But it's called "Google Web Designer", so many of us web developers probably thought we were the target audience. I first thought it was a Dreamweaver competitor with better support for JS libraries and HTML5, which would be great.
Instead we have "Google Ad Designer" targeted at designers and marketers. OK, I was still interested at least to play with it for a while and see if I could recommend it to my designer friends, but no Linux support and worst of all, they use PC as a synonym of Windows and Mac as a synonym of Mac OS X. Sorry, but this isn't the 90's anymore, go back to your time machine.
So, I agree I'm not the target audience, but you have to admit the announcement can be perceived as misleading and off-putting.
I am, mostly because it's wrong and helps in perpetuating misconceptions. I use a PC with Linux, you can use a Mac with Windows or Linux (and others), and nowadays Macs are PCs with a prettier design, so saying "PC and Mac" is completely meaningless. It's like saying "Mobile phones" when it only works in Android. You then have to take the time to explain to normal users why it doesn't work in their iPhones or Blackberries.
As someone who happened to use Linux on their PC while coming across this submission, I was confused for a while as to why the download button was disabled. ;)
Ah, thank you. I've been trying to work out why no one seemed to be mentioning it. I flicked to Chrome, used a proxy ... still greyed out without any explanation.
Google are seriously bad at web design and copy writing it seems based on this.
I think this metonymy helps reinforce the idea that there isn't a conceptual difference between hardware and software, or that they are inherently a single integrated product.
If you value various aspects of keeping hardware and software separate, then not reinforcing this association -- and instead trying to draw the distinction -- is valuable.
A lot of people in a discussion like this will point out that many computer users don't know what an OS is in the first place, or don't draw any distinction between the computer, the OS, and the browser. That's true, but avoiding using the individual proper names of these things makes it even more true!
It depends on the kind of designer we are talking about, it's not all about graphics design. Web designers (you know, the ones probably targeted by this software) don't need to depend heavily on Adobe applications and can comfortably use Aptana Studio for web design on Linux.
However, I was referring to myself. I was interested but couldn't use it, so I won't recommend it, as simple as that. I think software relies heavily on network effects, and many possible early adopters probably are running Linux too.
In my experience designers tend to be quite conservative in their choice of tools and probably won't ditch Flash just because this application appeared today. Developers are usually much more keen on trying out the latest tool, it's part of the trade.
In my opinion, it's a mistake to imply "Get the hell out of here, you're not the target audience" when you probably depend in these people to recommend the software to your target audience.
Lack of support for Linux is a consequence of not being a webapp, and that is what I really don't like (even if this was supported on Linux, OpenBSD and Solaris). Is expecting that Google can deliver cutting edge web-based apps really weird?
The design crowd probably are using a Mac or a Windows..
(it took me a minute to see PC = Windows, and remember this is a "machism" for Windows)
Linux is a thing mostly for coder types, and probably would want the source code attached to it.. and probably since they dont want tho share this code with us.. no Linux version for now
But you'd have to go out of your way to get your hands on it since the Download button is inert unless their javascript can confirm that you are in fact using Windows or so. Doesn't seem to work with wine's built-in browser, and I couldn't get past the clickwrap EULA with an old chrome-based browser running under wine either.