
Google Just Snuck Most of Chrome OS Onto the iPad - evo_9
http://thenextweb.com/google/2011/11/22/google-just-used-its-search-app-to-sneak-most-of-chrome-os-onto-the-ipad/
======
2arrs2ells
This article makes no sense.

Apple has already "snuck most of Chrome OS onto the iPad" - it's called mobile
Safari, and it shares the same WebKit foundation as Chrome/Chrome OS.

Google's new search app can act as a portal into the various Google Apps, and
that's somehow "sneaking in" their OS? All it's doing is taking features
already present on the iPad and making them (slightly) more visible.

~~~
Hrundi
"snuck" sounds ugly because it implies Google surreptitiously crawled itself
into the iPad.

Google implemented a combination of APIs provided by Apple. I don't see
something wrong with it, they don't appear to be breaking any rules. I would
have done the same.

While sharing the same foundation code is not as valuable as search + ads,
Google has a positive outcome, which stems from more scrutiny and active
development. In the end, it benefits both Chrome and Safari.

They "sneak in" in the sense that the experience is far better with the App.
To me, that makes a huge impact in user perception.

~~~
freehunter
"snuck" sounds ugly because the correct word is "sneaked".

------
modeless
_Honestly, if Google were to continue to update this app, replacing each of
the web versions of these apps with native ones, it could easily end up with a
fully iOS-native version of Google Chrome, running on the iPad._

Um, what? I think this guy is confused. iOS-native Google Apps would be great
to have, but they wouldn't be Chrome. Chrome is a browser and app platform,
which Apple will certainly not allow on the App Store, ever.

~~~
wisty
Given that they use the same renderers, and Apple is gradually copying
Chrome's security / reliability features (sand-boxing using subprocess) in
every part of their OS (it's arguably the biggest feature in Lion), I don't
think it really matters.

If Safari (and the tech behind it) really starts lagging, Google might worry a
little, but I can't see how it's a big deal.

Google is using the strategy Microsoft seems to have given up on - don't rely
on your ability to monopolise everything, just keep a foot in every door, and
keep pushing at every level.

~~~
modeless
It's the "app platform" parts of Chrome that are and will continue to be
missing from Safari. Things like WebGL, NaCl, WebM/P, Dart VM, and various
extension-only APIs that Chrome has introduced. WebGL may be enabled in Safari
eventually, but the rest have basically no chance as far as I can see. Not
that Safari necessarily _should_ implement all Chrome features, but it would
be nice if Chrome was actually available as competition.

~~~
xentronium
> Things like WebGL, NaCl, WebM/P, Dart VM, and various extension-only APIs
> that Chrome has introduced.

Can someone explain this to me: why such a move, when performed by microsoft
is considered EEE (embrace, extend & extinguish) and when performed by google
it suddenly becomes way to go?

~~~
daleharvey
WebGL started at Mozilla, then Opera. Apple/Google/Mozilla and Opera are part
of the working group that are developing it.

WebM/P solved a problem that people have been asking for for years.

Nacl and Dart could be considered EEE, but really the web has always been
about experimenting to push tech as google are doing, all these technologies
are open to be implemented elsewhere. Microsoft actively broke existing
technologies and attempted to replace them with closed ones

~~~
xentronium
Yeah, my problem was with NaCl and DartVM, not WebGL/WebM.

When developers start using <script type="text/dart"> scripts, they will break
web for a huge segment of users. And NaCl is only marginally better than
ActiveX. That's why I think both these technologies will not gain much
recognition outside google and some cool side projects.

~~~
beaumartinez
> _Both these technologies will not gain much recognition outside google and
> some cool side projects_

...Which is probably why there was little mention of "EEE" when they were
announced—how can Google extinguish when nobody uses their alternative?

------
sirn
Chrome OS or not asides, wow, I _really_ love the UI presented in the new
Google Search app. If they add some more browsing features (address bar, open
in new tab), it would become a really great Mobile Safari alternative...

~~~
bradmccarty
That may be precisely the problem, though - I'd venture to say that Apple will
be looking closely at that app. If it becomes a browser
replacement/alternative, then chances are it won't be given continued life.

~~~
sjs
What? Why not? iCab, Opera mobile, Opera mini, and dozen other browsers have
already existed in the App Store for a while now. There's no rule against
shipping a browser that uses UIWebView.

(There was some fuss around Opera mini because it doesn't use WebKit but it
was eventually approved as it doesn't render HTML directly, it's like Amazon's
Silk.)

------
idspispopd
This isn't sneaky at all, the author is perpetuating this google/apple hate
war. Google have put together a great app completely within the guidelines of
the appstore.

------
tantrumSeeker
Android vs iOS tablet stories are getting so old already. Both platforms are
almost practically the same technologically as they are just both mobile Unix
variants with the same or equivalent hardware. It's just a matter of design
preferences and price points. Apple software tends to be less utilitarian and
more simple and consumer friendly while Google lays on the utilitarian techie
feel really thick.

------
GBKS
This app just feels wrong on the iPad. While the main screens are nicely done,
the individual apps are just the mobile or web versions. This makes for a very
inconsistent UI and experience.

Personally I don't think this app should exist. Google search is built into
the safari UI after all.

------
anigbrowl
The most interesting aspect of this otherwise-thin article is that it
highlights the ongoing internal competition between Chrome as a web OS vs the
rich client-side framework offered by Android. I have the feeling that the two
teams within Google see this as something of a zero-sum game.

------
junglehunter
Things that make it at top of HN these days!

------
spinchange
This post embodies so much that is wrong with tech blogs. A false, inaccurate
narrative to fit the conflated ideas of app UX with browser/OS use case. He's
been called out by myself and others in the comments and doesn't care that
he's wrong or misleading. Totally senseless.

------
timmiley
This is not the first time Chrome OS got onto the IPad !!!

~~~
bradmccarty
Other than via Jailbreak? Source?

------
esutton
Wow the video really portrays chrome os 2.0

------
yanw
The thing I like most about the iOS Gmail app is that it’s an elegant
solution, they packaged the excellent webapp (the soon to be released
redesign) and endowed it with native notification capability. It’s a cost-
effective solution and one that makes sense, packaging webapps and augmenting
them with native capabilities, voice control in the case of the search app.
Now my question is when will we see the new Google design on the desktop?

~~~
frou_dh
Web-app repackaging instead of a tailored native app seems mostly of benefit
to the developer rather than users. I don't especially care how easy a time
developers of apps I use had.

Reminds me a bit of the "console port" phenomenon that ruffles PC gamers
sitting with their gleaming machines.

~~~
yanw
Even when the webapp is great? I don't see why they or anyone else should
maintain several versions of the same app, focusing on one version and
iterating quickly is surly to everyone's benefit.

~~~
MrScruff
I wouldn't describe the webapp as great. Since it attempts to emulate aspects
of UIKit it suffers greatly from the uncanny valley effect. The performance
and feel is poor compared to a native app.

I realise it's more convenient for Google, but I struggle to believe that's
the primary concern when a company of their size develops an app for a
platform with hundreds of millions of users.

To me it feels the app is intentionally crippled for some business reason.
Perhaps it would be more difficut to target ads in a native app, or maybe they
want to push people towards Android. As a user, I really don't care and it
reflects poorly on them to produce a substandard experience for their users.

Roll on Sparrow for iOS.

