Google builds a browser

The Register (U.K.) ^ | September 21, 2004 | John Oates

[Stoat]

Google is spending some of the cash it raised from its IPO on headhunting staff to build a web browser. Staff have already been poached from Microsoft and Sun.

Joshua Bloch, a senior Java developer at Sun, and four people from Microsoft's IE team have all joined the firm in the last few weeks, according to the New York Post. One of the four, Adam Bosworth, was also a lead developer in the development of Access.

Joe Beda, a developer working on the user interface for Microsoft's Longhorn, has also joined Google. His blog refers to the NY Post story, but does not give too many clues to his work at Google: "My only job now is to write code and ship product. That is about all I can say too :) "

Analysts also point to Google's hosting of Mozilla Developer Day for programmers working on the open source browser. Other observers believe the firm is likely to be working on a specialised music search - which could work like Google's image search.

Longer term, the firm could be looking at building a stack of applications that would mirror Larry Ellison's network computer model - an online resource accessed by a browser and a very simple PC. ®

Related stories

New P2P software could end illegal music squabbles
Google goes GOOG at $85 a share
Google! Licenses! Yahoo's! Secret! Sauce!

[flashbunny]

alright, way to waste some IPO money, google guys!

[egarvue]

Geez, no kidding. With Mozilla Firebird coming on strong these days and IE waning, why the heck would anyone waste money building a frickin' browser?

[jejones]

No kidding... no way would I hire people responsible for IE to write a browser.

[GVnana]

Google Viggo Bozodozeus and see what you get. And just for giggles, try ZOT.

[GVnana]

Nevermind the ZOT part. (She humbly asked.)

[Vision Thing]

Google jumps the shark. /sarcasm

[old-ager]

Is it too early to start talking about when Google jumped the shark?

[old-ager]

> shark

Oops. Didn't read other replies before posting. Wow!

[old-ager]

> sarcasm

I really have to slow down. _I_ meant it.

[Fiddlstix]

Well, ain't that something? Like we need another browser. Yeah Right.

[Cicero]

I've installed and removed a variety of toolbars on my browser over the years. So far the Google toolbar is the only one I've kept on for more than a year. No spyware, no tricks, no problems. If Google produces a new browser, I'm willing to try it. Although as with Netscape, before I gave up on it, it will be side-by-side with MS Explorer.

[Reagan is King]

Well the project is doomed, they hired former IE people.

[dennisw]

Good idea for google because this would tie in with their search tool bar and g-mail and most important, advertising on google searches. This browser will somehow enhance access to google advertisements.

Meaning more profits.

[Arkinsaw]

If its got any ad crap in it why would you want it when you can get Firefox for free. GMail is already semi-integrated into Firefox with the use of the GMail extension.

I really wish they would get GMail working properly first. GMail has potential, but you would have thought they would have at least put a usable contact list/address book in it. The one they have is not so great.

[George W. Bush]

Google might be writing a browser from scratch. But it's unlikely.

What is more likely is that they are planning to extend the Google Toolbar into more applications like GMail and to insure that they have proper extensions for similar functionality in the Gecko browsers (Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox).

Or they may be planning to use the Gecko source code to produce a Firefox-based browser that has all the Google apps built-in. I consider this somewhat less likely.

I'd watch to see how many of these individuals start contributing to the Gecko development tree. That might indicate where they're going with this. But the strong presence of IE developers (particularly the guy that headed the Access team) argues for integration of Google apps with existing browsers, not an entirely new browser.

Of course, there is a whois entry for GBrowser.com and it is owned by Google. But that might be part of a business plan to trademark every possible product that starts with the letter 'G'.

Slashdot's thread: Will Google Launch A Browser? (very long but good info)

[lonewacko_dot_com]

They also hired a Java developer. Last century, Sun had a Java browser that no one used; Netscape - high on Kool Aid and flush with cash - tried to create a commercial-quality Java browser. Then:

"Javagator is dead," said Andreesen in July 1998, as reported in Internet Time. "My joke is that a Java Navigator will have a lot of good attributes: It's slower. It will crash more and have fewer features. So you can do fewer things. It will simplify your life."

Javagator might have worked given two things that Sun and Netscape - because of the Kool Aid - couldn't understand. Sun needed to concentrate on making the core part of Java stronger and faster rather than their publicly stated goal: "breadth then depth." And, Netscape needed to use platform-specific code when necessary. They actually thought they could build a commercial product using just Java.

Now, about a decade later, they've finally come out with a product that works (Firefox), only it's not from Netscape itself.

[lonewacko_dot_com]

Oh, and anything based on any idea from Larry "Lawrence" Ellison is destined for failure.

[devolve]

A "simpler" basic PC

Ellison reinvents the $100 WebTV / MSN-TV "Classic"!

The WebTV "Plus" was about $200


They both used browsers that worked just dandy

TV-PIP & image & audio capture

Portable


Yeah, that's the ticket, go up against Bill Gates and and working product that costs less than dirt and can do much of what a computer can and often more


Virus-proof email too!

[Reagan is King]

Interesting stuff, it sounds like my browser use history. I started in 1998 with Navigator, switched to IE when Navigator died, and I'm currently using Firefox and think it's terrific.
Lotsa fun extensions to play with, seems faster, more secure, no pop-ups, etc.

Nice blog you have there lonewacko!