Re. distribution – I wonder if Google will strike up deals to get Chrome pre-installed on new PCs (or on ISP setup disks). That seems to be the strategy they’re pursuing in the mobile / cellphone market.

Cheers, Jon

From Jon’s blog: Salon Promotions – Christmas retail product ideas

Thanks for contributing! In a nutshell what I was getting at is that Google has long-term plans, and realizes than in the short and long term they can be cut out of markets (think IE 8’s anonymous browsing feature) which they rely upon, and/or be prevented from entering new ones without a solid foothold on the client side. But, regardless of what they need or want to do, without a clear value proposition to the end user it won’t happen. They won’t get the installs.

Raising the bar is great, but there isn’t much further for the bar to go. What Google presented on Tuesday isn’t revolutionary. That doesn’t mean it can’t be, but to the end-user it’s just another browser.

When Firefox hit the market, the online community was conducive to a browser alternative. Firefox’s launch message was that it was simple and secure. There was also the implied: Try it-it’s not Internet Explorer. Firefox was fast, flexible and a good alternative in a one-browser world at a time when Microsoft was being criticized for gaining market share for their web browser by bundling it with Windows and making it the default web browsing application. That practice was seen as a reason for the death of Netscape, and Firefox became an underdog play that had Netscape (Mozilla) at its core.

What’s Google’s compelling reason for installing Chrome? It’s not the Chrome EULA… I’m not saying they are going to fail, we just haven’t seen their plan for success yet.

Good point… If browser war history is an indicator Microsoft has any and all the tools they need to dominate for years and years to come…

I think the point you might of overlooked was that, if Google can raise the bar for browsers (mostly IE) they win (in a way).