Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 6th Sep 2013 15:22 UTC

The new apps look and behave much like the native apps you find on Windows and OS X. They're built using web technologies, but also with Chrome-specific code that means they won't be able to run on other web browsers - they're truly Chrome apps. They can exist outside of your browser window as distinct apps, work offline, and sync across devices and operating systems. They can also access your computer's GPU, storage, camera, ports, and Bluetooth connection. Chrome Apps are, for now, only available through Chrome on Windows or Chrome OS on a Chromebook. Mac users will have to wait another six weeks before their version of Chrome will be updated.

This is very important for Chrome OS - since this means it can now have applications outside of the browser. Google's plans for Chrome OS suddenly became a whole lot clearer.

Permalink for comment 571521
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Fri 6th Sep 2013 19:58 UTC
Member since:

I honestly can't find fault with this, besides my own general distaste for the absolute mockery of a developer environment that is HTML5/JS.

What Google is doing is creating a platform that runs in parallel to the "web" and using familiar technologies.

Microsoft has done the same with HTML5 apps on Windows 8, they call into Windows only WinRT APIs.

So while HTML, CSS, and JS is reused, there is still vendor stuff down below.

I don't think either approach is bad, only that it underscores the slow pace of innovation at the W3C. Obviously the web standards are moving at a glacial pace, so Google needs to fill in the cracks.

It seems to be, to me, an implicit acknowledgment that web technologies as they stand are still a poor fit for the scenarios that native applications require.

I find it hard to join in the chorus of vendor lock in when this isn't being pushed as a web technology. Google isn't advocating for people to write websites with Chrome only behavior, they're advertising a platform you develop with familiar technologies.

To me, the only person being 100% faultless here is Mozilla. They seem to have contributed everything they've had to invent on top of web standards back to the standards bodies as open specifications -- and that's an extremely good thing.

Reply Score: 8