They got one by us! After, oh I don't know, a near-decade of speculation about GoogleOS, the crew from Mountain View decided to drop a browser-bomb on us over the holiday. Announced midday yesterday, scheduled to launch midday today, it's Google's foray into the muddy waters of the browser market- Google Chrome.

When the first news stories started trickling in, I'll admit my heart skipped a few beats. Sure, I love Google, but do we really need another browser? Details were sparse. Rumours were wild. My last day on the beach was full of questions about what this meant for web developers and users. There are still plenty of questions surrounding Chrome, but Google's own Chrome Comic (a 40-page graphic masterpiece) does a fine job explaining what it's all about (as well as giving me a compulsive urge to F5 the two rumoured Chrome launch sites).

From what I've read (a lot; this release has probably excited me more than it should), despite entering a crowded market, Google Chrome looks to be amazing. Taking the best offerings from Opera, Safari, and Firefox, giving the browser a nice minimalistic feel, and completely overhauling how browsers are made and work gives me the sense that Chrome will eventually become my browser of choice. Eventually. It'll take a lot to pull me from Firefox (especially because of what I know is coming in 3.1), but Chrome may someday become a strong enough competitor.

Let's have a quick rundown of what's in store for Chrome users:

• Prominent, persistent tabs that can be dragged and dropped between windows, retaining their state and session info
• Better performance with today's RIA's acheived by separating each tab and plugin into it's own process (which means when one tab dies [with an awesome "Sad Tab" graphic, to boot!], the rest live on perfectly insulated and unharmed) and a completely new Javascript engine called V8
• Increased security from "sandboxing" all tabs and processes
• New methods of pop-up control that constrain all popups to their parent tab, keeping your browser and desktop from getting cluttered up with windows
• In-browser process management that allows a user to see and control which tabs and plugins are using which resources
• Built-in site blacklisting powered by a constantly updated list of known malicious sites that warn users when they encounter a possible phishing or malware-hosting site
• Increased privacy features, dubbed "Incognito", that function like Safari's Private Browsing option
• One of the best rendering engines available thanks to Chrome's base of Safari's WebKit engine, the nightly builds of which currently pass the Acid 3 tests and which has, for my money, the best font-rendering of any browser on the market

So basically, Chrome represents an entirely new way of thinking about browsers, provides what seems like an ideal environment for users, and wouldn't cause many (if any) headaches for designers and developers. A perfect storm of awesome, and one that has me salivating as we get closer to 1:00PM EST.

Will Google Chrome be the final nail in IE's coffin? Probably not. Firefox has had many years to do so, and is still working double time to make the inroads it has in market share, so the new kid on the block probably doesn't stand a chance, but it's got a great sounding system behind it, and even if it only ever becomes a niche browser, you can bet that most of the features that Big G is pioneering with Chrome will soon be incorporated by the other browser manufacturers. So no matter what, the users will win, which is and always has been Google's top priority.

More Info

• Google's Official Announcement
• Wikipedia article on Chrome

Long the bane of web developers everywhere, Internet Explorer's lack of compliance with even basic standards (and Redmond's seeming reticence to even make attempts at them) has for years slowed the adoption of new web technologies. Even with three very capable browsers snipping at their heels (go Firefox!), IE's six-years-in-the-making update was languid at best. As their market share continues to tumble, you'd think they'd maybe step it up a bit, but that hasn't seemed to be the case.

Granted, IE8 looks like it'll be a beast (and as the microformats guy here, I'm certainly thrilled to see them tackling hAtom despite their puzzling attempts to Redmond-ize it [seriously, hSlice?]), but with no official release date, who knows when we'll finally get an IE browser with some decent standards support. And further still, how long before adoption rates pick up and we can even take advantage of the new features (IE7 has been out for 2 years now, and IE6 still has >34% share!).

Tired of watching Microsoft ruin the web for everyone, the team at Mozilla has, according to reports from Ars Technica this week, taken it upon themselves to drag Internet Explorer out into the light. How? By releasing plugins for IE that will attempt to fix its many, many bugs. First up, support for the new canvas element in the forthcoming HTML5.

As awesome as it is, that's not really that helpful right now, given the sheer number of other bugs floating around, specifically in IE's problems with positioning, selectors, and Javascript. But it's just a first step. The next step is what's truly go to rock - ScreamingMonkey, a plugin that will enable Mozilla/Adobe's new Javascript engine (Tamarin) to run on IE, bringing all of the latest Javascript2 features to Internet Explorer.

While the plugins still have a long way to go, and the battle for adoption will be tricky (the Ars article mentions a possible tie-in with the next version of Flash, though I see that unlikely given the public's general annoyance with "unintended" installs [see: iTunes/QuickTime packaging], but I would love love love to be proven wrong on this), Mozilla has shown an unprecedented level of committment to making the web work for everyone.

Now if only we could get the guys from Opera to create a CSS plugin for IE, we'd be all set :)

Today's Wall Street Journal has an article announcing the results of Yahoo's trial-run of Google's ad platform. The results? "Positive."

Despite Google's ad network having a smaller reach than Yahoo, Google's ads bring in "significantly" more money. Should a Google-Yahoo partnership shape up, that additional revenue could add up to $1 billion a year to Yahoo's coffers.

Granted, a partnership between the two search giants (Google's market share: 67%; Yahoo's market share: 20%; source: Hitwise) would likely be difficult impossible to get by regulators, it gives Yahoo more leverage against Microsoft's hostile takeover attempts. Redmond's April 7th ultimatum might hold a little less weight now that Google may be sniffing around. And even if they're not, Yahoo would probably be wise to play that card ;)

If a Google-Yahoo partnership were to emerge from this, what would that mean for your SEO/SEM campaigns? Would a singular entity in the market make it easier and cheaper to reach your audience? Would the new search behemoth be able to mold internet marketing practices to it's own terms, at the expense of current SEO techniques? Or is any merger/acquisition/partnership destined to fail simply because "GooHoo" is a ridiculous name?

