Google I/O Day 1: Perhaps more excitement in tomorrow's keynote

Anyone who was looking for earth-shaking news from today's keynote presentation at Google's I/O Conference didn't find it. The biggest news had already leaked weeks ago--Google's decision to open-source the VP8 video codec from On2 Technologies. Under the name "The WebM Project", Google will make VP8 available royalty-free and open-source, and will pair it with the Ogg Vorbis audio codec, which has been added to the project by Xiph.org, to create WebM. YouTube has begun to make WebM versions of some of its videos available for testing, and WebM will become a standard format supported by YouTube.

Google, Mozilla and Opera will add support for WebM to their browsers (currently in nightly developer Chromium and Firefox builds, and in a Lab build of Opera). Adobe also announced its intention to add WebM support to Flash within the next year. More than 20 other software, hardware and services companies also announced their plans to support WebM. Not surprisingly, neither Apple nor Microsoft announced support for WebM.

There were a lot of demonstrations of applications built on HTML5, and Adobe demonstrated some ways to use the current Dreamweaver CS5 and CSS to build platform-aware HTML5 content. The company also demonstrated an early prototype of software that can create interactive graphic HTML5 content. Google announced that Google Wave is now open for general use as a Google Labs project (no invitation needed). The company also announced a web app store for Chrome; support for the store will be first available in developer builds of Chrome to be released later this year. Applications available in the store will run in other HTML5-compliant browsers.

Finally, Google spent the last 40 minutes of the keynote discussing and demonstrating application development tools and platforms. The announcements including the Google App Engine for Business, which is not yet available, and significant extensions to Google App Engine itself to make it more competitive with Amazon Web Services.

It's now expected that tomorrow's keynote will focus on Android, Flash and Google's TV initiative with Intel, Sony and Logitech.

How serious is Microsoft about HTML5?

A few weeks ago, Dean Hachamovitch, the general manager of Microsoft's Internet Explorer group, went on the record declaring the company's support for HTML5 in Internet Explorer 9. The Internet community generally applauded his remarks, although there was some consternation about his statement that IE9 will only support H.264 video. However, one point was generally ignored: IE9 will only be available for Vista and Windows 7, not for Windows XP, nor for any other desktop platform. It's not even clear that a full implementation of IE9 will be available for Windows Phone 7, which may well become a tablet platform in the future.

Microsoft claims that IE9 won't work on any platform besides Vista and Windows 7 because of the "magical" acceleration features they're using in the operating system. Bulls#!t. Firefox, Chrome and Opera are all cross-platform and all work much better than IE8. The reason that Microsoft will only support Vista and Windows 7 is that, as usual, they want to encourage upgrades to Windows 7. Thus, Microsoft is all for HTML5, but only if you buy Windows 7. If you're running another operating system, they won't support HTML5 at all.

Microsoft's corner of the universe keeps getting smaller and smaller, largely through the company's own actions.

Obligatory Google Chrome Post

Yes, I've installed Google Chrome, and no, it's not an Internet Explorer killer, at least not yet. My browser of choice is Firefox 3, and I see nothing in Chrome at this point that will get me to switch. The biggest advanage that I see so far is that Chrome seems to be considerably faster in loading pages than either IE or Firefox. Chrome uses the same WebKit rendering engine that Safari uses, and Safari has been roundly praised for its speed, so it's no surprise that Chrome is fast. Google benchmarks show that Chrome's V8 JavaScript compiler is much faster than the interpreters in IE, Firefox and Opera, but the forthcoming Firefox 3.1 will have its own JavaScript compiler, so Chrome's performance advantage may be short-lived.

It's going to take a long time for Chrome to get the same kind of third-party developer support that Firefox already has, but I don't think that's Google's objective: I think that they're targeting users who want simple, fast browsing, and couldn't care less whether the browser supports add-ons. Click one button and it's installed. Every visitor to Google Search is a potential user. That's got to scare Microsoft, even if Chrome is less sophisticated in many ways than IE.

I've visited some sites that don't recognize the Chrome user agent, and thus either limit access or won't give access to Chrome users at all. Therefore, the onus is now on Google to get site developers to support Chrome. That's not going to be easy, because other than the Google name, I haven't seen anything compelling enough to get most people to switch from their existing browser to Chrome.