file type or file. You choose whatever common file type to save as offline.

      With M$ apps you do not have access to source code.
      Worried that IE is "calling home" with your private info?
      Remember, it is there even when you are not web browsing.
      Do you understand how easy it would be for M$ to install a key logger on all Windows machines?.. Windows Update..

      With Chrome or Firefox, etc, you DO have access to source, and it is peer reviewed.

      I could go on for a long time like this, but hopefully you now see the point.
      • JQP123, on 09/22/2008, -1/+22"Do you understand how easy it would be for M$ to install a key logger on all Windows machines?.. Windows Update.."

        Do you understand how easy this would be to detect?

        Do you understand how devastating this would be to MS?

        Do you understand why your assertions are without merit?

      • NexusV2, on 09/22/2008, -3/+7Do you understand he does has a point?
      • grenadesingh, on 09/22/2008, -3/+0@NexusV2: Do you understand that your question is incorrect?
      • foxbuntu, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5Does anyone here understand anything on computers other than Digg / Solitaire ? ...thought not....
      • JQP123, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4"... he does has a point?"

        What point? That source code is available for Google's browser?

        Source code is irrelevant since noone is asserting that Google has done anything surreptitiously. They don't have to. Instead they rely upon user ignorance and stupidity to willingly surrender full access to private email and documents.

        Spyware/virus/trojan authors have done this years ... give the user something for "free" in order to gain access.
    • vincentweber, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3You'll probably get tired of this, but that's why I got into Linux in the first place. Nobody really owns it and nobody controls it.
  • To0pak, on 09/22/2008, -3/+163so it's like Voltron?
  • YourTechSupport, on 09/22/2008, -2/+60Combine this with the Ai their building and the creepy genetics experiments on Google Island in the South Pacific.... and that logo that looks like a creature containment vessel.....
  • MacParrot, on 09/22/2008, -6/+58I think GLAC or CLAG sould sound better, though GLAC sounds more like a BSG curse...

    "My sensors are GLACCED! Does anyone see those Clagging Cylons?"
  • shamittomar, on 09/22/2008, -16/+39If google becomes the Ultimate Power like M$ now-a-days........ then it will also start taking wrong steps just like M$.
    Its all the same. The one at the top is always corrupted.
    • JQP123, on 09/22/2008, -9/+19MS wants your money, Google wants your privacy.

      Please choose wisely and carefully.






      • KirbyMeister, on 09/22/2008, -3/+16While accusing Google of weakening privacy is valid, it's not like they hate privacy. They just have some urge to warehouse a lot of data and use it to improve AdSense, which IMHO is way more than enough data. It's not that Google can't be trusted with that data - it's that it's just completely irresponsible to warehouse that much data irregardless of intentions. Other people will try to get at it.
      • Waiting2awake, on 09/22/2008, -2/+11Don't be silly they both want it all.....

        Don't fall for false dichotomies.
      • jamesdew, on 09/22/2008, -3/+16buried for saying irregardless
      • NinjaBull, on 09/22/2008, -8/+2@jamesdew, you suck. Go look up irregardless.
      • jamesdew, on 09/22/2008, -3/+10@ignorant cockface who didn't do what he is suggesting I do

        Irregardless is a term meaning in spite of or anyway, that has caused controversy since it first appeared in the early twentieth century. It is generally listed in dictionaries as "incorrect" or "nonstandard".
      • NinjaBull, on 09/22/2008, -11/+5buried for saying irregardless
      • skabyss, on 09/22/2008, -3/+12Hai guys, just stopping through to call ninjaBull an idiot
      • MonoDede, on 09/22/2008, -2/+6lollerskates ^^
    • DteK, on 09/22/2008, -3/+18two M$'s and he still gets dugg up? people must still be asleep.
      • pHreaksYcle, on 09/22/2008, -0/+6I don't even notice anymore, it looks natural.
    • MAGZine, on 09/22/2008, -1/+5No, then Google will be popular.
      You wanna know what popular things create? People against them. Fault finders, and fault find they will.
      You can already find them.

