Tag: Chrome

Categories
Web Technology

My SenchaCon Hackathon Entry

The last day of SenchaCon was a hackathon, where everyone that stuck around (probably over 100 people) grouped together and hacked away to see who could make the coolest one-day project. There were a LOT of great apps, and several came away with cash and prizes (all of it very well earned!).

Not featured in the winners list is the app I made, because I missed the submission deadline by about twenty minutes. All this because I lost far too much time debugging issues with HTML5’s native drag-and-drop API. (I was planning on writing a rant about it, but Quirksmode beat me to the punch.)

In any event, I’ve uploaded the incredibly raw creation, and you can now play my simple HTML5 Video Puzzle Game. I only tested in Chrome, but it seems to run alright in the latest Aurora build of Firefox. Basically the app loads up an HTML5 video, slices it into 16 canvases, and scrambles the pieces. Your job is to re-arrange them by dragging them back into place (using HTML5’s native drag-and-drop, of course).

It’s really, really unpolished. I spent all of about 8 seconds on the styling, and there are a lot of features that are complete but inaccessible (like slicing the video into more pieces). I might try to fix it up later.

Anyway, the whole day was a lot of fun, just like the rest of the conference. It would be awesome to go again next year. We’ll see!

Until then, happy hacking, all my fellow attendees!

Categories
Web Technology

Is Firefox Past its Prime?

A few weeks ago, in a post about why Google+ is going to succeed, I noted that Google Chrome has been on an upward trend of about .5–1% per month since it launched nearly two years ago.

While I didn’t mention it at the time, Firefox has an interesting usage graph as well. If you follow that link, you’ll see that Firefox’s curve hovered a little over 30% for the tail end of 2009 and the better part of 2010, but has started to drop over the past twelve months.

If these trends continue, Chrome will be more popular than Firefox by the end of next year.

What does this mean for everyone’s favourite open-source browser?

From Phoenix to Providence.

Back around 2003, the ‘net was desperate for something new. Sure there were other browsers around, but nobody could hold a candle to the market-dominating behemoth that was Internet Explorer (source). Innovation was non-existent, and the web as we knew it was suffocating.

Enter Mozilla. The release of Firefox 1.0 in 2004 was a breath of fresh air for the online community. Suddenly there was an open-source, standards-compliant competitor gaining momentum. We were thrust from the shackles of monopoly into an arms race that culminated in the second browser war.

Mozilla was a critical piece of the puzzle. It was a veritable flagship of new, exciting features. Better CSS support. A clean, tabbed interface. The prevalence and importance of add-ons could be its own post; countless extensions have become standard features across the board of popular browsers.

By the time Firefox 3 was released, in June 2008, Mozilla could do no wrong. Everything was on the up-and-up.

Then, the landscape changed.

Is Firefox still necessary?

With Microsoft innovating again (see IE9), Apple’s devices gaining popularity (and Safari with them), and Google bursting into the browser space with Chrome, competition was hot in 2009/2010.

Firefox still played a key role at this time: it was the yardstick against which all other browsers were held. Sure Safari and Chrome have built-in development tools, but are they as good as Firebug? How does WebKit’s HTML5 support compare to Gecko’s? And isn’t IE still laughably behind?

But this role has run its course. The major players are now well-established. Most users are aware of alternatives to their operating systems’ default browsers.

This can’t be a long-term position for Firefox. It won’t last.

The competition is no longer resting on its laurels. Chrome is closing in. Internet Explorer is finally in a position to reverse its eight-year downward trend, and WebKit is absolutely dominating this year’s explosive rise in mobile browsing.

Extensions are everywhere. Support for standards has never been better. Firefox is quietly becoming less and less relevant with each passing update.

So I ask again:

Does the golden age for Firefox lie in its past?

Categories
Web Technology

Why Google+ is Going to Succeed

It’s official, I’m making a call: Google+ is going to work out just fine.

I know there are plenty of skeptics out there, so let’s go ahead and address the most common concerns:

Common Concern #1: Google+ can’t compete with Facebook.

The idea: Facebook is too popular, and a new network like Google+ won’t gain enough traction to reach critical mass.

Why that’s dead wrong: Google knows a thing or two about taking on massively-successful competitors. If it can hold its own against Apple and Mozilla, it can hold its own against Facebook.

The long answer:

Google doesn’t try to gain market share in one overwhelming blow. Google prefers slow, steady growth.

Look at Android. When it launched in Q4 of 2008, Apple had already sold nearly 10 million iPhones — and Steve & co. were getting started. Google didn’t try to win these users over immediately; they gradually earned market share one user at a time. Now Android is more popular than iOS, and all signs point to continued, step-by-step growth.

