Comments on: Microsoft's Gazelle browser takes a radical path

In an exclusive interview, CNET News' Ina Fried talks with Helen Wang, the researcher behind Microsoft's Gazelle effort, which aims to make the browser more like an operating system.

[queticomn]

Mozilla has stuff up their sleeve, GO! MOZILLA! DIE! ieVIL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-6kSHDlJmg

[Crosby4Life]

I personally think the HTTP protocol (yes, I know the "protocol" is redundant, but it just sounds better) is what really needs the overhaul. Then we can talk about reinventing browsers. The current, detached server/client model was great in 1995 when we were serving up static pages, but the world has far more outlandish demands for the internet these days, and I fear we may see a point where we just can't take the current HTTP model any further. Don't get me wrong, some of the current web technologies (ASP.NET especially) have worked absolute miracles with HTTP's nearly prehistoric setup. As a professional web application developer, I often take a step back in amazement over what has been accomplished with nothing more than a request and response object; the rise of AJAX-rich sites being one of the latest innovations. And that's not even to mention the client technologies requiring client add-ons, like Flash and Silverlight.

It really makes me wonder what could be done if a more dynamic protocol, one capable of handling HTTP's current load but with more persistent connections, were innovated to replace HTTP.

Of course, this would require a world-wide backbone capable of handling such a bandwidth increase this would inevitably cause, which may very well be a long ways off.

[plbyrd]

Dude, getting rid of HTTP would be a God-send, but it isn't going to happen without a complete shift back to client-server applications. Fortunately, SOAP over HTTP to provide web services makes about 10,000 times more sense than serving raw content as HTML, etc. The best apps are client-server apps with a local cache to allow offline execution. Google knows this and it is why Gears exists. Microsoft knows this and is why Silverlight exists. Adobe knows this and is why Air exists. Now, if the rest of the world would wake up and realize that it's not 1995 any longer.....

[jake3373]

Try telling that business across the street that its not 1995 any longer and its time to give up on IE6

[aawindoze2]

Wow, that is indeed a radical path but I like it!

RT
www.be-anonymous.tk

[josmor]

FOr some time I had in mind that Microsoft will achieve better results by killing IE. Actually is a brand that is out of fashion.
In order to compete better with Firefox or Safari they will need a new marketing pitch. More open and respectful of standards.
Having 2 war horses is better than only one.

[gggg sssss]

compete? if the browser IS the operating system, and vice versa, I guess you will have to find some other OS than Windows to run Firefox. LOL

[viper396]

"..browser is starting to replace the operating system "

Sure, and what will that browser be running on when you boot up the machine? Ideally any OS just sits in the background and does what it does. You browse, you do e-mail, play games, write term papers, etc. You don't just sit there and stare at the desktop.

[alansky]

If it's a Microsoft browser, it should be named Guzzle, not Gazelle.

[vadik78]

I am not debate if FF is better then IE. I just simply use FF because of AdBlock Plus - call me weird, but I hate blinking banners:)

[plbyrd]

Download IE7Pro. If you only use FF for AdBlock then you're really missing out. IE7Pro also works in IE8 and does a FABULOUS job of blocking ads. Why? It uses the AdBlock engine and signatures. IE7Pro also adds dozens of features that you have to load many, many FF extensions to get, including Grease Monkey scripting.

[nonamelab]

More FUD from Microsoft. Like Windows Longhorn turn out to be Vista.
It's a common practice for Microsoft to try to turn the attention away from the real problems they have with IE right now : poor standards support, droping market share , recent activx exploit , etc.
And in the comming months they will start talking about Windows 7 SP1 :)

I want facts not fiction.

[plbyrd]

OK, if you want facts then start with your own message. IE8 on Windows 7 does not have the ActiveX flaw. IE8 is very, very standards compliant, to the point where Microsoft has pissed off a great number of IE shops that have poorly written legacy apps.

[jake3373]

Okay, another comment from someone who has never tried Windows 7.

[MeepMan]

IE8 is so much more standards-compliant that you can actually tell what its score on acid3 was. Huge Improvement! On IE7, I couldn't tell if it was supposed to be the one in the purple box or the red number in the corner. However, I think IE 8 messed up on the colors. Some were supposed to be green. Oh wait. That's cause it got a 1/5....

[sargear]

Microsoft? They still kicking around?

[gggg sssss]

still the number 1, 2,3, ... 77 operating system in the world - or did you miss it?

[randy620]

third most profitable company in the world sounds pretty healthy to me. That's profit not revenue!

[gggg sssss]

Now THAT woudl get the EU knickers ion a knot when the browser IS the operating system.

[strange1889]

why stop there? (i understand security issues, but that aside) why put the shell and web browser in the same 'frame'. so there is no difference between the two?

[maeckg]

Web browser should run in it's own virtual machine by default, which would allow better security and more powerful web apps using things like Prism, Adobe Air and Silverlight. Google Chrome OS should come prepackaged in a virtual machine so can run as a web browser appliance on top of any desktop OS. It is getting to be more and more of a hassel to keep a secure system with so many devious hackers out there. A Mac can be compromised in 10 seconds. Keep the browser locked up. Each web app should run in it's own sandbox, but we need more.The VM could be secured with stricter firewalls, NAT, network interface and other networking security features. The vm could run a more aggressive anti virus since it would not restrict the applications on the host OS.

