Robert Love: “In Google’s calculation, the cost of a native port outweighed the benefit of a native [port] vís-a-vís a WINE-fueled Picasa. Is that really unexpected? Our development platform is no shining star. We have two toolkits, poor binary compatibility, and unclear direction. To be sure, vendors such as Novell are devoting increasing effort toward improving the Linux ISV and platform story. But the community must make it a priority as well, from the kernel up through the highest levels of the graphical desktop.”
That’s part of it (and certainly an accurate assessment of the kind of thinking we need as a community to make Linux a better platform). I think there’s another part of it, though, and that’s that operating systems in general are fundamentally uninteresting to Google as platforms in themselves, as well they should be—after all, the web is Google’s platform, and they dominate there, so why should they promote an alternative where they are much weaker?
In my view, the (fat) client bits merely exist to ease the transition from the current, predominantly desktop centric world to a new web centric world where Google naturally thrives. After all, such paradigm shifts are always gradual. There’s the offline question too—if all your data is in the cloud, how do you get to it when you’re not online?—though I suspect over time the browser will provide offline capabilities of some sort, so this is largely a temporary problem too.
So, using Wine in ports not only minimizes the incremental cost of building out a foothold on the client (which, again, is a necessity for Google, given that Google’s biggest competitor is between them and 90% of their customers), but it raises the fat client platform up a level too. In other words, it builds a fat client platform with a consistent look and feel across desktop environments; and with this, the operating system underneath rapidly becomes irrelevant.
The real question is when Google will hook Picasa into a photo sharing service of its own. I already keep my photos in the cloud, and I’d love to organize and edit them in Picasa (Organizr is nice, but nowhere near as nice as a desktop application, and it doesn’t have some basic functionality, like import from camera and red eye repair). Of course, this is just one example of Google having some platform thinking issues of its own, though that’ll have to be a rant for another day.
“There’s the offline question too—if all your data is in the cloud, how do you get to it when you’re not online?—though I suspect over time the browser will provide offline capabilities of some sort, so this is largely a temporary problem too.”
It’s a bit of a hack but it seems we have offline storage:
http://codinginparadise.org/weblog/2006/04/now-in-browser-near-you-offline-access.html