People will consume content where it’s most convenient, but eventually the print version will be an expensive luxury. But by that time, the channels will have improved.

We’re all living in beta out here.

Buddy Scalera
http://www.buddyscalera.com

[...] launch­ing a shop on Chrome has noth­ing to do with choos­ing a pro­pri­etary plat­form despite what some piracy advocates/​bloggers may think. Chrome is a mar­ket­place. Go to Google’s web app store and notice lots of other web apps, [...]

I want cross platform support, not to have to buy the same books over and over again depending on my device. I’m actually looking into getting an ereader and one of the ones I really like is the Nook.

Mainly because it offers the ability to use any book I buy through it, on the Nook, computer Iphone/Touch, and Android.

It also offers a feature that would scare comic publishers I bet though. A LendMe feature, that allows you to loan (for specific time frame) books you bought to a friend who also has a Nook.

In terms of mobility of purchased media, I share the same hesitation as others.

I spent a lot of time with Marvel’s Chrome service as prep for a post I’ve got coming soon, and I realized that the website is HTML5 powered, yes, but the actual comic reading experience is in plain old Adobe Flash. I think perhaps their store software (which is currently pretty buggy) requires some HTML5 routines, but the rest of it doesn’t. It could’ve been a part of their Digital Comics Unlimited Program, and in fact, if you have a sub to MDCU, you get “the majority” of the Marvel Chrome books along with it.

As a first step goes, it isn’t bad, but it definitely needs a lot of work before it’s optimal.

I think in this case, the direction is fine, but it’s the steps that are frustrating. The Chrome app store is part of Google’s evolution from browser to platform/OS. It’s only a matter of time before it converges with the Android store. Google/android has a bigger user base than apple/iOS, so better comics support for Google is actually a move in the right direction.

That said, you’re right that this is a terrible time for consumers of digital collections. We’ve got Apple, Google, Amazon and, increasingly, Facebook splintering access to content, and content producers too often asking full price for crippled product and outside of music, legal options for free are shrinking. So, yeah, hard to get excited about another app that limits access, but it’s a necessary step in the right direction. Especially in light of Apple’s recent crack down on apps that sell third-party content that isnt’ available through Apple’s marketplace.

Universal seems to be the solution, in both software and content.

Joshua, and people call me snarky!

But, in this case, I think it’s a technology issue.

I took a quick look, and it seems this site is coded heavily in HTML5 (I went to see if FireFox could handle it, and it actually pops up a message announcing that). In which case, using Safari would cause errors, yes. The problem is that browsers themselves are rather proprietary, especially in what/how much/how fast they support new web technology. IE8 for example, still manages to screw up even just CSS, which is years old.

Coding to make up for browser compatibility issues takes a ton of time and effort… You need to consider the functionality from the start and usually downgrade to the lowest common denominator. So it might just be in this case, they chose to offer something new through the only means possible. Just giving the benefit of the doubt, in that.