Today Google unveiled Chrome, an open-source web browser built for web apps. The release begs the question: What happened to its relationship with Mozilla, its Mountain View, Calif.-based neighbor and formerly close collaborator on Firefox, the open-source upstart trying (and to some extent succeeding) to take […]

Today Google unveiled Chrome, an open-source web browser built for web apps. The release begs the question: What happened to its relationship with Mozilla, its Mountain View, Calif.-based neighbor and formerly close collaborator on Firefox, the open-source upstart trying (and to some extent succeeding) to take a piece out of Internet Explorer?

In addition to providing the majority of the non-profit Mozilla’s revenue through a deal to be the default search engine for the Firefox browser, Google had in the past paid for some of its own employees to work part-time or more on Firefox. Most notably, Google hired Firefox lead engineer Ben Goodger in January 2005 under the condition that he would continue to work at least half-time on Mozilla projects.

And who should turn out to be one of the lead engineers on Chrome but Goodger himself, who in fact presented the browser at a media event at Google’s headquarters today. When asked after the presentation about the circumstances surrounding his stopping work on Firefox, Goodger said the Chrome project had begun two years ago, after he was hired, and he was grateful to Mozilla for giving him his first experience in the space. (As confirmation, Goodger’s blog says he stopped contributing to the Mozilla project in 2006.)

When we talked to Mozilla CEO John Lilly yesterday his spoke of Chrome like that of a competitor, saying he would wait and see if he should be worried about yet another player in the market.

So when did Google decide to forge its own path? Sundar Pichai, Google’s VP of product management, said that at some point Google realized it wanted a complete overhaul of a browser to fit its needs. While Chrome development was conducted in secrecy, now that it’s (somewhat incongruously) out there as an open-source project it may have the opportunity to rejoin other browsers’ development cycles, he said. “I hope that big chunks of Chrome can make it into next generations of Firefox,” said Google co-founder Sergey Brin, later adding he wouldn’t mind if they made it into Internet Explorer, either.

“Without what [Mozilla] have done, this would have been nearly impossible because would have had only one browser,” said co-founder Larry Page.

At least for Google there’s some money behind those words; in a nice bit of timing, Google last week renewed its Firefox search deal through November 2011. And Pichai made a point of emphasizing that Google services aren’t given preferential treatment within Chrome, though the default search provider is rather obvious.

So OK, it’s another open-source, free web browser. What’s in it for Google? Page said that the monetary benefits Google will gain from Chrome will come from the better and cheaper-to-develop web apps that its engineers can build using a better browser, as well as increased user loyalty and freed-up user time so they can search more.

But because Google has no desktop monopoly to build upon, what ultimately matters is if (like its search engine) Chrome is faster and better enough than existing options to prompt people to switch. For me, Big Brother implications aren’t an issue, but it’s just not worth using Windows, so I’ll grumble through Firefox stalling out my computer for yet another day until the Mac version comes out.

Chrome’s features — “incognito” browsing, searching within sites from the toolbar, tab dragging on steroids — are indeed excellent, and if Mozilla isn’t holding a grudge, should be added to Firefox ASAP. But the features are for early adopters and power users, so it’s Firefox’s market share that Chrome will eat up, not IE’s. And it’s Firefox’s engineers that Google took away. Maybe being open source and having a common enemy will heal up this little bout of backstabbing, but then again, maybe not.

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. I’m not a Google or Firefox fan but have to come to Google’s defense and ask how you can slate Google for abandoning Firefox when they’ve just signed a deal with Mozilla to provide default search capabilities until 2011?


    The deal, which was first agreed on in 2006, represents the single biggest income stream for Mozilla, almost 85% of its total income (approx $57M in 2006).

    1. You should check to see what “to beg the question” means. It does not mean “to raise the question”.

  2. Might be interesting to see if Microsoft swoops in if the the relationship goes sour…maybe even Yahoo. That would be a big boon for either.

    Chrome looks pretty good from my first look at it. Still ugly though, wish google would invest in a UI person(s) to pretty up ALL their properties (the ones they built in house at least).

  3. I’ve tried chrome today, Woah! looks like Google copied lots of stuff directly from Mozilla Firefox! and they didn’t even acknowledge them!
    Even the name chrome is lifted from Firefox Gecko Engine.

    if you got Firefox enter chrome://browser/content/browser.xul and you can see that chrome actually refers to the XUL render engine.

    Chrome is spy ware that sends everything back to Google HQ about user patterns.

    Don’t write-off Firefox or IE yet. Firefox is amazing browser with great addons/plugins. It wouldnt take much for Mozilla team to add Firefox with whatever chrome got today. But I dont think they would do that.

  4. When do we get to call Google evil?

    just wondering

  5. Honestly Google is truly evil they need to stop taking everything on the internet market (ex: search engine, ad revenue, browsers) If you want to hate google try http://www.cuil.com for your much better search engine and http://www.firefox.com for a much better browser and even just use regular ad placement not google adsense on your site.

  6. This can’t be considered evil because it’s open source and free. You are in no way forced to use it. It’s still a merit based system, where you use it because you want to, unlike Windows, where you use it because you have to (applications/hardware tie-in).

    My understanding of Mozilla’s goal is that it’s there to provide an open source, free, and user-friendly browser that does not favor hardware, software, or data source. If they are to go by this, I don’t see any problem with adopting portions of Chrome that would benefit the users, as long as what they take DO NOT tie them to anything specific about Google, such as things that would send data back to Google or somehow favor Google’s app development. I expect to see Firefox to take some parts of Chrome. They have nothing to lose given their mission.

  7. Google Chrome – Who Says What… | Nethackz.com Tuesday, September 2, 2008

    [...] First Test Of Google’s New Browser [...]

  8. Everyday Reads: Google Browser Puts the Cloud To Work | SignOnSign.net Tuesday, September 2, 2008

    [...] Article: Why Did Google Abandon Firefox? -via [...]

  9. First Day First Show: Google Chrome « Confessions of a Digital Immigrant Tuesday, September 2, 2008

    [...] fact that Google poached Firefox engineers to build this is visible in certain implementations. The bar that pops up and offers to remember [...]

  10. Google Chrome Roundup Tuesday, September 2, 2008

    [...] Why Did Google Abandon Firefox? Similar Posts How to set up TwitterSpy in Google Talk [...]

Comments have been disabled for this post