      How was/is Microsoft corrupted? They don't treat their employees badly, they just make a crap product now and again.
      • pHreaksYcle, on 09/22/2008, -2/+5I'll start, feel free to add to the list guys:

        1. Spreading F.U.D about open source
        2. Thinning the mindsets of children regarding computing by giving school discounts so the only "real" choice is Windows and MS Office etc (even thought Open Office works just fine) When kids grow up using Microsoft products, they're going to naturally want to use them in their adult lives, same as Coke and Pepsi putting machines in schools.

        That's my input, awaiting your response.
      • pHreaksYcle, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1If you bury, explain why.
      • jay019, on 09/25/2008, -0/+1It totally has nothing to do with creating an empire on the back of a CP/M clone and a rip off of apple lisa which was a rip off of Xerox PARC. *rollseyes*
    • skabyss, on 09/22/2008, -2/+7I think at this point google scares me in a way Microsoft has never been able to achieve.
      • HHP2K, on 09/23/2008, -0/+2Possibly because they make it all look so damn easy.
    • pnmoore, on 09/22/2008, -0/+7Absolute power corrupts absolutely. MS has never quite had the "absolute" power people accuse them of, but Google appears to be making a play for it. Not to say MS hasn't tried ;)

      Any company on this track would raise the same fears whether it be MS, Google, Apple or somebody we haven't heard of yet.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Once the founders Larry and Sergei are replaced, or start to enter retirement (like Bill Gates) then the company will begin to lose its soul.

      The original drive that propelled the company will be lost and only the profit engine will remain.
    • thefinger, on 09/23/2008, -3/+1Hi there, you little zit. I came here to digg you down for "M$". Oh, and also to block you. Good luck in the Boys Choir, you twit.
  • kernel16, on 09/22/2008, -18/+5All I can say is, my pc's still running windows, don't really feel the need to change at the moment. Until you actually force me to change by say MS dieing, I probably won't change the OS. I'll just update it with another warez version of windows when I absolutely have to, I don't think I ever paid for a copy of windows.
    • Waiting2awake, on 09/22/2008, -2/+5So I assume you are also using a horse an buggy to get around, and churning butter by hand?
    • MacParrot, on 09/22/2008, -2/+4Great Idea! You get the products you like for nothing and the companies that make it lives on breadcrumbs! Surely that's a long relationship in the making!

      You of course don't accept a paycheck from your job or failing that, don't accept the grades you get in school since that's like a total contradiction from your free lifestyle and would make you a hypocrite.
    • SundayBrunch, on 09/22/2008, -3/+2Kernel, don't listen to these pansies, I support your freeloading lifestyle, keep on keeping on, BRO. I even dugg you up. microsoft and stink Jobs are ***** their proverbial, collective pants right now.
  • kotatsu, on 09/22/2008, -28/+19Shoehorning Linux into this is laughable. Chrome isn't available on Linux the last time I checked, and even if it was it would make no difference. Chrome runs great on Windows, and you get the added bonus with Windows of it actually having a comprehensive line-up of software for it, such as Maya, MS Office, Photoshop, and masses of games.
    Personally I doubt how well Chrome will do even on popular platforms, as the masses simply don't see any real reason to ditch IE, which to be fair isn't actually a silly thing to say anymore as the latest versions of IE are not at all bad.
    • connieLingus, on 09/22/2008, -12/+2"Chrome runs great on Windows"

      it does?? why does it crash every 30 minutes then?
      • mediahaze, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5mine never crashes...just a little anecdotal evidence to show my bias.
      • NinjaBull, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Mine hasn't crashed once either.
      • ripter, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Mines been running rock solid.
    • KirbyMeister, on 09/22/2008, -3/+7A lot of things can run under WINE without a hassle nowadays. Although Windows itself is still the OS for games, everything else can be done on Linux...
    • zeebo, on 09/22/2008, -0/+8Its not laughable because Google Android is a Linux distribution. This is talking about Chrome on Android as Google's platform going forward. Just like how Apache can be run on Windows, but how when we talk about it, its generally in reference to the LAMP platform.
    • Induane, on 09/22/2008, -4/+5Not only that Maya actually runs natively on Linux, no W.I.N.E. required. Combine that with the fact that most of my games work on linux via wine:

      Diablo II (yea still play it)
      Sacred Underworld
      Sauerbraten
      Age of Empires II (yes again I still like this game)
      World of Warcraft
      Starcraft
      Warcraft III
      Total Annihilation
      Supreme Commander

      Sure there may be games that don't work but coincidentally all my games happen to.

      In addition Quake III and Wolfenstein Enemy Territory have native linux clients as well as my copy of Neverwinter Nights, which runs native on linux as well.

      Photoshop also runs via wine, though I actually prefer Gimp for the same reason most prefer photoshop. Its not really a functionality difference, its simply what I learned on. Many versions of Office run on linux too however I always use OpenOffice as it works are a good drop in replacement in most cases.

      I'd also like to contest that IE7 isn't that bad, they bolted on a bubbly tabbed interface onto an updated Trident Rendering engine with a few more bits of the CSS spec (still missing tons though) and the ability to render the alpha channel of png files without specifying a filter. It consumes lots of ram, with the latest versions of 8 beta consuming more ram than the entire XP operating system, is still a much utilized method of attack for malicious software due to security vulnerabilities that were never addressed, and generally still sucks in its implementations of the web standards that its still holding back the web. I can't use simple CSS functions like Inline Block (handy as hell) because its only supported on Safari, Firefox3, Epiphany, Konqueror, Opera, and Chrome. Wait.. only.. no NOT implemented in IE7 or 8 yet (though 8 isn't finalized so they may change that).

      Its not users who should ditch IE, its developers. Developing for all other browsers besides IE would initially migrate users to other browsers, then force MS to update even more (just as firefox has been doing).

      • NinjaBull, on 09/22/2008, -5/+1tl;dr
      • johnnysaucepn, on 09/22/2008, -3/+1"Developing for all other browsers besides IE would initially migrate users to other browsers"
        No, it wouldn't. It would only ensure that users don't visit your site.
      • Induane, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2I don't think so. A simple notice upon visiting stating that non web standard compliant browsers aren't supported and links to alternative browsers should work fine. Sure if you're the only site doing it it won't change anything but I'm talking about on a larger scale if people would eventually get tired of not being able to access their favorite sites and just migrate. That or IE would work harder to follow web standards (as in fact they have started to do to a degree).

        My bank website recommends Firefox for security reasons because its not as targeted for various exploits. Warnings like: "This page may not render correctly in outdated browsers such as Internet Explorer" would work but let people still visit the page. Who it drives away is really dependent on the type of site and target audience. Developing for IE then for everything else makes IE the odd one out and a pain so it really is in the interests of everyone to just start following the standards better as this will lead to better browsers all around.
      • Krondor, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1"My bank website recommends Firefox for security reasons because its not as targeted for various exploits."

        Seriously? What bank! I'll switch next week... I'm so sick of bank sites that don't work on Firefox. Half the time they do if you switch useragent but sooo many banks tell you they only support IE and Netscape of all things.
    • inkyblue2, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5you didn't read the article, i guess. "But the real sweet spot here isn't computers. It's mobile phones."

      not everything is about desktop fanboy wars. in this case, it's about google being able to control and distribute every layer of a system royalty-free on just about any platform you can imagine.
      • ErrorF002, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2At least somebody reads the whole article..... this isn't the usual PC pissing contest guys... This is something else.
    • jbmcb, on 09/22/2008, -4/+10> Chrome runs great on Windows

      And it will run great on Linux when the port is done.

      > such as Maya

      Which runs on Linux as well.

      > MS Office,

      OpenOffice.org, KOffice, Google Apps, Microsoft Office online

      > Photoshop

      Gimp, KPaint. Ok, there's really no 100% substitute for the 'shop, but how long before Adobe gets sick of Microsoft muscling their way into their territory, and releases creative suite for Linux?

