Chrome has a few problems with BBC pages, and it’s a bit slow on some pages in an online game I play.
This is its strongest feature, IMO. Not to mention the improved garbage collection.
Ugh, there are about 20 different open source browsers already, most are passable, none are perfect. I’d have rather they put their resources directly toward improving Firefox, maybe do a code audit to remove all security holes like was done with openBSD. Or maybe focusing on their core business for once and making their search engine better. I can go on a rant about how I’ve become disenchanted with it recently, but that’s not what this thread is about.
Either way, bleah, I don’t need another browser. I need someone to fix the one I use.
Well, that’s much more likely to happen if the people who make the browser you use have to worry about Google stealing their lunch.
This will have the IE team shitting themselves - meaning IE 9 will arrive very soon after IE 8, which in turn will force Opera, Safari, Mozilla, and the rest to pull their socks up even more. Even if Chrome doesn’t get widely used, it’s mere existence is enough to up the ante in building fast, secure browsers. It’s all good IMO.
True enough, but if it’s moderately standards compatible it will still be a case of ‘write to standards and then bodge it for IE’
I’m using chrome right now; the only two things I’ve noticed so far is that it’s a bit faster than FF on my system, and that the spellcheck seemingly doesn’t do squat, since about every word I type gets a red squiggly line (alternatively, this may be a way of transmitting secret messages – the one in this post reads ‘so bit faster, type red in post’). :dubious:
Also, I’ve read that one reason for Google creating Chrome is to make computing in general more web-oriented, i.e. you won’t have a host of programs on your PC, but rather use web-based applications. (‘Also Google Chrome in web, host PC web’.)
I’ll be watching that secret messages thing, though.
I’m not sure any of this is true. Firefox/Mozilla has been around for a long time, the only time other browsers make inroads on IE’s market share is when Windows users get fed up with IE’s security holes being exploited and start downloading a different browser. I doubt that another fork of Firefox with features added is going to help Firefox’s security any more than Galleon, Konqueror, Links, Lynx, W3M or the embedded web browser in Emacs did. At any rate, Chrome stealing Firefox’s lunch certainly isn’t going to help my browser, Firefox (haven’t owned a Windows machine in years).
Through what mechanism is Chrome going to improve Firefox’s security? Seriously, if Google wanted to improve it, I truly feel there were better ways. A race to add in new features is VERY unlikely to close security holes that already exist, but have not been discovered. They are free to do what they want with it, but it’s not the path I would have chosen. I’m not gonna hail yet another browser, especially since this one is tied to a company that I am growing less fond of each month, and seems to have its own fight to use Firefox for.
I accidentally started a thread in IMHO (It seemed too… mundane for GD to me for some reason) without looking here.
Anyway here’s the bulk of my OP:
I’m using it right now, it’s pretty good. It’s still in BETA of course so a lot of frills and applications that use non-kosher plug-ins aren’t working (and you can’t add dictionary exceptions), but it comes with some interesting features at least. For example I can resize this text box I’m typing in. It’s not exciting or really necessary, but apparently it’s being designed as a browser built for applications instead of just displaying webpages correctly so if they’ve given thought to how users may want to resize their forum reply boxes I’m at the very least curious to see what functionality they’re going to add for the larger applications. It also seems to load a bit faster than Firefox and Internet Explorer.
I’d like to add it also has some display issues, another forum’s quick reply box disappears in Chrome. Anyway it’s open source, and the comic seemed like they wanted FF et al to use it. (Well, duh) So if anything, at least if the browser doesn’t catch on some of the technology probably will. And several of them seemed pretty nice (especially for me and my never-close-my-browser ways).
Shouldn’t be too hard, I hear that a room full of monkeys banging on a typewriter produces Microsoft-standards-compliant IE releases on an average of once every six minutes. 
Chrome is a pretty good paradigm change for browsers. It, theoretically, has some very nice advantages to it. Can’t wait for Firefox 4.
When searching for information (ironically, Googling) on this new browser, I came up with this site, which seems to indicate some problems with Chrome’s End User License Agreement, namely:
"11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the 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. "
There is some discussion on the subject following the original post. If this really does indicate that Google gets the rights to everything posted through Chrome, I’m not too thrilled. Could someone with a legal-sort of background give their take on the subject?
AFAIK, they are, and will remain, the primary funder of the Mozilla project. What more do you want them to do?
Yup, definitely beta of a new technology. It took someone all of a few hours to find a carpet-bombing security hole.
Well, they are the default search engine of the browser in return, so I think they get what they pay for in that respect. Interestingly, that relationship seems like it is still slated to end in Nov. 2008, from the FAQ I just read. Besides, it’s not really what more do I want them to do, it’s what I’d rather they do instead. If I had a few extra simoleons to pay developers to improve the internet, creating yet another browser is the last thing I’d do. Fixing the existing browser they’re forking would be tops on my list This has the potential of possibly returning dividends for both parties; yet another reason to use Firefox, where Google is already the default search engine. Fixing the niggling problems with their search engine could be another. Increasing the use and usefulness of current encryption standards would be yet a third. If they really must extend Firefox, there’s probably better ways to do it than forking it into yet another open source browser that will compete with Firefox for developers.
Seconded. I was all set to test out Chrome (Firefox is good, but I’m always open to new things) until I read this.
And why do they start downloading a different browser? Because someone organises a decent PR campaign and starts giving MS some proper competition.
IE always has major security holes, and there are always a variety of alternative browers. However if they’re not getting lots of media exposure and being pushed by a reasonably big organisation, they get nowhere and MS simply don’t care. Its not as if FF was any kind of a major innovation over things like Opera, it just had better PR.
Nobody has bigger exposure on the web than Google, and nobody scares MS more than Google. If Mozilla/FF was enough to get MS to beef up their IE dev team, then Google Chrome will make an even bigger difference.
And I’m not sure that FF has been around that long. 1.0 was released in 2004, about the same time as the second update of IE6.
My main complaint about Google’s Chrome: it silently installs an update application. The installation program doesn’t mention it; there’s no option to disable it. It kept pinging my firewall (this is why I also run a software firewall–to catch progs calling home) until I disabled the updater. Very rude of Google; I’m disappointed.
Exactly. Very bizarre OP.
Are you sure?
Not quite. The project Chromium is open source. The browser Chrome itself is not. You can confirm this yourself clicking the “About Google Chrome” menu item from within the browser itself. It clearly states “Copyright © 2006-2008 Google Inc. All Rights Reserved.” That is not an open source license.
By the way, what exactly is the difference between this new-fangled ‘a new process for every tab’ approach, and just having a couple of copies of a browser running, like with IE pre tabbed browsing? Other than having tabs instead of entries in the task bar, I mean.