The first version of Google’s Chrome web browser is out and available for download here:
According to a video on how to use the search bar (click on “Watch a video on how to use the address bar.”), it appears that the Google has combined the address bar with its search bar, which will suggest results.
So for example, if you type in the word flowers into the address/search bar you will have the option of adding the .com at the end and navigating to the site like always, or you have the option of doing a Google search for word flowers by choosing in the address bar “Search Google For” which will take you to a Google search result page for flowers, and the search bar “will suggest popular sites to you” like 1-800-flowers.com
This means that in the near future (current this option is not working) the search bar will suggest sites to you that have to do with the term you started to type in and entice you to pick one of the suggestions rather than navigating to the site you started to type in.
It is not clear where the suggested sites will come from buy it seems logical that this will be a paid sponsor spot.
For domainers the browser looks like it will have a negative impact.
The more choices the user has the less lightly he is to complete direct navigation. A certain portion of users will select Google search right from the browser and others will take one of the suggestions reducing type in traffic.
This is different than firefox which currently only suggests site you have visited when you start to type in a URL into the search bar.
Although we have no idea how many people will be using the browser in the next 3 years, after all 70% of people still use Explorer, I do not see this as a positive for domainers. It can only take away from type-in traffic, not increase it.
Also we await the release of the new Microsoft Explorer browser to see if there are any tricks in there that might take away type in traffic.
Interesting also to look at the terms of Service for Chrome which you should do before downloading:
Google reserves the right to automatically update and install Chrome.
“The software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google. These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new software modules and completely new versions. You agree to receive such updates (and permit Google to deliver these to you) as part of your use of the services.”
Even though you retain any copyrights to content you own and use in the browser, Google says it has a right to display some of your content, in conjunction with promoting its services:
“By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any content which you submit, post or display on or through, the services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services.”
3. Here where the ad’s in the browser come in:
“Some of the services are supported by advertising revenue and may display advertisements and promotions. These advertisements may be targeted to the content of information stored on the services, queries made through the services or other information.The manner, mode and extent of advertising by Google on the services are subject to change without specific notice to you.”
What if Firefox and/or IE follows the same approach? IE might want to send search traffic to live.com to compete with Google. Firefox can easily and quickly adopt Chrome to have a single box. Firefox 3, indeed, runs a search at Google if you don’t type the extension. Typing “flower” in the address bar goes to Google and runs a search for “flower”.
Yes, but surely the impact will be felt in the aftermarket instantly. If I was bidding on a major dotcom right now I would be feeling pretty sick.
Osman
This is the problem, but there is some hope.
Although that Firefox’s number one contributor is Google and Google said that they are committed to continue funding for Firefox though 2011, Firefox is a non-profit operation, and accepts no ads so they shouldn’t go down this direction.
Microsoft is just about to release the new version of Explorer which hopefully will not have this feature.
So after this release, any new version is at least another year away.
MSFT also has another problem doing something like Google has with their broswer, anti-trust action.
MSFT always has hanging over their head anti-trust action, by the US and the EU.
MSFT has already gotten in trouble for what is included and didn’t include in previous versions of Explorer.
The fact that all computers come with Explorer as the only browser put MSFT in a position where they can’t always do what Google does.
Paul
It will only effect the aftermarket between domainers.
The end user market will be unaffected.
It will be interesting to see how the domainer market reacts to this in NY.
MHB – Sorry, but I can’t be so optimistic (it is way past my bedtime in Europe). For example, I have NewYorkCityGuy.com, which previously I thought was OK, but now, why is it better than .name or .nu? If I am selling bagels, painting on my truck ” NY bagels” is surely better than “bagels.com” or “bagels.mobi”. OK, I guess it is just a reminder that content is king. Best. – Paul
dot.me and other non-dotcoms are looking better every day!
This actually could be a HUGE benefit.
What if the browser bar REPLACED the search engine? What if everyone that NEVER used the browser bar before changed their habits?
Since the day I got on the net I have been told THIS will kill type ins or THAT will kill type ins. Well it ain’t happened yet. This may actually be a benefit.
Time and STATS will tell. I share the concern, but also see a possible benefit.
Paul
I didn’t think I was being optimistic at all.
You want to see optimistic, check out Mr. Schwartz’s post above.
Rick
Leave it to you to think out of the box.
If someone wants to use Google to search they will.
But the browser is where we make our bread & butter and distractions from direct navigation can’t be good
Secondly, I don’t know about the experts, but when I type in a name to the browser bar, I am looking at my KEYBOARD not the screen!
People have ALREADY made the decision to type a generic domain BEFORE they start typing. They generally either type faster than the suggestion tool can function (or their eyes can comprehend the suggestions), or they’re slow typers, in which case they’re looking at their fingers and not the URL box.