Need more proof? Let’s talk Chrome. At launch in 2008, Google’s browser started out with roughly 1% of the world’s internet users. Since then, Chrome has slowly crawled along, picking up half a percent of the market every month or so (stats). It now owns a whopping 20% of the browsing market, and there’s no reason to believe it’s going anywhere but up. Half a percent at a time.

Google+ isn’t out to crush Facebook all in one go. It’s going to slowly pick up users, little by little, until it’s a force to be reckoned with in the social media space.

Common Concern #2: Google+ is going to end up just like Google Wave.

The idea: Google’s last major product launch failed. Why should Google+ be any different?

Why that’s dead wrong: Google learns from mistakes. It’s a wildly successful company full of incredibly smart people. If anything, Wave’s failure will help the Google+ team overcome similar challenges.

The long answer:

Google Wave failed for a lot of reasons. It was difficult to explain to others, its success relied too much on developers, and invites were a mess. Google+ has fixed all of these problems.

“It’s just like Facebook” is an adequate description of Google+. Everyone knows Facebook, and that begs questions like “well, what is different?”. These conversations show what Google+ is really about: polish. It doesn’t have a bunch of killer new features, it just has a slightly-better version of the features common to most social media tools.

The invite system is much improved as well. Google Wave fed users a meagre handful of invites on an ad-hoc schedule. This meant carefully choosing who to invite, any only inviting a few friends at a time. The invite system for Google+ is more like a valve; when the servers can handle more users, the valve opens, and everyone can invite as many people as they want. When capacity fills, the valve closes, and we take a short break until the next tide.

Google+ isn’t Wave. It’s not just a different product, it’s a better product. Run by a better team, with a better plan going forward. Why expect anything less from an internet powerhouse with a proven track record?

Even if I’m wrong, I still win.

You know what the best part is about Android vs iOS and Chrome vs Firefox?

Of course you do. Competition.

High-profile technology wars bring major innovation to the market, and that’s always a win for users. Just look at how much smartphones and browsers have advanced in the past three years or so. All of it thanks to increased competition.

Ultimately, it doesn’t matter if Google+ succeeds. The real value is the threat — Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Yammer… they all have to up their game to stay competitive. As a user of these networking tools, we’re certain to benefit for the foreseeable future.

What do you think?

This post also appears on the Macadamian blog.

Categories
Web Misc

Opera vs Reality

2009 was an exciting year for the web browser crowd:

  • Google released Chrome.
  • Apple ported Safari to Windows.
  • Firefox picked up a lot of market share.
  • Microsoft actually produced a half-decent version of Internet Explorer.
  • The iPhone and Android finally made mobile browsing popular.
  • Support for HTML5 and CSS3 was way up across the board.

The term crowd is especially appropriate here because it really is starting to get very crowded. For a long time the browser war has been fought largely between two major players at a time (IE/Netscape, IE/Firefox) and all of a sudden we have four major companies with fantastic browsers available to the vast majority of users. Oh, and then there’s Opera.

Here’s the thing about Opera

Opera is in serious trouble because it doesn’t have a “thing”:

  • Internet Explorer’s thing is its existing market share. It has a lot more users than everyone else, so its going to be a major player for the foreseeable future.
  • Firefox’s thing is its community. Not just its core developers, but the people who create addons or personas or rally everyone they know to go download the latest version on launch day. It’s easily the most passionate user group of the bunch.
  • Chrome’s thing is its brand. When people think web, they think Google. Google has the best search, a fantastic email client, why not a great browser? Users rely on Google for a great online experience, and Google has a lot of high-traffic areas where it can push Chrome.
  • Apple’s thing is its loyalty. Apple fanboys are a loyal bunch — most of them will stick with Safari on their Mac and many will consider getting Safari for any Windows computers they’re forced to use. Apple also has the iPhone, which gives it a growing space where it has the only browser (not that any iPhone users mind — loyalty, remember?).

Opera has nothing. It used to be the most advanced browser for HTML5 support, then everyone else caught up. It used to be a major player in the mobile space, then Apple and Google obliterated it. It used to be a fun browser for geeks to talk about, but now the buzz is all Chrome. It’s not enough to be an alternative to IE anymore; users are demanding more from their browsing experience, and they’re flush with places to find it.

What’s even worse is that there isn’t really anything you or I can do to help. Opera’s engine isn’t open source like Gecko (Firefox) or Webkit (Chrome/Safari) and they don’t have the extensibility of Firefox or Chrome. It doesn’t have the de-facto standard advantage in Windows (IE), OSX (Safari) or linux (Firefox), and even if I wanted to rally some Opera enthusiasts together, where would I start? How many people do you know that have even heard of Opera?

I don’t have anything against Opera (it’s a fine browser), it’s just that it’s no longer relevant — there are too many better options around preventing Opera from picking up new users, and I can’t think of a single significant reason for its existing users to stick with it.

Any Opera fans out there?

Do you use Opera? Do you have any thoughts on Opera’s future? Be sure to leave a comment.