03 Sep, 2008, Zenn wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
(Copied from http://www.mudnews.blogspot.com/)

Wow.

Wow.

Google went and released a web browser!!!!

Did I emphasize that enough? But seriously, guys, this thing is totally awesome. You can drag and drop your tabs all over the place, and they're independent from each other. It even has it's own task manager, and a "Most Visited Sites" tab that lets you see if anything's new on the websites you visit most.. It's pretty awesome. Very nice, very clean, with a more compact feel, and from what I can tell; pretty stable. If one of the apps you're running in one of the tabs crashes, you can use it's built-in task manager to terminate that specific tab, without getting rid of the rest of the web browser.




Also, I looked at a side-by-side memory usage comparison with Firefox and one tab open in each. Here's the difference (On Vista 64bit):



Chrome definitely runs with less memory. Definitely the browser I'm using from now on.

Wonder what Google will do next? Antivirus software? Ultrafast watch-it-on-your-computer movie rental available straight from Google? An operating system?

Whatever they do, I can't wait. :grinning:

- Zenn
03 Sep, 2008, Lobotomy wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
You may want to have a look at this article for some cautionary points regarding the terms of service agreement for the new browser.
03 Sep, 2008, Zenn wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
Eh, then just use Firefox to upload things. Easy as that. Why Google would try to rip off your work for any reason at all is beyond me when they have designers that can do ten times anything most of us could do. Why would they go to the trouble of actually watching for interesting pieces of artwork, code, etc. and spending more than they would to actually create their own content doing so .. *shrug* I don't think it'd be worth it to them.

Other than that, though, it seems an excellent browser to me.
03 Sep, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
It amuses me that some people treat Microsoft as the Big Evil Corporation that does Pretty Evil Things, but when Google – a corporation with a huge share of the Internet market – puts in rather draconian licenses, these people just shrug and say "oh, but Google wouldn't actually do anything bad with it"…
03 Sep, 2008, Zenn wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
I don't treat Microsoft as the Big Evil Corporation that does Pretty Evil Things. Bill Gates earned every penny.
03 Sep, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
There are other people in this world… :wink: I wasn't necessarily referring to you. Nonetheless the total trust you place in Google still amuses me somewhat.
03 Sep, 2008, Fizban wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
He doesn't seem to trust Google, he just seems to think it's not worth the time of their incredibly skilled developers to try and steal hobbyists's work. 90% of mud developers can't touch the professionals Google employs. They're known for employing geniuses. They've in fact gotten flack for doing so.
03 Sep, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
The statement that they wouldn't bother to do it implies the trust that even if they did, it wouldn't really be a problem. It also makes the assumption that human beings are the ones doing all this trawling, which is an odd assumption to make for a company that is one of the best at machine learning in the world.
03 Sep, 2008, Guest wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Well unless Google actually starts abusing the position they're in, I'd say getting worked up over the potential for it is a bit paranoid. Microsoft has earned every last word of the negative press that's been generated about them for years for being intrusive, insecure, and simply full of bugs.

I read through the entire 30+ pages of Googles' comic presentation for Chrome and the security model they've setup for it sounds like it would blow everyone else away. And if you're truly worried about what it's doing, the entire project is open source. Inspect it. Can't do that with IE.

EDIT: A quick followup on really brief usage. A couple of things really stood out as missing, and a couple more like I'm fighting against the UI.

Noticeably missing is a button to click to return to your homepage. I may be an oddball or something but my blog is my homepage. If I want to head back there for something I don't think closing the browser and reopening it is the best method of doing so. Yes, I could make a bookmark to it, but FF, Opera, IE, and Safari all give me that convenient house icon to click on instead.

Also missing is more detailed control over cookies. You can either enable them all, "restrict how 3rd party cookies are used"* or disable them entirely. There's no option like in Firefox where you can set the default to block all, then create a whitelist of trusted sites.

* (this isn't explained anywhere at all. restrict them how?)

The placement of the bookmarks menu is awkward on the right side of the screen and is a long way off from the new tab button. Middle clicking a link opens a new tab as expected, but does not then switch to the new tab so you can get down to business.

It's still early beta, but that stuff is glaring at least for me.

On the plus side, the thing is uber-fast. I zipped through a bunch of different places just to see how quick it ran and rendering speed is crazy. Easily blows the pants off of IE, FF, and even Opera.

It also has only very trouble properly displaying the contents of the pages. No strange out of place boxes, lines, or other things you might get with a rendering bug, but the overflow settings in the file viewer are being completely ignored, causing a table stretch. However it does display the entire contents of a couple of known huge troublemakers. All 8400+ lines of imc.c for example, where FF will die around 2000. Though it did get a bit sluggish toward the end of the page.