Better, more secure browsers are needed since ww spend more time in web browser than in other apps nowadays. More users are using multiple devices to access web pages, so synchnizing browsing like Opera offers A virtual machine environment would allow web apps to bring a more consistant experience and still be safer. Then one could just go to a different window for the host desktop OS to run legacy apps or more demanding programs. The host could be in a more secured network.
VMware offers web browser appliances running as virtual machines; though with rather out dated browser, it does work. Zone Alarm offers a vm based solution. One can run versions of Linux from a thumbdrive and PortaApps and others run suites of applications from a USB drive. What is needed is the installation of the web browser into it's own vm to be the default and Microsoft and Google can make it happen even on PCs several years old as well as netbooks. It could be a good use of the multi-core processors newer PCs now have.

[MeepMan]

Ironically, none of this seems necessary as long as the browser is ingrained as part of the OS and the OS is not allowed to be changed. That would force hackers trying to go through the OS to have nothing they can do, assuming there are no programs on the computer itself to be run. Everything would be based on how secure the websites are. Unfortunately, websites would start to be compromised at every turn, unless those computers with the websites were well-enough protected, and all ads were scanned.

[Jim Hubbard]

Microsoft has absolutely NO IDEA who their core audience is.

They don't know or understand their developers OR end users.

That's why (instead of streamlining the desktop OS) they waste money on crap like this - and waste time on a wild Google chase that could be spent making Windows 8 the trim, fast OS that we've always wanted.

[jake3373]

Windows 7 is the trim, fast OS that we've always wanted.

[MeepMan]

Yes, just like Nike is the cheap brand of sneakers you've always wanted...

[Renegade Knight]

It's all the browser hooks into the OS that make them so insecure to begin with. Creating a browser to have more system functions? This doesn't sound like a good path to go down unless they sandbox the entire thing.

[MeepMan]

Well, if the machine stores no information itself, then what is there to be insecure? The website? If websites are designed well-enough, there won't be any problems.

Except that there's always twitter and myspace for hackers to fall back on...

[t8]

In short, Wang says, the browser needs to act more like Windows does--making sure that different Web applications are protected from one another--even those running within the same site. So Wang and her team came up with a prototype, called Gazelle, that does just that.

It´s already invented. It is called Chrome.

[MeepMan]

Actually, if it acted more like windows does, they already got their design from previous attempts. It's called IE 5.

[johandelange]

Ouch, reading the above comments made me think just one thing - suckers! - come on, everyone, you're all obviously experts in technology, no doubt, and clearly have preferences about the browser you wish to use, but this entire article has very little to do with the debates raging amongst us readers. Clearly we can choose to read this objectively and note that it is interesting to read the marketing spin from one competitor after a major announcement from another competitor - in this case Microsoft bragging that it already has a browser capable of what Google has been bragging about this week, running like an OS. And I'm not knocking either these companies, because without one or the other, we won't see half the innovation we see and we won't see any downward pressure on software or service pricing. I'm simply noting that we can choose to read this post in the context of the past week's Google announcement, where Microsoft's marketing machine kicked in to 'better' the competitor's announcement, as being the main motivation for the release of this interview with Wang.

Or we can choose to fall for it hook line and sinker and start the age old 'Ms vs everyone' arguments we saw way back when it was MS vs IBM (DOS war), MS vs Apple (API and OS war), MS vs Novell (network war), MS vs Oracle (DB war), MS vs Netscape (Browser war, MS vs Real Network (Media war), and so on and so on, all made possible because us fan boys keep falling for the marketing material like the this post here.
We're all smarter than that! I will no doubt have a debate with some of you here when someone writes a post about their dad being stronger than my dad, because hey, then we're talking about personal preference. But this post does not deserve our attention in the way we are commented here. It's just marketing splurge that both tech giants throw our way to start senseless debates like the one ranging here amongst us.
Each product out in the market today battles to show that they have a unique selling proposition, and so often relies on personal support like ours to swing the balance in their favour. I say horses for courses, and that we should started looking beyond the hype and apply products and services to our professional and private lives according to how each best fits, and not by selecting them only because we LOVE the vendor that supplies them.

I'm sure you all followed the BING launch earlier in June and you must have noted that Google launched a whole series of articles about their technology beating BING because of this technicality or that algorithm. So their marketing works just like Microsoft's has here, each trying hard to show the other up. It's what we should expect from the main players in our market, strong competition and fierce battles to best each other, as it all ends up with better products at lower prices for us ;)

[lippin75]

thank you world.ie.microsoft.the world and i are finally on the same page computing child sir_roy...


>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [e-mail] _ sir_roy<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

[lippin75]

my friend billy gates catch_on it was a tough fight apple/mac 22 Microsoft a possible one ..YEA !

>>>>>>>>>realizing it may kill the work around hack comunity ie no need things work like they
should scary thought....

[FlyingPie]

Gazelle sounds interesting, but I think multi-platform support has been and will be increasingly important. One of the reasons I like to use Firefox is that it's available for Windows, Linux, and OS X. Since I use all 3 platforms, I like being able to use the same browser on all 3. For the same reason, I've avoided relying on something that's only available for one platform, such as Internet Explorer (which I did use for several years as my primary browser).

Also, I still believe that Microsoft is a company that likes to break standards in order to force people to use their products because their products will be the only things that documents work with. They've done it with IE, and that's another reason I try to avoid using IE. Firefox is a standards-compliant browser, and I appreciate that.