"At this point, all the web browsers pretty much work the same way."
That's what I was told in 2008, when I was trying to sell the idea that organizations should have more than just Internet Explorer on their standard desktop image. I didn't bother pushing the point -- my elevator pitch wasn't prepared for beliefs that far from the truth.
Soon after that, Chrome was released and literally revolutionized the web browser landscape. If you haven't ever read it, you seriously need to sit down and go through the entire Google Chrome comicbook, so you can appreciate what a huge change it represented. Almost three years later, Internet Explorer is just beginning to catch up to what Chrome was doing in Fall of 2008!
---
What's wrong with Internet Explorer?
IE's web standards support is years behind all other major web browsers. This doesn't just mean that your teachers won't see shadows and design elements (although that's true, too). I'm talking about core, fundamental features of the web that are supported in current versions of Chrome and Firefox that aren't yet supported in IE 9 or even in the current previews of IE 10. (References: charts comparing many browser versions at once, or compare two specific browser versions in detail)
IE is slower than other browsers. If you give teachers the option of a faster browser, you could save money by stretching the life of your hardware. (Reference: typical browser test results) Additionally, because IE loads pages slower, you have to compensate by lowering the quality of those pages, and the quality of the tools you offer to teachers.
If you only have IE, then IE problems are always show-stoppers. Teachers can't easily work around web tool problems that only affect IE because they don't have other browsers installed.
Those are solid reasons on their own, but they're all based on the current version, IE9. If your computers use Windows XP, you can't even install IE9, it only supports Windows 7! These problems, then, are all multiplied because you are literally using a browser (IE8) that was behind the times when it was released over two years ago.
---
If you have to decide on one additional web browser (and you don't), you should offer Chrome.
Firefox is more commonly known, but Chrome really is the leader. It is faster and more secure/stable. Chrome already has 20% market share and is on track to have more users than IE or Firefox in less than 2 years. (Reference: Pingdom blogs about Google Chrome)
On a practical note, Chrome also seems to have stronger support for group management than Firefox, although there are some Firefox options out there.
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Google+ is the next generation of social networking, thanks to +Circles
It was a magical moment when I saw the Google+ announcement. Immediately, it was obvious that Google+ is on a different scale of magnitude than Buzz, Wave, or Connect. Those were small potatoes, side projects that missed the big picture.
This is Chrome big. Maybe bigger. This might be Gmail big.
Why?
---
Social networking has been stagnant for several years. Since the advent of Twitter, there have been no new major players to speak of. Facebook is relying heavily on network effects -- people join Facebook and stay active because that's where everyone is, not because the features are fresh and useful.
The elephant in the room with social networking is that Twitter, Facebook, and pretty much everything else are built wrong for how we actually interact with each other. As everyone joined Facebook, we've ended up with "friends" representing many aspects of our lives: schools, neighborhoods, jobs, hobbies, family members. And, even though we act a little bit differently with each of these people in real life, on Facebook, we have to present the same face to everyone we know. People don't cringe because they don't want anyone to see a picture of them with an empty bottle of wine; they cringe because Facebook shows that picture to everyone.
---
Google+ has several potential killer apps, like nifty video chat and Instant Upload to a private album. The most important bit, though, is +Circles. Call it the killer glue that will hold everything together. The idea of +Circles is that the entire social network is built, ground-up, to let you manage your "friend" connections in groups that make sense. So, you can tell all your close friends about your night on the town and talk with your family about the reunion without cross-pollinating. This is exactly what we do in real life, and it's the part of Google+ that gives it the most potential.
Google+ is "post-Facebook". It's the next evolution of social networking.
This is Chrome big. Maybe bigger. This might be Gmail big.
Why?
---
Social networking has been stagnant for several years. Since the advent of Twitter, there have been no new major players to speak of. Facebook is relying heavily on network effects -- people join Facebook and stay active because that's where everyone is, not because the features are fresh and useful.
The elephant in the room with social networking is that Twitter, Facebook, and pretty much everything else are built wrong for how we actually interact with each other. As everyone joined Facebook, we've ended up with "friends" representing many aspects of our lives: schools, neighborhoods, jobs, hobbies, family members. And, even though we act a little bit differently with each of these people in real life, on Facebook, we have to present the same face to everyone we know. People don't cringe because they don't want anyone to see a picture of them with an empty bottle of wine; they cringe because Facebook shows that picture to everyone.
---
Google+ has several potential killer apps, like nifty video chat and Instant Upload to a private album. The most important bit, though, is +Circles. Call it the killer glue that will hold everything together. The idea of +Circles is that the entire social network is built, ground-up, to let you manage your "friend" connections in groups that make sense. So, you can tell all your close friends about your night on the town and talk with your family about the reunion without cross-pollinating. This is exactly what we do in real life, and it's the part of Google+ that gives it the most potential.
Google+ is "post-Facebook". It's the next evolution of social networking.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
A New Hope for Home Internet
Google is in the business of being a game-changer. When they rolled out Gmail with 1GB of space for each person, Yahoo! Mail was offering a paltry 4MB. It took Yahoo over a year to catch up; Hotmail needed 2 and a half years.
(Why does Google offer so many free Internet tools? If Google makes the Internet better, people use the Internet more often, and Google's superior tools will be perfectly positioned to make money by showing them ads.)
Now, Google is experimenting with another potentially game-changing way to increase Internet use: better home Internet service. If you're not a heavy user, you might not think home Internet service is that bad. However, as we increasingly turn to streaming video instead of cable or satellite, companies like Comcast and AT&T are dragging their heels instead of moving with us, and early adopters are finding that the companies just don't seem willing to change. The problems that heavy users face today will be your problems tomorrow...
...unless Google's experiment works. It sure seems like all the right pieces are in place: Internet Service Providers have been coasting for years and increasing prices without any significant improvement to services. Google already has a lot of network expertise, both from leasing their own fiber lines all over the world and from smaller experiments with providing super-fast Internet to their own employees. And honestly, Google's too smart to undertake a project this big without a pretty solid plan in place.
So what happens now? We watch, and we cheer from the sidelines. If Google is able to successfully provide super-fast Internet access in Kansas City, at a cost equal to (or possibly much lower) than the competition's relatively slow broadband, we can look forward to similar improvements in most cities and neighborhoods across the US. If Comcast and AT&T can't keep up with Google, someone else will.
(Why does Google offer so many free Internet tools? If Google makes the Internet better, people use the Internet more often, and Google's superior tools will be perfectly positioned to make money by showing them ads.)
Now, Google is experimenting with another potentially game-changing way to increase Internet use: better home Internet service. If you're not a heavy user, you might not think home Internet service is that bad. However, as we increasingly turn to streaming video instead of cable or satellite, companies like Comcast and AT&T are dragging their heels instead of moving with us, and early adopters are finding that the companies just don't seem willing to change. The problems that heavy users face today will be your problems tomorrow...
...unless Google's experiment works. It sure seems like all the right pieces are in place: Internet Service Providers have been coasting for years and increasing prices without any significant improvement to services. Google already has a lot of network expertise, both from leasing their own fiber lines all over the world and from smaller experiments with providing super-fast Internet to their own employees. And honestly, Google's too smart to undertake a project this big without a pretty solid plan in place.
So what happens now? We watch, and we cheer from the sidelines. If Google is able to successfully provide super-fast Internet access in Kansas City, at a cost equal to (or possibly much lower) than the competition's relatively slow broadband, we can look forward to similar improvements in most cities and neighborhoods across the US. If Comcast and AT&T can't keep up with Google, someone else will.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)