My not-so-recent post about Google's browser, Chrome, touts the browser as an OS competitor instead of just another browser. After having read about Ted Dziuba's feedback on Michael Arrington's post on TechCrunch, I decided to take another look from a different perspective on Chrome again, and Ted's article does make more sense than Michael's post. To me, an operating system consists of a kernel and some applications. Chrome is simply just that - an application. If it's going to compete with Windows, *NIX, or OS X, it's going to need more than a browser. Maybe Android is Google's answer to competing with (netbook) operating systems, but only time will tell if that ever happens. On my home desktop system that I use for work and other stuff, I use Windows XP SP3, dual-booted with Ubuntu 8.04 or Hardy Heron (Hardy). Of course, I use Firefox whenever I'm using Hardy but when I'm booted to XP SP3, I use Chrome and Firefox. So I compared Chrome with my most-beloved Firefox, and I realized how shameful it was to think about permanently replacing Firefox with Chrome. Now, I'm only using Firefox. Here's why. Two processes for one webpage? What I noticed is that when I open an application while Chrome is running, the application's startup time seems to have tripled, or more, than when I was using Firefox. Notepad takes about a second or two to start. Not when Chrome is running, though. It takes about 20 seconds to open up. Sure, Firefox takes a longer time starting up than Chrome, but I do have a need to use other applications as well, especially when I'm trying to accomplish my other-job's tasks, and my browser takes a backseat when I'm coding. My system is on the brink of crashing whenever I try to launch any Adobe CS3 application while Chrome is running. I knew I had to find out what was causing this issue that was nonexistent pre-Chrome. I then fired up the Task Manager, then quickly looked for Chrome's process. It wasn't too hoggy, just about 20+ to 30+ megs of RAM used. But I saw two processes for Chrome, and the other process was about 12+ to 15+ megs. This with just ONE webpage open in Chrome. And whenever I opened up a new tab, another 12+ to 15+ megs of ram gets eaten up by a new Chrome process. Imagine if you have 10+ tabs, that's 120+ megs of RAM just for Chrome. Firefox maybe using up 130+ megs of RAM with about 12 tabs opened, but it doesn't make my computer slow down to a crawl. Google still has to develop a way for Chrome to be more efficient when handling system resources. Pretty, but not pretty enough. Another thing that I missed sorely from Firefox while I was in my Chrome-induced hallucination is the ability to add extensions or plugins. I no longer care so much about skinning the browser. I'm happy with what Mozilla came up for Firefox 3, and Chrome's tabs at the top instead of a menu bar is something that I'll always look for in a new browser. For me, the menu bar (File, Edit, View, etc.) is a waste of screen real estate (especially for netbooks) and if there's a way to hide or remove it, it should be added in the core. However, there are other Firefox plugins I can never live without, namely, Firebug, FireFTP, Foxmarks, and StumbleUpon. Chrome may have something similar to Firebug built-in, but there's no integrated FTP client, no bookmark synchronization feature (that I know of), and it has to be "hacked" for a very limited demo of the StumbleUpon toolbar to work. Chrome is pretty, but not pretty enough, IMHO, to forsake Firefox. With Google's record of not coming out of beta for a long time (read: GMail), I wonder how long Chrome will stay in beta, if it ever comes out of it at all. For now, I'm cleansing my system (and myself) of Chrome. So, are you still using Firefox or have you made the permanent switch to Chrome?

Lately, the urge for me to write something, anything, has been virtually non-existent. There are tons of topics that I can write about, but none of them seem interesting enough for me. New gadgets? Why bother? There's Gizmodo and Engadget, to start with. Weird news? Fark and Boing Boing comes to mind. Silicon Valley news ain't so great either. And TechCrunch and GigaOm has it covered. Basically, I'm on "read-only" mode, obsessing on scans of comic books I wasn't able to read before because I can't afford to collect them, except for those that I consider most awesome. Graphic novels are mostly the extent of my comic book collection. Also, this might be caused by Heroes' third season that began recently. And I'm sure a number of blogs are covering it. The fact of the matter is, I think I'm having some sort of writer's block, if one can consider me a writer. Although I have been writing my reviews and personal opinions about WordPress 2.7-hemorrhage, I can't help but feel some sort of inadequacy. It's been a long time since I wrote something substantial but not technology-related, if there ever was a time. A spirit walk is most likely appropriate at the moment, but I'm admittedly lazy. Nothing quite piques my interest right now. Unless, maybe, if, or when, I get a new gadget, I might have the urge to write about it. Wendy, my MSI Wind U100 netbook comes to mind.

Read the rest of this post »

So the cat is out of the bag. Google Chrome has been released. For those who haven't heard of it, Google Chrome is a browser in which Google designed the way they think a browser should be: a desktop application for web applications. Simply put, Chrome is a web browser. But of course, with Google, it's not just a simple browser. Chrome uses the Webkit engine, the very same engine that powers Safari. Webkit is a lot like Gecko, the engine that powers Mozilla Firefox, only faster. A lot faster. And as with all things Google touches, Webkit was greatly improved, hence it is really much faster than what Safari is using, and it all boils down to how fast the browser can interpret, or execute, javascript. And since Google relies heavily on javascript for its web applications, such as GMail, Google Calendar, etc. Google designed its own javascript handler for Webkit. Instead of letting Webkit use its own javascript handler, Google redesigned how Webkit handles javascript. Instead of one process handling multiple threads of javascript, they decided it would be better to have multiple processes handling one thread of javascript. This would make the web application respond faster and more stable. At least, that's how I understood it from their comic. I've been using Chrome since its launch. It doesn't have any extensions available yet, and I haven't seen an option to add some, but it is still too early in the beta stage to expect something as robust as Mozilla Firefox 3. And Google promises to release an API for developers, so it would simply be a matter of time before extensions, add-ons, or hacks start popping up. What I like about Chrome is the way it lets you maximize the virtual real estate you see when viewing web pages. There is no menu bar, just a button to house the browser options and other settings, and another button that houses options for the web page itself. The status bar usually found at the bottom of the window is only there when hovering over a link or when loading a page. It fades out as soon as the page finishes loading. As with tabbed browsing, the tabs are up top, away from the web page's content. The focus is on the content, not on the browser. There are times that I forget I have other tabs open simply because I was too focused on what I was doing on one tab. The navigation buttons are simple, and there is no stop button. Since you can always press the Esc key to stop loading a web page, you don't have to bother moving your mouse to click on the stop button. Also, the home button has become optional since they introduced the New Tab page. It displays thumbnail screenshots of the nine (9) most recent web pages you have frequented, and it also displays a list of your most recently closed tabs. It also displays a list of your recent bookmarks. And speaking of bookmarks, it is optional to have it integrated with the browser itself. I wonder when and how they will integrate Chrome with a Google Account. Incognito browsing lets you "plan a surprise party" with confidence that no one will know what you were doing. The "Omnibox" integrates the address bar and the search bar, taking a page from Mozilla Firefox 3's Awesome bar but a little more "evolved." And Chrome has its own task manager. I'm loving Chrome so far, but I have seen some quirks and eccentrities in its ingenuity. One is the overflowing text when typing in a text field in Plurk. It may be a CSS issue, or a Plurk issue, since I haven't seen this appear in other sites. That, or I'm not websurfing enough. Another is the smoothness of rounded corners. Although it supports CSS-enabled rounded corners due to Webkit's standards compliance, Mozilla Firefox renders the rounded corners more smoothly. Ajax is sometimes quirky, but most of the time, it works, and it's the same with Flash - videos or sites itself. I can't say much about Gears as I don't encounter much implementations as I should. Chrome is also resource hungry, as my desktop PC slowed to a crawl when my antivirus started its scheduled scan. I also checked the task manager, the Windows Task Manager, and it indicated that Chrome used about half of my physical memory. Also, a bug I found in Chrome is when I tried accessing my router. I didn't bother setting up a password for it, so I just leave the username field blank, and typed in the default password. Chrome would not let me proceed without filling in the username field. So I went back to Firefox to setup a router password and then tried Chrome to try accessing my router again. With the admin username and the password I set, it allowed me to access the router admin page. Chrome may have forced me to add a router password, but it should let me in and do exactly that using Chrome itself. I wonder how Google will address this in Mac and Linux. I would so love it if Chrome's Linux version had an Ubuntu-flavored color/theme. Features I would like to see added to Chrome in the future would be the ability to change the color of the window, or theming capabilities. Also, the ability to add extensions that are much like FireFTP, Stumbleupon, Delicious, and Foxmarks. I would have asked for Firebug, but when I tried the Inspect Element in the context menu, it showed me something that was achingly, very similar to Firebug. After searching for Chrome tips and tricks, hacks, and such, I stumbled upon an article from TechCrunch that may have proven what Google is actually aiming for, and it made sense. Google, with Chrome, is not really aiming for, or joining, a browser war. Right now, I'm about 70% sure I'll switch to Chrome and leave Firefox forever. But it's not just that. Google is joining the OS wars. With everything being put in the cloud these days, one would only need a browser to do whatever they need to do. And computers are being developed to simply use a browser without an operating system. The birth of the cloud computer is near. To Google and the Chrome developers, a tip of the hat or a pat on the back may not be enough and a big thank you is all I can manage to give you. This is a job well done. You may be evil, but you are so good at being evil. I simply can't wait for the next iteration of this great application.