Give me your thoughts in the comments.

Perhaps in response to the online backlash from the developer community about IE8's proposed method of version targeting, or, as Microsoft's own press release hints at, fear of more potential legal trouble in the EU, the guys behind Internet Explorer announced yesterday that, after thinking long and hard about their previous position on the matter, IE8's wholly embraced (then widely criticized and, ultimately, reluctantly accepted) version targeting system was going to adhere to standards mode by default.

Whatever the impetus for this about-face is, the only thing that matters is that Microsoft has finally started making good decisions about web standards support.

Instead of continuing to put the onus on developers to submit to IE's quirks, Microsoft has finally woken up to the fact that the standards are here to stay and that the only way for the web to progress is to stop pandering to incompetence. That may seem a little harsh, but it's the truth. The web has grown by leaps and bounds over an incredibly short period of time, and the innovations we've come to expect from the web can only continue if EVERYBODY works towards the same goal- an open, accessible web.

I can completely understand Microsoft's desire to support older sites. Given the size of their userbase and the number of legacy intranets that depend on IE6 quirks, it's impossible (and unacceptable) to expect them to completely drop support for those customers. On the other hand, it is equally unacceptable that standards-aware developers be forced to use outdated technologies and compromise what's possible simply for the sake of those legacy applications.

With the news that IE8 will now, thankfully, take the logical route of rendering in IE8 Standards mode by default, the web community as a whole can only benefit from it's release. The web will, hopefully, no longer be restricted by Microsoft's (again, understandable but incorrectly handled) coddling of legacy users. Those users now have two options: set their servers to trigger the appropriate rendering engine in IE8, or get their code compliant. The latter is obviously preferable and will hopefully see some significant play, but in reality, probably won't. Those developers that have grown used to being pandered to by Redmond will probably just choose the first option (the quickest and cheapest, so I can't really fault them). But, hey, that's OK. They don't need to update if they don't want to, as long as the rest of us no longer need to worry about Microsoft "favoring" incorrect websites.

So thank you, Microsoft, for stepping up and putting some support behind your (let's be honest, less-than-fulfilled) past pledges to support web standards. It is really, truly appreciated.

Since the earliest days of the IE/NS browser wars, developers have struggled with inconsistent rendering issues across not only the Great Browser Divides, but also across versions. In 2000, Microsoft released IE6, which changed significantly from the previous version. To help protect sites that were developed around IE5.5's... unique... rendering bugs design features, Microsoft initiated DOCTYPE switching. In the early days of web development, not many sites put much focus on standards compliance. Just getting it working in two browsers was a feat in and of itself, nevermind trying to work in such trivialities as well-formedness or semantics.

So Microsoft's idea was to use the invalid nature of websites to their advantage. If a website had an outdated, malformed, or non-existent DOCTYPE, the designer probably didn't know what they were doing, and IE6 would render the site using IE5.5's incorrect (but designed for) box-model. The so-called “Quirks Mode”. If the site had a valid DOCTYPE, IE6 rendered it using the new engine and a (more) correct CSS implementation, “Standards Mode”.

A great idea, but it just isn't sustainable, as shortly thereafter, the Standards Police came in and everyone started doing things the right way. Skip ahead 7 years, and out comes IE7, which is leaps and bounds ahead of IE6 (though certainly still with faults). Now sites are presenting valid DOCTYPE's, but were still relying on their outdated box-model hackery, which IE7 promptly chokes on. We'd been developing for IE6 for the better part of a decade, and when we finally get used to all of her little quirks, BAM! IE7 is sprung on us and destroys it all. The developers at Microsoft had broken their cardinal rule for IE development, “don't break the web.”

Apparently, the boys from Redmond have learned from their mistakes, and are planning an interesting version targeting system for IE8, which is due to be released later this year. In concert with the Web Standards Project, MS has proposed a new meta declaration, X-UA-Compatible, which will allow designers to specify which version of IE should be used to render their pages. If you want IE8's brand spankin' new rendering engine to take a crack at it, set X-UA-Compatible to “IE=8”. If you'd rather stick with tried and true IE7 rendering, “IE=7”. If you always want to use the latest engine, from IE8 through IE666, use “IE=edge”. Now, you no longer need to worry about your site breaking if a visitor upgrades their browser before you've fixed any issues with it, and at the same time, you can take advantage of the better rendering capabilities if you need to.

Some other benefits offered include no longer needing multiple instances of IE running on the same machine. Get IE8, and just switch your X-UA-Compatible to 7 or 6, and you can test your site in all three versions with little more effort than hitting refresh. It also changes our entire method of browser targeting. Now, we look forward. If the browser's UA string contains this, do that. But that quickly breaks if the UA's change (a la Safari's questionable decision to include “Gecko” in it's UA, thus defeating almost all browser sniffers). Version targeting puts the onus on the browser, not the developer, and renders back to a specific version, instead of us trying to predict how future versions will handle things.

Of course, there are also significant issues that arise from this new system. For instance, just how faithful will the older renderings be in IE8? Can we really rely on the new system to exactly match that which we've come to expect? How many versions will be available, and how will we know which are available to our users? If IE8 includes multiple rendering engines, how long do we have until browsers become bloatware?

Fortunately, IE8 is still a few months out, and we can hopefully get some answers to these questions before our sites start exploding.