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.

Thread beginning with comment 571527
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Nelson
by acobar on Fri 6th Sep 2013 20:44 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
Member since:

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.

I agree with your whole post and would like to add the following: how can it be "vendor lock-in" if it is multi-platform and Google is not even close to be a dominant player? It is very different from IE6 case, for example, in that you were obligated to run that freaking insecure browser under MS Windows to access some sites facilities.

It seems more "java-like" API and being the whole Chrome the "interpreter". Yet, I would not like to use any "application" build this way as I disliked 99%+ of java apps I tried: they were slow and foreign at that time though things may be a bit different this time around, as we have way better computers now and things would not be as terrible as they used to be.

However, unless Google keeps true to its motto "Don't be evil" and properly document the expected behavior of the components involved so that, for example, Mozilla or Microsoft would be able to reproduce and run the apps, I would not touch or write any code for it. Perhaps, it is just me.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Nelson
by zima on Sat 7th Sep 2013 12:25 in reply to "RE: Comment by Nelson"
zima Member since:

Google is not even close to be a dominant player

I'm not sure about that, the amount of green on this map is getting a bit scary... ;)

edit: OSNews breaks more complex links ...I mean the map in the top right of

Edited 2013-09-07 12:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5