By SCOTT DEWING
Published: November 2008

The problem with writing about technology is that it changes so quickly. The monthly technology columnist (that's me) has a particularly difficult challenge and must accept that most of what he writes about will either quickly become outdated or just be flat-out wrong. I've had my share of experiencing both of those scenarios and so it is probably a good thing that I don't use my prognostications about the future as the helium to inflate the balloon of my ego, an ego that is probably best kept partially deflated and less susceptible to popping when being stretched and pulled in life's many directions.

So it was that in last month's column I waxed prophetically about Microsoft's beta-release off Internet Explorer 8: "With IE8, Microsoft hopes to begin reeling back in some of those users [who were lost to rival Mozilla Firefox]. It'll be a tough battle, especially since end-users seem to have stopped drinking the Microsoft Kool-Aid and begun to demand good software for free."

The day after I submitted my column, Google announced the release of its own browser, Chrome, and the "tough battle" I'd predicted for Microsoft transformed overnight into what will be an "epic battle" that will go down in history as "Browser War II".

Of course, when I say that, I'm predicting the future again, but I'm pretty sure I'll be right this time because I just used the tech pundit trick of manufacturing reality by authoritatively stating something that may or may not become true. But by stating it, I just made it so and if I can get more folks (hey, folks like you) to repeat what I've said (and please do it with great authority) then I'm that much closer to cementing my claim into the bedrock of reality, regardless of whether or not it is actually true. Every four years, we are reminded that truth is malleable because the art of manufacturing reality is often practiced by political pundits and politicians alike during an election year to convince voters that a candidate is something he or she is not. Like tigers in the grass, they prey upon those who are not paying attention. So pay attention and please vote responsibly.

In order to vote responsibly, you need good information. The World Wide Web offers you lots of information and somewhere in that mountain of information is a modicum of very good and useful information. You will likely use Google to search for that information. Yes, there's other search engines out there, but Google is still king with 70 percent of the search market share. And now, you can choose to use Google Chrome as your browser too.

When I first downloaded and used Chrome, I immediately liked it. Chrome is sleek, sparse and very fast. I noticed the speed difference right away. Shortly after Chrome's release, the benchmark speed tests started to flow in (or out onto the Web, so to speak) and my impressions of its speed were confirmed. For processing of JavaScript—a scripting language that enables all sorts of cool website features—Chrome was twice as fast as Mozilla Firefox and 50 times faster than Internet Explorer.

Where I really noticed the speed improvement was when accessing and using Google's own online applications, Google Apps, which includes word processing, spreadsheet, presentation, email, calendar and web-authoring applications. This comes as no surprise. Google has invested a lot into Google Apps, banking on a future in which software will be delivered online rather than installed on the desktop. That would be a dark future for Microsoft, at least under its current business model. Microsoft has already attempted to compete with Google on the online applications front, but failed quite miserably with its half-ass release of Microsoft Office Live Workspace.

With the release of Chrome, it looks as though Google is going for the 1-2 punch on Microsoft. Do I think they'll drop them to the mat with this? No. It'll take far more than Google Apps and Chrome to punch Microsoft out of the ring and I think Google would put itself at a strategic disadvantage if they began running their business according to some "Get Microsoft" agenda. Not to mention that such an agenda would borderline on "evil" and be counter to Google's informal corporate motto of "Don't be evil."

Google is better off to stick to what it's been doing: build cool and useful tools for end-users. If they always keep the end-user's experience and needs at the forefront of their efforts, they will continue to be successful. And that's exactly what they've done with Chrome. Browser War II won't be a fight like Browser War I was during the 1990s between Microsoft and Netscape in which Microsoft used its marketplace muscle to beat down and eventually knock out Netscape. The battle landscape has changed significantly since the 1990s and Microsoft no longer has the control it once had. That control has been given to you in the form of choice in an open and competitive market.

Perhaps Mitchel Baker, head of rival Mozilla Firefox, put it best in a recent interview with Wired: "If Google comes up with some good new ideas, that's really great for users. Competition spurs the best in us."