It's still a snorefest as the limelight is shifted to other news, but Microsoft's bid is still up in the air as News Corp., the owners of MySpace, is joining Microsoft in its bid for Yahoo!. However, Yahoo! thinks it can avoid the acquisition bullet by merging with AOL. AOL, meanwhile, has its problems of its own as Time Warner is thinking of selling it off. Anyway, Yahoo! also thinks that making itself a company not worth being acquired (i.e. a company losing money) is a good thing and hopefully make Microsoft retract their offer. Basically, Yahoo! wants more money from Microsoft, and if Microsoft can't or won't increase the bid, Yahoo! won't sell. To further prove to Microsoft that they should not pursue the bid, Yahoo! "partners" with Google in which Google will handle the ads shown on 3% of Yahoo!'s search results page. And this is something that made Microsoft cry foul. Yahoo! is basically telling the world that they can no longer compete with Google and is throwing the towel. Google, therefore gets the monopoly on the search advertising wars. Of course, this is unacceptable. Here's my theory on what will happen. Microsoft teams up with News Corp. to give Yahoo! what they want: more money. This is AFTER Yahoo! merges with AOL. Google will be left alone to their own devices. So it's going to be Microsoft/MySpace/Yahoo!/AOL against Google. Microsoft will get Yahoo!, with or without News Corp. but before Yahoo! merges with AOL. If Yahoo! merges with AOL, Microsoft will have no choice but to give Yahoo! more money. And they can definitely do that by getting News Corp.'s money to up the offer. Michael Arrington of TechCrunch mentions something about the health of the Internet. I believe him. Whatever happens, expect layoffs in the thousands. That is, if the acquisition pushes through. If Microsoft decides to back out of the offer, Yahoo! will then continue to do what it is doing. And that would be losing money. And at this rate, Yahoo! will be in the deadpool by next year. Personally, I hope Yahoo! finds an angel before it's too late.

Catching wind from TechCrunch, Microsoft is now trying to befriend the open-source community by releasing 30,000 pages of documentation for Windows. And it's not all crap documentation. Specifications for Vista, Server 2008, Office 2007, and others are included.

Microsoft is providing a covenant not to sue open source developers for development or non-commercial distribution of implementations of these protocols. These developers will be able to use the documentation for free to develop products. Companies that engage in commercial distribution of these protocol implementations will be able to obtain a patent license from Microsoft, as will enterprises that obtain these implementations from a distributor that does not have such a patent license.

Not yet open-source but Microsoft is starting to embrace the force that is open-source (rhyme unintentional). Or are they really? One can speculate. And Microsoft is doing all this in the name of Interoperability and Data Portability. This may also be in line with their participation in the development of OpenID. The Redmond giants released this in a form of a promise. But as far as cliches go, promises are made to be broken. I still can't trust Microsoft. And this move of theirs is just making me more paranoid. I'll just keep my fingers crossed in the hopes that someday, there will be better interoperability between Microsoft and Open Source software.