It faced its first security alerts, two bugs which taught users what the wrench in the corner of the screen is for. (It gets you updates.)
It has faced the first blush of backlash, with snarky charges of its being over-hyped, the expected stories of a threat to privacy, and a threat by Microsoft to put the anti-trust shoe on the other foot.
What it has yet to do is build an ecosystem.
One of the great strengths of Firefox is its ecosystem of add-ons. I miss my tool bars (especially the Google one) when using Chrome.
An ecosystem offers many advantages. But it also has disadvantages. Add-ons written by others can slow down your product, introduce security risks, and make you responsible for things you did not do.
I use Firefox for commerce because I keep my passwords in an add-on. I use Explorer to write posts here because Chrome does not yet support the Wordpress visual editor.
There are indications that Google “gets it.”
Google has extended its deal with Mozilla, so rumors of its death (or that of its ecosystem) are greatly exaggerated.
It’s also possible Google may go another route in building an ecosystem. SaaS vendors which create Web applications are thrilled with Chrome, and since many have working business models they might help Google build profits into Chrome fast.
The problem is that an ecosystem requires a vendor to scale-up in areas where Google has long been reluctant to scale-up.
Google’s real secret sauce is that it scales technology, not people. This is a variant on the old soccer saying that the ball is the fastest thing on the field. The computer is the ball.
But to build an ecosystem you need people who will meet with other people. Lots of people. People who need people and are, in many ways, the luckiest people in the world.
Mozilla has such people. Microsoft has such people. Does Google have enough of them, or a willingness to bring them in and respect them, as it respeccts technologists?
source:http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2870