I type fast, and the younger generation brought up with computers do too, and the suggestions aren’t fast enough to keep up with my typing.
what if google starts taking bids on related terms that appear in the address/search bar. Suppose someone types in vodka.com and instead of being directed to that page you are first offered stoli.com right from the address/search bar since theoretically stoli has now bid to replace the actual site that you are going to .i.e. vodka.com. Or perhaps the top 5 bidded sites(or what google ranks as the top 5 sites based on their formula) are shown as alternatives?
Here is what I noticed that has not been mentioned:
If you type in a parked domain and watch as you type you will notice it will NOT give you the .com option. But, if you do it on a term that is a developed generic (0r a popular site) then it WILL give you the .com option.
Type in RumCake,com, a developed site, and then type Frank’s RumCakes,com and you will see what I mean.
They cut out adding the .com if the domain is parked, but not developed.
They also give you the option of searching G for any domain name when you are at the stage of hitting “Enter”.
Like Mike already said, IE still has 70% of the browser market.
I’d be surprised if chrome got any significant piece of the market shared to make any difference.
Now let’s get back to work developing all those domains in our portfolios !!
PS. I wonder how much traffic chrome.com is getting this week?
Larry
I believe that’s what Google will do, sell the keyword on the browser to the highest bidder
Too Many/Richard
I said Microsoft has over a 70% share, but I wouldn’t underestimate Google’s ability to put up a game changer.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Explorer at 50% and Chrome at 20% in short order.
Larry, Mike, I think if Google resorts to this it will be outright THEFT! To override the free will of a surfer won’t last long and the repercussions will be severe.
Hmm, I can’t say for sure b/c there’s no mac version yet but from what you describe I think I actually agree with Rick, doesn’t this seem like it would be a plus for generic, search-term .coms? For example, I’m “searching” for camping chairs, would it ask me if I’d like to visit “campingchairs.com”? I mean, providing it’s not parked like Johnny says. This actually sounds better for domainers than a traditional address bar providing your domain matches a search term. Develop, develop, develop.
Pure
It would suggest campingchairs.com in your example but maybe not until you have typed in everything but the .com.
It may also suggest other sites you can click on once you type in camping and users might take one of the suggestions (like camping.com) instead of typing in your domain
Google has combined the address bar with its search bar, which will suggest results.
When it comes to an experienced web surfer that person will not go for the suggested result that appears in the browser (I for sure do not take this result so I type in the WHOLE url) the novice web surfer may fall for this suggestive nonsense
If you own domain names hold on to them and do not sell them for next to nothing.
This is not the doom in domaining
Dose anyone have an idea on what the impact for typos will be? I have not yet tried it out. But from what i read it sound like short brandable names and SEO are in, long tail keywords and parked pages are out.
Maxe
Typos are going to have a problem as the browser will suggest the right spelling of the term someone searches for
Here’s another approach with a positive outcome:
Broad matching single word generic domains may actually lose some direct navigation traffic to multiple keyword site suggestions from Google, but the upside is that it’s highly likely that domainers own the most frequently searched two, three and four keyword rich domains.
For example if I am seaching for a song to play on my guitar, my intention may have been to start with guitar.com. But as I begin to type “guitar” into the address box – “guitar tab” is suggested, and finally I am led to “guitar tab universe.” Ultimately, the issue is whether I’m finding what I want. Direct navigation would have eliminated this possibility altogether.
What if the unintended consequence of searching through the address bar is that it increases the desirability (and monetary value) of the most frequently searched two, three and four word longtail combinations? Wouldn’t that be a kick!
Dave
This is possible.
But is I own Guitar.com and get 1,000 visitors a day and through Google as you suggest people start picking and visting Guitartabs.com or Guitartabuniverse.com then my visitor count may go down to 900 day or 500 a day or who knows.
How does that help me, that the click goes to another domain owned by someone else?
Yes, i see the point here, SEO experts have the most to gain, you coud have mzguitaresw. anything, yet when someone types in guitar, if google likes
(for SEO) mzguitarsw.whatever, they will come up first.
Here’s a link to US Patent# 7,401,072:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=4&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=search&s2=%22address+bar%22OS=search+AND+%22address+bar%22&RS=search+AND+%22address+bar%22
Much of the rationale for this new functionality is explained here. Not an easy read, but it starts to make more sense after about the 2nd time through. I’d be very interested in what anybody else makes of this and whether there’s any opinions as to just how far reaching this new browser technology may be.
Sorry, I somehow didn’t correctly place the link, but if you go to the uspto.gov website, you can pull up the patent under the patent # 7,401,072
should be interesting to see if Chrome works more efficiently than FireFox and IE… if it’s faster than Firefox, since isn’t IE, then i’ll use it