Pop-up heavy pages never got one through, even a couple of those "incognito" type pages they went on and on about :P

It appears as though all of the settings it can use right now from FF got imported without a problem. All the bookmarks and page history made it, but none of the existing cookies.

Over all it's not a bad effort really. Polish off some of the big issues and a bit more UI refinement and they'll have something that's a serious contender. I'm not jumping ship just yet from FF though :)
03 Sep, 2008, The_Fury wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
Samson said:
Well unless Google actually starts abusing the position they're in, I'd say getting worked up over the potential for it is a bit paranoid. Microsoft has earned every last word of the negative press that's been generated about them for years for being intrusive, insecure, and simply full of bugs.


I tend to agree with you. Google has a motto that it asks all of its staff to follow, "Don't Be Evil" and while that in itself is not a reason to trust them, it does show that the company does attempt to balance its capitalistic nature with the greater world community. Google like most companies wants to be the best, offer the best and in the process make lots of money for its shareholders all the while balancing a fair play attitude is commendable, contrastingly you have Microsoft who also wants to be the best and make lots of money but does not give a rats about who it steps on along the way and for the most part has set up its business models to make sure that it remains the dominant player.

Should Google be trusted, IMO yes as they have not given any reason to believe that they are anything but honorable in their actions, but as soon as they show that their intent is to bolster their market position at the expense of others then i would dump them like last weeks girl friend. Sure for Google this is also about making money, which for them is from advertising, but even that could be a lot worse, they could be serving up pages and pages of flashing multi coloured epileptic inducing banner ads rather than the tasteful and slightly out of sight text ads.
03 Sep, 2008, Zeno wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
Noticeably missing is a button to click to return to your homepage. I may be an oddball or something but my blog is my homepage. If I want to head back there for something I don't think closing the browser and reopening it is the best method of doing so. Yes, I could make a bookmark to it, but FF, Opera, IE, and Safari all give me that convenient house icon to click on instead.

Might want to check the Options, bud. :P
03 Sep, 2008, Guest wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
Yes, well, had you read my post completely you might note I was already in the options menu. I didn't see that checkbox there before :)

That doesn't address the rest of the problems is has though.
03 Sep, 2008, Kayle wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
It does render exceptionally fast, and overall I'm pretty pleased with it, very few things jump out at me as needing fixed, but there are a couple of things. I'm not getting rid of Firefox just yet, but it is looking like Chrome will be the new Browser to beat.
03 Sep, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
Chrome will have to support all the various extensions I use before I could even consider using it as a primary browser. Oh, and they'd need a Linux version… :wink:

EDIT:
People might also want to look into some de-hyping of the V8 engine's speed domin....
03 Sep, 2008, Fizban wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0
Well. It is dominant over Firefox hands down based on those bench-marks. It's trace-monkey which is apparently still unstable that showed as testing faster than Chrome. Trace monkey also won't even be released for a few months, so of currently available browsers, Chrome is 'definitely' faster than Mozilla's offerings.
03 Sep, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
In fairness, Chrome is also beta: if you play fair and use the unstable versions of Mozilla's stuff, you will be getting their enhanced Javascript. Google just happens to have nicely packaged their unstable version for non-developers to use. :shrug:
03 Sep, 2008, Zenn wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
DavidHaley said:
Chrome will have to support all the various extensions I use before I could even consider using it as a primary browser. Oh, and they'd need a Linux version… :wink:


IMO, it doesn't make sense to port a beta to Linux or other operating systems just yet.
03 Sep, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
Err, given that one of their selling points is cross-platform compatibility, it in fact makes all kinds of sense to demonstrate that it actually is cross-platform, no? :rolleyes:
03 Sep, 2008, Kayle wrote in the 19th comment:
Votes: 0
They haven't finished the beta setups for the linux and mac ports.
04 Sep, 2008, Omega wrote in the 20th comment:
Votes: 0
Google retracted their terms of service with regards to your uploaded files, apparently that took ALLOT of fire right away and they altered the terms of service, and made them retroactive to people who used dl'd it prior.

Article

On top of that, with any open source software, you should always look under the hood and inspect what they got, and disable anything you don't like, and take note of anything you can do to optimize/update, as nomatter how good the coders may be, it is so simple to overlook something, and have a completely shmuck find/fix an issue.

Anyways, just my two cents. I like Chrome, its got quite a nice look to it, but I won't be using it until it is out of beta.
0.0/67