      > masses of games

      That's what the Xbox, Wii and Playstation are for.



    • darthjure, on 09/22/2008, -1/+1I agree. I don't see Linux as part of the equation.
  • waltpsu, on 09/22/2008, -15/+75The logo is horrible. I knew I wasn't the only one who immediately thought of that Simon game.
    • johnnykwest, on 09/22/2008, -2/+43Why is it horrible? It reminded you of a nostalgic handheld game and also used Google's signature colours. Why is that bad? While I like Firefox, I don't think it's logo is in anyway inspiring or overly clever.

    • ho0ber, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4Doo doo doo doop!
    • itanshi, on 09/22/2008, -1/+30It's a pokeball...
    • glui2001, on 09/22/2008, -2/+3Same here. Simon indeed.
    • Depthfunction, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Simon says . . . you WILL use Chrome.
    • seraph582, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1No need to be so dramatic about it. It's not a big deal.
  • Alex006, on 09/22/2008, -21/+0
  • LoudNoise, on 09/22/2008, -13/+6So let me get this straight; Google's new browser is the icing on the cake for a system made up of it's new smart phone OS and another OS that it isn't even available for yet? What?
  • rrife, on 09/22/2008, -16/+4Stupid.
    • wigren, on 09/22/2008, -6/+4Do you really have to advertise your self?
  • GMMStraider, on 09/22/2008, -7/+25And it costs you nothing exept your private Data... but who needs that anyway
    • Waiting2awake, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1That is my main concern, however it is fair to point out that you have all the same worries regardless on which system you use...,
      • GMMStraider, on 09/22/2008, -0/+0Of course, but people seem to forget this very easaly. And Google is one of the biggest Companies which makes Profit out of Information.
      • Waiting2awake, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3GMM - I agree and I have caught myself cheering for Google a few times, until I catch myself. Nobody does nothing for nothing.

        Not sure how to fix that though. Sad that so many things have happened to cause so many people to become so cynical.
    • MAGZine, on 09/22/2008, -0/+7Google keeps 2% of whatever you type in your omibar bar. This is no more then FireFox. It's only doing this because it must contact Google for the request a search thing when you type stuff into the omibar. And, on top of that, Google now anonymizes data after only 9 months.

      Don't like it? Change the search engine that it contacts to do all of the searching, and turn off data collecting to help improve their service, and they're not tracking you.
      • Waiting2awake, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3You do sound like you have followed this pretty well. Can you actually do that? How secure can you make it? Call me cynical, but I would like to hear more about how you can make it "fairly" invisible.
      • pHreaksYcle, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1"fairly" invisible.

        Didn't see that part...explain.
      • MAGZine, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Right Click on the Omibar > Edit Search Engines.

        Options > Under the hood > untick Help Make Chrome better (...)
    • Rudegar, on 09/22/2008, -1/+6only terrorists have something to hide!
      palin told me so!
    • ertz, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1I don't think Google is interested in how much porn YOU watch every day.
  • NerveBand, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5I'd to call it icing on the cake. Glaze perhaps?
    • Vorin, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Glaze on a pizza?
      you, sir, might be on to something.
    • soupedupsupra, on 09/22/2008, -1/+2the cake is a lie.
  • xamox, on 09/22/2008, -7/+2Wow! I can't believe someone discovered googles secret plan, oh noes! No *****, see I thought they were just making a complete mobile operating system for the fun of it. You are so clever, give yourself a gold star.
  • TalksInMaths, on 09/22/2008, -1/+7When I read the headline I thought it was going to point to a Google OS and that's REALLY where this is heading. Think about it - buy up a company that is producing these small $400 sub-notebooks, put on a customized Linux distro, Gears with Google Docs for word processing and spreadsheets, Chrome to vieiw it all. Voila! A complete, portable, computer system, with viable Word & Excel replacements for under $500. Mark my words, this will all happen within the next year.
    • zydeco, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Google has always suggested that Android could be ported to things other than phones. I'd expect an EEE port as soon as the full source is available.
    • vincentweber, on 09/22/2008, -1/+42009 is going to be the year of Google on the desktop! I can feel it!

