Google TV Ads? Taking Chrome to the Masses
On Friday, Google announced that they will be using their Google TV ads service to place advertisements for Google Chrome on various television networks beginning this weekend. Some time ago, Google put out a call for videos that exemplify Chrome’s unique features. While those videos are doing their viral thing around the web, the video from Google’s headquarters in Japan will be gracing television screens across the nation.
And computer monitors as well.
Saturday morning, while watching Dollhouse on Hulu, I was presented with the aforementioned advertisement. My nerdy excitement was primarily fueled by the fact that I do not subscribe to any traditional forms of television service (cable, satellite), so I thought I’d never get to see the ad, but secondly, I was viewing the ad using the browser in question. (I also got excited when I noticed that all the spiffy computer monitors in the show Dollhouse were the same wide screen Dell monitors I have on my desk. I like the affirmation, alright?)
Though, I’m not sure if Internet Explorer, Opera, or even Netscape in its hey day had entire TV spots dedicated to them, Firefox had a series for select markets back in 2006. Google obviously isn’t giving a lot of details, but their use of the word “networks” instead of “markets” leads me to believe that the advertisements are showing up on, at least, one of the “Big Four.” Chrome has already enjoyed a sizable jump in the browser market share due to hype, Google loyalty, and a massive online advertising campaign, but the company realizes that the majority of users on the world wide web can’t tell Google from MSN or Yahoo, or Internet Explorer from a fish tank screen saver. So, to rope in the technically un-savvy, but technologically curious, Google’s taken it to the ‘tube to sway a group unlike those who will ever read this blog.
According to Google they built a browser out of the goodness of their hearts, using components from today’s best browsers, and in turn, released Chrome as open source. Google’s aggressive push to get Chrome in the hands of users led them to tear the beta label off Chrome in record time (Gmail is still in beta and it’s been around since 2001!). With text, video, and image advertisements all over the web, and now television ads, obviously Chrome means a lot to Google. But, with Internet Explorer finally getting a clue, and the gents over at Mozilla not being the ones to let another browser introduce any feature that isn’t matched and/or bettered, will all this work?
May 10th, 2009 at 9:59 am
Beta doesn’t mean “beta” at Google. The only reason they tore the beta label off of Chrome was to give it the illusion of legitimacy after a reception that can only be described as lukewarm at best. Gmail is still in beta because it’s about a philosophical position much more than it is about an incomplete product. KnowwhatImean?
They’ll continue to shove Chrome down our throats through all avenues possible (“YouTube is better on Chrome”, anyone?)…
It’s a good browser. It still has a lot of compatibility issues. You can download a couple of dev forks if you know where to look and what to sign up for. It will be of relatively little use to me until it officially supports plug-ins. That’ll be the day.
May 10th, 2009 at 11:10 am
chrome is a good browser. Its faster than firefox of IE, especially with their integration of their pdf reader. sure, it doesnt have the highest compatibility right now, but that will only change with time as developers start to create pages with chrome in mind, and as chrome improves how it handles certain scripts.
as for plugins, its open source…that’s pretty much an invitation for plugin developers to have their fun. Aside from that, i dont really care much for plugins, as I don’t rely heavily on customizing my browser. On the bright side, this allows me to better function on “foreign” machines which wouldn’t have any of my customizations anyhow.
Plus, I just resized this text area so I could read my post better as I type it.
d:- D
May 10th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
Every browser has it’s pros and cons (Except IE, there are only cons). But Chrome, with its simple, fast, “get it done” interface, sandboxing, and lightweight architecture has brought a new competitor to the browser arena, and competition, even in the open source world, always benefits users.
May 10th, 2009 at 11:37 pm
In what way does competition benefit them in the already-crowded browser arena, where devs are already pounding their heads against the wall trying to support the plethora of browsers available?
I would contest the claim that IE brings only cons. Have you used IE8? It’s very nice.
May 11th, 2009 at 6:42 am
As long as web devs and browser devs are following standards, then its less about compatibility and more about functionality.
Many software kits are compatible across FF, Opera, and Chrome, where as IE has its own playground. As long as IE insists on behaving like Windows Vista with UAC on, then I’m not very interested.
May 11th, 2009 at 7:00 am
Regardless of how IE behaves (and 8 is taking great leaps and bounds to be more “standards” compliant, which is why they’ve introduced “compatibility view”) it is the #1 browser out there in terms of installed user base and I have no reason to believe that this will not continue to be the case. Supporting it as a web dev should be a priority, not an afterthought. Hm?
May 11th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
You were lamenting the issues of compatibility due to the “crowded” browser market. You’re right, devs have to support it because to most people, IE is the Internet. But why is it okay for MS to create a ass-backward browser while a browser like Chrome is simply adding to the “crowd?”
I’m not trying to stick up for one browser or another. I couldn’t care less. It’s not fair, however, to discourage development simply because an area is “crowded.” If that were the case, the poor browsers would simply die away. (remember Netscape?)
May 11th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Netscape, in its later iterations, literally was Firefox with another skin over it. It had been using the Gecko engine.
Why is IE ass-backward?
I wouldn’t want to discourage Google from entering the market. Or, anyone else for that matter.
I think it’s okay for MS to create any type of browser they darn well please. They’re free to do what they will, and they do.
IE8 is much more strictly compliant with W3C.
I don’t advocate any one browser either. Doing so is silly, as content delivery of pages is ultimately the goal here.
You’re right about it not being fair. The current reigning kings of the browser would rather it not be fair, honestly. They don’t want new participants in an already tough market. To say that competition in this market always benefits the users is interesting to me. In the OSS sphere, fierce competition often fragments an otherwise unified effort to produce a cohesive product. It’s a tough pill for them to swallow.
Don’t be surprised if there’s more camaraderie between Safari, Firefox, and Chrome than there is competition. Remember, inimicus inimici mei amicus meus est.