Google Chrome OEM Strategy To Take On IE 290
ruphus13 writes "In an effort to take on IE and make strong headway in its share of the browser market, Google is taking a page out of Microsoft's playbook and working on deals with PC OEMs to include Chrome in their devices. From the article: '[Google] is likely to pursue deals with major original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to put Chrome on their computers and devices. ... If Mozilla could get aggressive about this too, we could see Internet Explorer facing more serious competition than ever. ... Google, much more so than Mozilla, has enough global brand recognition, money, and savvy to make a big deal of this. ... Microsoft wooed Dell, Compaq, HP, Gateway, Acer and many other companies into making its browser the default choice on Windows desktops. Chrome currently has just under one percent market share, according to NetApplications. That number could rise significantly through this effort. Mozilla doesn't have the kind of money required to get the significant deals in this space, but Google definitely does.'"
Will it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Chrome isn't ready for prime time ... not a good idea at this point.
Why not just get them to include firefox and google apps, giving something of more perceived value?
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
I bet it will be by the time any deal get's done and there ready to start putting it in there process.
Or rather (Score:4, Insightful)
"Microsoft wooed Dell, Compaq, HP, Gateway, Acer and many other companies into making its browser the default choice on Windows desktops."
Or rather, they just didn't install a second browser at all, since the only browser kinda HAS to be the default. I really doubt much wooing was involved.
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:One evil for another. (Score:2, Insightful)
and shudder at the data they have on people.
Jesus, I hope you don't use the Internet at ALL outside of Slashdot, because Chrome is the least of your worries as far as tracking goes....
Google may be afraid of Ad Blockers (Score:4, Insightful)
Planning (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't, usually, start working on how you are going to distribute a product after you know it is ready for the market. You work on what you need to do to secure the distribution channels you want to have while you are getting the product ready, so when it is ready, those will be in place.
Presumably, Google has an idea of where it wants Chrome to go and a plan to get it there. If it doesn't then, sure, this discussion of OEM deals may be premature, but you certainly can't conclude that from the fact (which I certainly don't dispute, though I use Chrome for almost all of my home browsing now) that Chrome isn't ready today to be most people's sole browser.
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Google is being an innovator in this field at the moment, and so I'm glad that they're positioned to get more "default" marketshare via OEMs.
It will push Microsoft to innovate with their own browser in order to keep their search engine hits up.
One feature that I expect to see in the release version of Chrome is video chat. They released a plug-in to make Firefox compatible with their Google Talk chat's new video feature, but I'm betting that functionality will come built-in to Chrome.
Re:Television Ads (Score:4, Insightful)
You didn't say how the W3C doesn't define the standards. You don't say how they aren't valid. There are lots of controlling and regulating bodies that are not elected by the people. While you attempt to paint a grim picture by grouping the W3C in with two other organizations that aren't exactly shining examples of effectiveness or moral integrity, I'd have to protest the tactic on the grounds that it simply fails to disprove or invalidate my comment directly. Furthermore, you indicate how ICANN is out for its own gain, but not the other two. It would have been more interesting, however, if you managed to include ISO in the mix...
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Other posters are right. Chrome should not be dealing with OEMs to root out IE. It should be Firefox.
Apparently you don't quite understand the concept of competition. There isn't always "The Big Guy" and "One Underdog". Why should Firefox be the only one allowed to compete?
Re:Firefox actually seems to be better known (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this is going to play havoc on people's understanding of the internet. Most people already think IE is the internet, but at least they knew that google was a thing on the internet. Now Google is going to be another internet that looks like a sort of three-colored button, next to the old internet that looks like a blue "e", and on both you can have Google, but you can't have the blue e on the Google internet.
Expect some calls from confused family members, people.
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
But as far as rooting out IE goes, wouldn't you want the "best browser" to be the one to do it?
Obviously. The part where I disagree is which one is the best. You already know which one you want, so you can choose just fine. Let the other browsers compete at getting chosen by those that haven't decided.
Re:Planning (Score:3, Insightful)
Google could also offer a choice between Firefox and Chrome, or even install both to let the user experiment with which one they like best).
Google would win either way since Google and Mozilla already have a strategic alliance lasting until 2011 and both browsers have already integrated Google search, and I don't think Joe user wouldn't mind having them both given that he's already used to bundleware from the OEMs.
Suppose that the OEMs bundle Chrome in as the default browser and by some miracle Chrome's browser share replaces IE's overnight. People who knew only IE would still have to view each and every ad. They've given in to the fact that all ads must be seen, but they'll still be grateful that Chrome is cleaner, faster, and safer than their alternative was.
As for the rest of us, Google, where the hell are the plugins?!
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately, ActiveX is extremely common in corporate intranets, making it the one and only mandated browser for corporate use in a lot of places.
And IE is? (Score:5, Insightful)
Chrome isn't ready for prime time
And IE is? :)
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Firefox and Opera aren't standing still ...
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Chrome doesn't have adblock, and probably never will. Extensions are king, and firefox has that mindshare. Linkify, Greasemonkey, noscript, webdeveloper, firebug, etc.
I played with Chrome for about an hour and then removed it. It's a pretty horrible experience after firefox which makes it a rather pointless web browser.
Google's taking lessons from Cypress Hill! (Score:3, Insightful)
"Punk [playaz] bailin' every time that I use Chrome" - Cypress Hill, "Till Death Comes"
Granted, B-Real is talking about firearms here, but good for Google. It'd be interesting to see browser usage stats on machines that ship with both IE and Chrome preinstalled, although it wouldn't surprise me to see IE retain a majority share, just on name recognition alone.
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:2, Insightful)
Google will target embedded applications (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd bet that Google is looking to target embedded platforms that will need a lightweight browser in ROM. This would include things like cell phones/PDAs, netbooks, notebooks with a pre-boot environment, etc. This is what Chrome was designed for from the start.
The biggest killer app of them all is television. Over the next few years, The US has an impending mass uptake of new, higher resolution televisions that are suitable for web browsing and other text dominant internet activities. We already have a selection of set-top boxes and game consoles to provide usable internet functions on TV. Internet enabled televisions will become commonplace in the not too distant future. These will be the products of choice for aging, wealthy, and (relatively) technologically illiterate boomers.
If Google can get its foot in the door to that and other embedded markets then they can compete without having to face MS directly. I expect that MS will not be able to revamp Pocket IE to make it capable enough to be a viable competitor to Chrome on a platform where a web browser has to have all the bells and whistles to satisfy users.
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:2, Insightful)
In Safari's defence, I'm sure half those million+ results are in regards to land rovers hitting elephants and other African fauna.
On the contrary (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Will it really matter ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Firefox's 20% seems to be doing fairly well *without* ActiveX.
And this is a bullshit reason - ActiveX is a fucking piece of shit from a security point of view. Why would any sane person want to support it if they were not forced into it? With websites now working well with FireFox and understanding that being standards compliant is a good thing, we are now moving back into the "All the world is IE"?
And they call themselves non-evil?!
Mucking Forons, all who support ActiveX in Chrome.