      But you are very right. They could just do it whenever they please...
      • jay019, on 09/25/2008, -0/+1lol. if that happens people will ***** bricks as it will be the year of the linux desktop by proxy.
    • jbo5112, on 10/31/2008, -0/+0Have you looked into gOS? It's not actually by Google. If it were, it would be less tied to the search giant.
  • Vadi0, on 09/22/2008, -2/+10Gears don't work on 64bit.
    • xoxota, on 09/22/2008, -0/+9And Chrome don't work on Mac.
      • hellbent88, on 09/22/2008, -6/+1I have Chrome on my mac on OSX 10.5

        wow thats oh most like a porno

        got some hot 3 some action going on there
      • surferjoemaui, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4Wrong, Chrome doesn't work on OS X would be much more accurate. it is my understanding that windows (therefore chrome) run great on a Mac. I admit I've never tried it as I am quite happy with OS X and the safari 4 beta (as far as i can tell it might as well be Chrome for the mac). Also safari HAS an ad blocker plugin (safari block), Chrome does not.
      • poprocksandsoda, on 09/22/2008, -1/+2Why not just use Safari, because that's all Chrome is ... the source code for WebKit branded Google and using another JavaScript engine. WedKit is the same code base used by Safari.
      • RobotBuddha, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1It 'kinda' does. Crossover put together a package. Ugly widgets, but it works and benchmarks faster than firefox on my macbook. Still, I agree that I'd rather a 'real' port.
    • jamesdew, on 09/22/2008, -2/+7the answer to both of those is "yet"
      • ethana2, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5Yes... and as for chrome on linux, I've run it, it just crashes a lot.
        ..but mac users never seem to know what WINE is for some reason..
      • jamesdew, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Ye I tried it too it wasn't great, I just hope the native version when it comes out is as good as the windows version.
    • hellbent88, on 09/22/2008, -1/+4its for a phone, and free stop complaining
    • vincentweber, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2Linux 64bit... custom wine version 32 bit... and it should work right away.

      Oh this is for when they want to make their own OS ofcourse... I am not telling you how to run it on Linux for yourself ;)
    • liljerk, on 09/22/2008, -2/+3Gears runs great on my xbox360 though
  • opivyh8su, on 09/22/2008, -3/+13Nothing will ever make "us" happy unless we're given everything for free and never have to work a day again in our lives.
    • MonoDede, on 09/22/2008, -0/+9And even then we'd complain about it because everything isn't fast enough or it's collecting too much private data or blah blah blah.
    • thefinger, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1We don't know what to do with anything that looks like paradise or perfection. We get it and then we trash it. We stagnate if there isn't something to bitch about.
  • MasterNayru, on 09/22/2008, -3/+2We should call it CLAG. After all, that name is more likely to stick.
    • kevdotbadger, on 09/22/2008, -1/+2CLAG describes you.

      Clearly large and gay.


  • MemphisExNoel, on 09/22/2008, -4/+1I have ony one thing to say...
    Authority corrupts... and with great power comes great responsibility (I know the second is stolen from Spiderman :p)

    Its just a matter of time to see how different Google is from Microsoft and Apple as well as all the rest...
  • evilgourmet, on 09/22/2008, -1/+3Until Chrome is linux inside, I guess I will have to wait...maybe it will be 64 bit too.
    • bsmang, on 09/22/2008, -1/+3Following links FTA, codeweavers got it running on wine... I had tried but failed. It wouldn't load pages for me in Ubuntu (amd64 version).. But they got it working there and on Mac:

      http://www.codeweavers.com/services/ports/chromium ...
      • RobotBuddha, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1I forget what it is offhand, but they create the icon with the wrong arguments. You have to add something like --no-sandbox into the call to wine the desktop icon tries.
      • bsmang, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1Yep, tried that. And --new-http and --in-process-plugins.. and different combinations of them, both via desktop link and command line. And 2 new versions of Wine. I was able to get chrome to load, but it wouldn't go to any sites, local or otherwise.

