How Shiny Is Google Chrome?

That's the question I asked when Apple released Safari for Windows. Now I ask it again about Google's new Chrome Web browser, now in beta testing for Windows.

I know, I know. It's cruel to blog on Apple Watch about a browser not available for the Mac. But at least Chrome, like Safari, is based on Webkit. Conceptually, applications and services supporting Chrome would also support Safari, assuming both browsers conform to the same standards. This is an example of where open source can really work for commercial development. Lucky Apple.

Google is more likely to woo developers than Apple, which is great news for Safari development. What's good for Chrome is good for Safari. However, should Chrome succeed, it will almost certainly come at Firefox's expense. Most of Mozilla's income comes from Google paid search. I expect Chrome to take share from Firefox, which means money from Mozilla.

GOT A TIP OR RUMOR?

Apple should sweat a little, too. Windows PCs are cheap compared with Macs. One day, Chrome could become the de facto user interface on cheap laptops, netbooks or MIDs (mobile Internet devices), many running—get this—running Windows XP Home. See my Microsoft Watch post about Chrome being the Web-based OS Netscape tried to be a decade ago.

Simply Powerful
This afternoon, I spent a couple hours testing Chrome, as did my eWEEK colleague Jim Rapoza. Like Jim, I've got good first impressions, but for different reasons.

I tested Chrome on an HP Artist Edition Notebook—Pavilion dv2800t—with 2.2GHz Intel Dual Core processor, 14-inch display (with 1280 x 800 resolution), 128MB discreet nVidia GeForce 8400M GS graphics (shared to 767MB), 2GB of RAM, 250GB hard drive (5400 rpm), multi-DVD burner (with LightScribe) and Windows Vista Ultimate Service Pack 1.

Chrome is the hallmark of minimalist user interface design. The UI is simple, hiding complexity from the user. The best UIs share these two symbiotic qualities of emphasizing simplicity and hiding complexity. I liken hiding complexity to the movement of the human arm. The movement is a highly complex process, with respect to the brain, nervous system, neural impulses, musculature, tendons and bones. The action of moving the arm to pick up an apple seems to the person as being a simple activity. The simplicity of movement is often overlooked until injury, such as a broken bone, or age increases complexity.

Web search is another example. The user interface is simple and familiar, while the complexity is kept with the back-end or algorithmic processes. Google emphasizes simplicity and hides complexity in most of its products. Complexity pulls back to the server, which handles tasks invisible through the simple user interfaces. So I wondered how Google would approach a browser, which doesn't benefit from data centers handling complex tasks.

Google's browser is both eloquent and simple. Chrome is a canvas on which Web sites fill with color and vitality. After using Chrome, the Firefox UI feels cramped and cluttered. The browser shouldn't get in the way of Web content, but cluttered UIs, tool bars and other add-ons often do just that.

Something else: For anyone using AJAX-enabled Web sites/services, Chrome will feel very familiar. The UI is drag-and-drop usable and customizable—sometimes to a fault. I exported bookmarks from Safari on the Mac and imported them to Chrome on the PC. I could see no easy facility for getting bookmarks I wanted onto the tool bar other than drag and drop, which worked breathlessly. Tabs drag and drop in more sensible fashion than either Firefox or Safari. More importantly, the tabs look like paper folder tabs.

Familiar, but Better
Good UIs build on familiar concepts, but extend them; iPhoto is a great example. Images are laid out like a photo album, but letting people do things they might have wanted to do but couldn't, like make the pictures larger. Chrome uses a real tab motif representing separate browsing experiences; they're running in separate sessions like distinct browsers. If one tab fails, Chrome doesn't crash, only the tab (or so claims Google; I had no crashes to test the feature).

When a new tab is launched, Chrome presents the six most visited Web pages. It's a nice touch that I would want to use for several days before committing to liking it. Security and privacy settings are similar to Safari, which means they are, to my tastes, inadequate. Internet Explorer 7 and 8 Beta 2 offer more granular control over cookies. When presenting browsing history, Chrome also gives the time when the user went to a Web page.

One startling feature, superbly presented, is "incognito." Chrome has a private browsing mode, like other browsers, but with a little more zing. Typically, private browsing applies to all tabs, but not Chrome. Incognito opens as a separate session in a new window. So it's possible to view content in separate private and nonprivate sessions. The feature is surprising because Google makes money off behavioral tracking tools that incognito could thwart.

Chrome definitely has lots of niceties. But are they really enough to warrant another browser? I'll need to do more testing before offering my answer about whether Chrome is needed. But I will say that most people probably need no more than two browsers, if one is inadequate. Firefox, Internet Explorer and Safari all have measurable market share. Chrome most certainly will gain share, simply because it comes from Google. If Chrome succeeds, it will be at the expense of some minor browsers' share (think Firefox and Opera, among others, including Safari) and later Internet Explorer.

One Microsoft Watch commenter exposed sentiments about the Google browser: "I'm writing this comment in Chrome. Seems to work OK, but seems like a very bare bones browser. I guess the simplicity is good for non-technical users. ... It seems reasonably quick and seems to display all the pages I've hit so far OK. Do I really need another browser? Why not."

Do you need another browser? Please answer in comments or by e-mail.

[Please send your tips or rumors to watchtips at live.com].

Related:

• Google Chrome Makes a Good First Impression, Emerging Tech, Sept. 2, 2008
• Google Chrome Security Features May Not Impress Web Surfers, eWEEK, Sept. 2, 2008
• Chrome: The Google OS, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 2, 2008
• Google Eats Its Young, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 2, 2008
• Google Chrome Browser to Challenge Microsoft, Google Watch, Sept. 1, 2008
• IE 8: The Rough Cut, Microsoft Watch, Aug. 27, 2008

Posted by Joe Wilcox on September 2, 2008 7:29 PM