So Mike and NovaJinx have taken a stand against Google’s new browser Chrome; which I think was aptly named after what Mozilla coders call running XUL apps. From my perspective, and that of a CNET analyst I heard on Marketplace, Chrome is a chess move, and an aggressive one.
Chrome is not going to gain large market share of browserdom, but it is going to force Mozilla and Microsoft to develop some new kicks; innovation. It’s going force browsers to provide a rich web-application environment, and this, in turn, will only help Google (since they’ve been going hard at web-app development for years now). In short, Chrome is necessary to stimulate the browser world.
Now about the EULA, clause 11 looks terrible, yes, but I cannot fully agree that it was interpreted properly. The statement is disclosed with regard to Services, and Chrome is all but a service; it provides access, but it is not a service. In fact, the first comment over at SlashDot, states what I was thinking when I read Mike’s post… that is the Original TOS for Apps, and it does in fact apply to Google’s services (Video, Photo, Mail, Notebooks, Documents, Calendar, etc). Until it is made clear by Google, I’m not falling either way, but there is always Chromium, which has no such things (due to open-source license).
That said, I really have no intention of replacing Firefox, that’d be crazy. I don’t plan on using Chrome in the future either, as all my systems are linux-flavored atm. Still, I like Google’s move, and I like even more their reimplemented ECMA (javascript) engine V8.
Mozilla SQUEEZE….
Vague EULA-statements can be interpreted in any direction but that’s exactly why it’s not really a positive thing. Lawyers can twist anything to fit their customer’s “needs”, if Google for some reason decides to act using the rights stated on the agreement. I’m not saying that it would but when large companies are concerned, nothing is certain. I’d rather play it safe.
Well, if I was interested in Chrome to begin with. Opera for the luv ^^
See my response to Mike’s post. This is sort of “as expected” and not at all “shocking” imho. Also, not worthy of the UNINSTALL, UNINSTALL sentiment floating around.
Good call lolikitsune!
I just don’t see any benefits in using Chrome over Firefox at the moment.. if anything it may mean more work when it comes to web development. (PLEASE LET THEM STAY TO STANDARDS)
I hear you there mellow, STANDARDS ftlog! I think Google likes standards, because it is allowing specification to fall on another organization’s hand, and gives them a good guideline. The V8 engine is to spec, and I expect the Mozilla/Gecko crew to be figuring out how to implement the module into the browser.
As for Chrome, it may be a quick little way to bring up a page, but I don’t see it gaining huge market share in the long-run.