        The codeweavers-modified one just works. And it's nice and everything, but I still look forward to the real Linux version.
    • poprocksandsoda, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1There's no reason why Google couldn't have done this:

      http://mondaybynoon.com/2007/04/23/installing-and- ...

      As you see, WebKit ... the codebase used by Chrome and Safari ... can be ported to Linux.
      • Krondor, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Chrome is based on an older version of WebKit so you would need Google's fork of it... but yes there isn't anything hard about WebKit on Linux. You do know that WebKit came from Linux in the first place right? It was a fork of KHTML from KDE and extended by Apple.

        There was even talk of making KDE 4.1 konqueror use qtWebKit over KTHML, but I think that discussion is still ongoing as it seems to be KHTML for me (4.1.1 KDE).
  • jellygraph, on 09/22/2008, -3/+11Clown computing...
    Where the f* is my data?
    In the MTF'ing cloud
    • GhostFreeman, on 09/22/2008, -2/+3It's in those little cars the clowns drive around in.
  • gn0stik, on 09/22/2008, -3/+8I don't understand the addition of linux. I thought android was an independent mobile os.
    • Biznarie, on 09/22/2008, -0/+9Which is based off linux.
    • gn0stik, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1then isn't that a redundancy that should be left off of the acronym? I mean, either android or linux but not both.
  • sugarhigh4242, on 09/22/2008, -3/+7It's way too early to exaggerate Chrome into "essentially an operating system". I laughed out loud when I read that.

    Still, it is an interesting attempt to connect the dots. And it does sound mostly realistic. But if Chome is going to be the presentation layer for all our anywhere-enabled applications, one thing is missing: A standard Ajax toolkit. One of the big selling points of Chrome is it's ultra-fast javascript interpreter. So Google may finally be the ones to rid us of these miserable Flash (and Silverlight!) plugins.
    • jsebrech, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2There is no popular OS with a standard toolkit, so I don't get why you would argue ajax needs one. I expect the browser api to become somewhat like the windows api: painful to program directly, but quite powerful when wrapped in a toolkit.

      Flash and silverlight aren't going anywhere in the web apps sphere. How many of the popular web apps are built on flash/silverlight? The ajax tool stack is good enough, so there's simply not enough of an edge there. Modern ajax toolkits like dojo or extjs are very competitive with what silverlight and flash offer.
      • sugarhigh4242, on 09/22/2008, -0/+0Are you crazy? There's Win32 on Windows, Cocoa for OSX, GTK+ for Gnome, QT for KDE, why not some standard API based on Ajax for Google's new venture?

        You're absolutely right that there are already solid Ajax frameworks available, but maybe Google should "bless" one of them just to lay down a standard set of tools that are tested to work well with the rest of their web-app stack. If nothing else, it would be useful for new coders trying to get into Google's platform. It doesn't mean the other frameworks would be blacklisted.
  • MAGZine, on 09/22/2008, -1/+11Please don't compare my favourite browser to a game that sits there and makes fun of me because I can remember a long sequence.

    Oh who am I kidding, I can't get past 5.
    • tehjarvis, on 09/22/2008, -1/+7Can you breathe on your own?
      • kevdotbadger, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3judging by the lack of response i think he died.

        Well played.
    • MAGZine, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3I'm alive.

      Not well.
  • myranttoyou, on 09/22/2008, -2/+4If Chrome on Andriod makes such great sense, just put the damn phone out already. Chrome is hardly needed on Windows with FF, Safari and Opera.
  • ChayesFSS, on 09/22/2008, -0/+5I was unaware that google was going to pass 100% of the app profit to the developer, anyone know of an android development for dummies book?
    • WarMachineWCLH, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1I was thinking the same thing. I need to think of some small app that I can make now.
  • ethana2, on 09/22/2008, -2/+5If Windows was posix compliant, we wouldn't have to pull apps off the processor to have solid multi platform stuff.
    It's a shame, really, all those wasted cpu cycles..

