Chrome is definitely new and worth checking out but I’ve decided not to get too excited about it.
First, I’m having trouble installing it on the two Windows laptops in my house, which is a long story that has nothing to do with my broadband connection or willingness to install it.
Second, the one lesson I’ve learned from being a beta whore over the past few years is if you’re happy with the application you’re currently using, then think twice about trying out something else simply because it’s new. The same approach could be embraced when it comes to upgrades that promise more features but, quite often, headaches as well.
Bottom line: I really like Firefox. I like how it performs, including the new features in Firefox 3.0; I like how I can have 20 tabs open at the same time; and I like that Firefox is an open-source player with a thriving developer and extension community.
It’s not to suggest that Chrome isn’t appealing. The notion of a super-fast browser sounds really good, and I think Chrome will resonate with many people who want a user-friendly, no-frills browser.
But Chrome doesn’t have add-ons yet, it doesn’t offer a version for Mac, and it’s bad enough that I’m using multiple Google services already.
That isn’t to say Chrome won’t get more interesting in the future because you know Google is going to learn and improve it. For one, I expect Google to start to integrate more of its other services (e.g. GMail, Blogger, YouTube, Picasa) into Chrome.
But, for now, Firefox and I are tight.
For what Chrome got right, check out a guest post on Louis Grey by Phil Glockner.
More: Google has been getting an awful lot of flack about its end-user licensing agreement, which essentially says that anything you upload using Chrome gives Google the right to use it.