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

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 571553
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
50 comments so far
by galvanash on Sat 7th Sep 2013 08:31 UTC
galvanash
Member since:
2006-01-25

And it looks like 75% of them didn't get past the press release...

Quick hit list:

1. This is vendor lock-in - Google has already submitted this entire framework to the W3C for standards tracking. That doesn't mean that other browsers will necessarily support it, and it doesn't mean that it will become a standard, but it does mean that it is not an attempt at lock-in... They want other browsers to implement it - there is nothing about it that is Google specific. There is some overlap with existing standards (http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/), but it's close enough that it can be viewed more or less as an extension to the widget api.

2. You need a Google Account - You only need an account to get apps in the web app store, because... well that is how you get to the app store. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone from publishing an application anywhere they choose to, and you certainly don't need a google account to run one. Its just a zip file with a special extension.

3. This is forking the web - The web is not HTML and the web is not JavaScript... The web is HTTP. A web app, but definition, cannot be built without HTTP - it is simply required. This (chrome apps) don't need HTTP to function at all. It lets you build things you cannot build as pure web apps. The point is to use web technologies without relying on the web itself (other than as a bootstrapping mechanism - and even that isn't strictly required).

4. This is ActiveX all over again - Ummm no. That simple - its not even close. Please read about it a bit before jumping to conclusions.

I simply don't get all the Debbie Downer posts about this. Google has an OS, they want to gives developers a tool to build richer and more capable applications - things that can interact with hardware and can run without a network connection - you know, conventional applications. They don't design a framework for only Chrome OS though - they design a framework for any OS. It doesn't rely on any proprietary technologies, they share it with the rest of the industry so that if they want to they can implement the same thing in a compatible fashion, and they give it away for free...

Yeah, sounds like a total dick move to me...

Reply Score: 10