Blogger Jason Kottke has been asking for a Google browser for seven years. So, too, have Larry Page and Sergey Brin. In 2001, Google CEO Eric Schmidt told them the company wasn't ready to take on Microsoft in a full-fledged browser war, Steven Levy reported in his Wired feature on Google's new browser, "Inside Chrome: The Secret Project to Crush IE and Remake the Web." But I don't think Google's project is really about taking on Microsoft. It's about Mozilla, the maker of Firefox, in a feud that stretches back almost two years.John Lilly, the CEO of Mozilla, has said he's "not worried" about Google Chrome. That's classic PR-speak. Mozilla and Google are financially intertwined; Firefox makes money for Mozilla by referring users to Google's search engine; that traffic, in turn, generates advertising revenues for Google. But Mozilla has shown some signs of independence, signing a deal with Yahoo for search in some parts of Asia. And the larger Firefox gets — its browser-usage share has reached 20 percent, according to some estimates — the more leverage it has over Google. Sure, in theory, Microsoft can tie its Internet Explorer browser to its Web search and mapping services, generating traffic. But that's been the theory for years. Can we say it? Microsoft's online services just aren't very good, which is why users avoid them and they're losing money hand over fist. A new browser won't change that. So Firefox, not Internet Explorer 8, is the real strategic problem for Google. Of course, it's impolite to say so. Firefox, as an open-source project, is beloved by geeks, even though its executives are well paid and the project is gushing cash. (Mozilla Corp., a for-profit corporation, is owned by the Mozilla Foundation, a nonprofit; the company's profits can thereby flow up to the foundation without violating its tax-exempt status. Neat how that works, eh?) Google would also face an all-out rebellion in the ranks if it came out and said it's taking on Firefox. But there's reason for the Googlers behind Chrome to start a grudge match. Several key engineers — Ben Goodger and Darin Fisher among them — devoted considerable volunteer time to Firefox before joining Google's browser project. An article posted on the Truth about Mozilla blog in February says Mozilla's CTO, Brendan Eich — a veteran of Netscape — removed Goodger as a Firefox "module owner" in September 2006. Being the "owner" of a module, while a volunteer position, carries considerable cachet. Goodger subsequently removed himself from the Firefox project, as did colleagues like Fisher and Pam Greene. Wired now reveals the motivation behind Eich's move: By June 2006, Goodger and others had created a prototype of Chrome. If Lilly wasn't worried about Google's browser, why would Eich take Goodger off Firefox? In any event, removing Goodger played into Google's hands, making him all the more willing to take on Mozilla. The infighting between the browser maker and the search engine shows the limits of open source's "sharing is caring" ideology. Open-source projects can be just as political as proprietary code — and as vulnerable to twisting for corporate priorities. The bottom line of Google Chrome's creation? The bottom line. Google was worried that Firefox was making too much money, and Mozilla was getting too independent. Mozilla had to be stopped — and the true Firefox believers at Google had to be cajoled into doing Larry and Sergey's dirty work. (Illustration of Ben Goodger by Scott McCloud)

So Google launched a browser, did you hear? Well you should have by now considering that Google slipped up and sent the promotional comic book about the project early. Today's featured commenter, giddieup, knows how the breakdown in communication occured:

In the October issue of Wired, Steven Levy has delivered a formulaic feature on the making of Google's Chrome browser. It's just like those jargony trade-publication writeups you've read ad nauseam — but with the value-add of meeting recaps. One line makes the whole thing worth it, however, is engineer Pam Greene's retelling of a demo by colleague Darin Fisher to Sergey Brin : "Sergey was bouncing on one of those exercise balls, watching Darin give a demo, and petting the snake," according to Pam Greene, an engineer on the project. Oh, wait — it was a stuffed snake. No, that doesn't make it any better. (Illustration of Greene by Scott McCloud)

With Chrome, Google is trying to reinvent Web browsing. What's that old saying about not fixing it if it ain't broke? Walt Mossberg, the Wall Street Journal's make-or-break gadget reviewer, has played with Chrome for a week. His conclusion: the browser has "promise" — which, if you're familiar with Mossbergspeak, means he thinks it sucks, but he's willing to review the next version in a year. The harshest part: "Despite Google’s claims that Chrome is fast, it was notably slower in my tests at the common task of launching Web pages than either Firefox or Safari."

Forget the klutzy announcement-by-comic-book of Google Chrome, Google's new Web browser — this thing was the worst-kept secret in the Valley and beyond. Joshua Schachter notes that Alberto Lumbreras, an R&D engineer at Telefonica, Twittered about Google Chrome in July — but no one noticed because he called it a "navegador" instead of a "browser." The news made it to China late last month. And the head of PR for Google's Android project spilled the beans over tapas last Friday. That, too, made it to Twitter.

Hilarious! Google executive Sundar Pichai blamed the mailroom for leaking word of Google Chrome, the search giant's new Web browser. Philipp Lenssen, a blogger based in Germany, got a comic book about the browser delivered Monday, a day before Google had planned to launch Chrome. Put two and two together: Someone in Mountain View forgot that Labor Day is not observed worldwide.

Cartoonist Scott McCloud's 1993 graphic non-fiction book, Understanding Comics, was a breakthrough piece of work. It explained the complex insides of comics writing and illustration in a way that was engaging and understandable to outsiders and fans, not writers and illustrators. By contrast, McCloud's marketing collateral for Google's Chrome browser is a crippled, half-assed effort.It's not that the work is too technical in scope. Understanding Comics went pretty deep on the elements and jargon of comics style. But this time around, many of McCloud's panels will be indecipherable except to Web engineers — the very opposite of what made Understanding Comics a hit. I doubt McCloud ran his work, whose words are attributed to "The Google Chrome Team," past a proofreader outside of Google. "Given what's known about mass browser exploits ..." mumbles a cross-armed product manager on the second page. My MSM editorial training kicked into gear: What are "mass browser exploits?" (I Googled the phrase. Zero results.) What about them am I supposed to already know as "given" so I can understand why they matter to Chrome? Any editor at O'Reilly would have thrown the line back for rewrite. By page three, McCloud has lost the entire non-webapp-coding world. "The Gears guys were saying that one of the problems with browsers is they're inherently single-threaded." The majority of misfortunates who try to read this comic on Tuesday will have no idea who the Gears guys are. They'll puzzle at the statement browsers inherently frimble frotz foobar. The rest of the 38-page book reads like the middle of a Neal Stephenson novel. Did you know that taking screenshots and creating a cryptographic hash is an imprecise way to compare layouts? It's true.

They've yanked the video, so for now you'll have to settle for these screenshots of Google's forthcoming Chrome browser. No Mac version yet, hmph.

You can't download the new Google Chrome browser yet. But you can read about it in this comic strip for which Google hired Scott McCloud, author of the nerd classic Understanding Comics, to turn geeky Googlers like open-source evangelist Chris DiBona into comic-book heroes. I guess I'm not supposed to ask why the logo for Chrome looks like a primary-colored plastic toy, but here's a rundown of the most outstanding features Google promises: