I played with Google Chrome yesterday. Pretty cool browser. Bit unfortunate that it’s not available on the operating systems I have available myself (Ubuntu, Leopard), but supposedly that will change in the future. Various WebKit contributors are also reporting several disabled Web standards features, e.g. HTML5 SQL support,
<video>, and HTML5
<audio>. The Google Chrome Web developer FAQ meanwhile only addresses the HTML5 SQL question (admittedly it does allude to other features, although it is not specific beyond Offline Web Applications). One reason for these features not functioning yet may be that each of them requires some amount of integration work before they actually function, but then again, so did Gears.
In any event, more competition in the Web browser landscape can only lead to better products for end users.
Chrome needs some work on its accessibility too: google chrome accessibility.
They have publicly stated they’ll be working on that. Though maybe not in a way some people would like.
I don’t think it’s so much that they have disabled support, as that (supposedly) their browser is currently based on a pretty old version of Webkit.
Chrome is still quite buggy as well and it looks like it will be taking marketshare from firefox and not IE :(
If one is happy with the browser they already use, why would someone be tempted to leave the familiar to use something new? Just because of the Google name? No, thank you.
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that more competition leads to better products for the end users. I think that is a good theory for the free market, but it often is not the case in other real world examples.
For example, the cell phone industry has many features, price plans, phone models, etc. But the end users have many restrictions and barriers to getting the best to suit their needs. I like the new "xx" phone but it is only carried by "xx" provider and I'm stuck with a 2 year contract with a different provider. The same thing happens with the different browsers - limits as to the operating systems that will support each one, frequent or infrequent updates. Many headaches and barriers.
Not to argue with you - I respect your opinion and obvious expertise. Just venting my own frustrations, I suppose.
Are there examples where no competition meant the best for end users? I agree that things are not perfect, but no competition will just lead to stagnation.