    Does Javascript have OpenGL bindings?
    • elfprince13, on 09/22/2008, -0/+2i could imagine that happening once HTML5's gets more widespread support :D
      • elfprince13, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1< canvas >



        screw unintelligent tag stripping.
    • poprocksandsoda, on 09/22/2008, -0/+4Windows products have been POSIX-compliant for many years. That includes 2000, XP SP1, Server 2003, Vista and Server 2008.

      Someone has been feeding you bad information.
    • deadbaby, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3POSIX is actually quite old and really no longer relevant. If you're trying to do modern GUI based multi-platform apps POSIX is not really part of the equation at all.
  • cran, on 09/22/2008, -6/+1This might be credible, if Chrome weren't married to .NET.
    • poprocksandsoda, on 09/22/2008, -0/+3Chrome is not married to .NET at all. It's based off WebKit, the same browser code that Safari is written under.
  • Osmose1000, on 09/22/2008, -4/+8I love how sensationalist this article is. I'm tired of hearing people go on about how Chrome can run web apps as if they were applications. All it does is make a friggin shortcut that removes the address bar. Is that supposed to fool me into thinking that Gmail is now an application?

    Platform my ass.
    • Vorin, on 09/22/2008, -1/+1the article didn't say it was at this point, it actually said that "eventually" the browser will be able to disappear behind the browser.
    • d4ni, on 09/23/2008, -0/+1It also uses Gears to make it available offline, but I agree the article kinda hypes this feature too much.
  • madpuppy, on 09/22/2008, -3/+3so......the ready to run Linux version of chrome is out now???? blah....
  • krueger038, on 09/22/2008, -1/+5Damn, I knew that google chrome logo looked extremely familiar.
  • FallenTurtles, on 09/22/2008, -1/+5I learned nothing from this article. All I can do is think about playing Simon now. I'm so happy I still have mine!
  • frostcrow, on 09/22/2008, -2/+2I never thought of the Chrome logo as a Simon Says , looks more like a friendly HAL9000 eye. I thought it was just Google's way of saying " Yes, we are watching every thing you do and everywhere you do it."
  • GreatSunJester, on 09/22/2008, -1/+2And here I thought of the Chrome logo as more of an updated and stylish Microsoft flag than a Simon.
  • monostatic, on 09/22/2008, -1/+0I disagree in that Google will try to lock people in. In their benevolent perversion, it's the LEAST thing they'd ever want to do.
  • killdeer03, on 09/22/2008, -1/+1As am i....
  • xceptionaly, on 09/22/2008, -1/+2Why was Google building an army? To what purpose? For what greater good? In Google we trusted.
  • Clbull, on 09/22/2008, -1/+2Heres a point, a version of Chrome for Linux and Mac hasn't been RELEASED yet, yet its open source and can/or probably has been ported to Linux and Mac.

    As for the whole GACL thing. It does seem that part of Google's goal with Chrome is to provide better support for web applications through things like Google Gears and the V8 Javascript Engine.
  • Clbull, on 09/22/2008, -5/+0Heres a point, a version of Chrome for Linux and Mac hasn't been RELEASED yet, yet its open source and can/or probably has been ported to Linux and Mac.

    As for the whole GACL thing. It does seem that part of Google's goal with Chrome is to provide better support for web applications through things like Google Gears and the V8 Javascript Engine.
  • kragil, on 09/22/2008, -2/+1Good point, but Android is all about GPS+Compass:
    http://digg.com/gadgets/Picture_of_Android_phones_ ...
  • missingnoh4x, on 09/22/2008, -2/+3Headline fooled me into thinking the Linux port of Chrome was finally released.
  • specialbuddy1, on 09/22/2008, -0/+1Just hope that I can get Android for other phones besides the ones T-Mobile offers. T-Mobile is usually only good in cities.
  • Federbeast, on 09/22/2008, -7/+2But can it run Crysis?
  • Kanten, on 09/22/2008, -2/+11Google is Skynet.
  • Ziyonex, on 09/22/2008, -4/+1Google FTW!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.