Holy cow that is so annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
-click click-
Printable View
Holy cow that is so annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
-click click-
Remember its beta. I will contiune to use FF 3 and will keep my eye on this.
what google product isnt beta? Isnt gmail still beta for gods sakeQuote:
Originally Posted by vengance_01
Ok, I'm actually starting to like the bookmarks and the speed of this browser. This is greatly offset mainly by the lack of a basic :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing feature called autoscroll, the horrible download manager, the lack of combined back/forward quick history for each tab, lack of fullscreen mode, and the buginess of the rendering engine.
I'll play around with it a bit more. I'm mainly waiting to see if there's some kind of power user options page like FF has. If I can get autoscroll working Chrome might stay installed, and if the rendering bugs get fixed I might consider switching. If I could get all of the positives from FF3 and Chrome in the same browser I wouldn't ever need anything more.
I have very little knowledge in the area of security, but isnt the fact that its open source a big security risk to users? at least on XP?
I think it's a double edged sword. Easier to for scammers to find exploits, but also easier for the good guys to find and fix them when you have a large developer base.
I think ill stay clear until I see its secure.
Thanks metric. Slightly better than IE when it comes to standards compliance, but worse than firefox, and much worse than safari.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metric
I hate to say it, but Safari passes that test with 100/100.
If you want entertainment, run it in IE7. Give it a few seconds to load.
If it had gotten 100/100 I would have used it. Now there is no point. Next thing for me to test is javascript on it...
Hmm I'm using Chrome for safe surfing. I love how fast it loads. It makes me feel funny on the inside.
If you are not a developer, it may seem like a risk. However, it is only a risk in the situation where they used some very broken library and someone malicious sees the source code and realizes, hey these libraries have x,y,z bugs that I can use to hack others.Quote:
Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck
But usually programmers are like other people two, when news gets out of something broken, they wouldn't leave it in there.
Second issue is, one of the hardest things to do is actually look at source code and say "wow this has one major bug I can see". You have to so super advanced in your coding skills, that you wouldn't be a hacker in the first place. Sure small things are obvious, but I am sure google has very competent programmers that will at least spot the obvious.
Its way easier for an end user to grab a piece of software, and literally attack it with several different techniques that are known to bring down web browsers, than it is to do it from source.
If you did not know, Firefox has been open source from day one. When you hear open source, you need not worry about things from a "security" point of view.
FF's also open source.Quote:
Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck
Actually I think open source programs have a lower risk of security holes because there are more people looking trying to improve it.
Its a cool browser once you get use to how different it functions.
Initially you want to not like it cause things don't work the same as how your use to, but that cant be confused with how good or bad it is.
That aside, it needs work, but its a beta thats been out one day. Now that its released user feedback will come flooding in and you will most likely start to see features you really like that aren't there getting implemented.
Really wish there was a linux beta though :P
If you'd just written that bold statement in the clear concise way you did in your previous post, I wouldn't have asked you anything in the first place. Regardless, I guess it's preference, I like having fewer buttons. It's rare that I'll ever hit the back button enough to go forward 5 or 6 pages, and I can just right click the forward arrow if I need to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird
I see your point, but wouldn't that really only be an issue on a small monitor? All the webapps I use can easily fit in a windowed browser on the 19'' monitors I work with daily.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird
I like it. Very fast, and hasn't crashed on me yet. I thought I'd hate the tabs up top instead of below the address bar, but it's growing on me. Have it installed in Vista x64 on my desktop and in XP on a Celeron 1200 with 512MB of RAM and it's pretty zippy even then. Not bad, not bad at all. I like its downloader a lot, very clean and minimalistic.
My only complaints have all been said before. It got a 78/100 on that acid web rendering exam when I ran it just now, so it's not perfect, although I haven't run into any rendering problems so far. I wish it had ad blocking, but I'm sure that'll come in time. Probably in the form of an addon rather than in core functionality, since some people like to have ads displayed for whatever reason. Tweaktown maybe? :shakes: Also, middle-click scrolling would be nice. At least it works with the backwards-forwards mouse buttons.
Also, their website doesn't let you download the Windows version in Linux. Dunno why.
I'm just wondering if its even possible for them to make a 64 bit version, I think one of its open source core components it runs on is only available in 32 bit.
Then again it may not even matter as it seems it will be a cold day in hell before Adobe releases a 64 bit flash. ndiswrapper just doesnt work perfectly.
Is it just me or does it seem A LOT faster than Firefox loading web pages, holy :banana::banana::banana::banana:.
It is much faster. Have a look in 'about Chrome'. You'll see it's based of Safari and Firefox.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
What wasn't to get in that statement? Anyway, let's put that behind us.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird
Tons of web apps have adjustable resolution. Sure, you can run it at a lower res to get it to fit in to the window, but sometimes that extra bit fullscreen gives you is enough to put the app in a higher res without clipping. Again, it's pretty minor, but it's such a basic and simple thing that I don't see why Google would leave it out. As it stands they need to redo the download manager, fix the rendering bugs, and implement auto-scroll and a lot more people will want to use the browser.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
And why the heck does acid 3 get a different score each time I run it? Did Google cut corners to get Chrome's impressive speed?
Just got this, the warnings when going into Incognito are hilarious.
EDIT and this dark theme is nice too. http://nukeit.org/2008/09/02/chrome-...-chrome-theme/
Especially since the Zune XP theme almost matches it.
The "Find on page" is AMAZING. I mean really, wow.
EDIT no CTRL+ALT+Enter for www.*.org or Shift+Enter for www.*.net??? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O
Hey I just realized there is one site you guys could try:
http://www.valil.com/winfx/RTM/Chess...ess.WinFX.xbap
Only works in windows, but works nicely in IE and Firefox and any other windows browser.
on it right now, decent..a bit uninspired, but this is a ruff version still.
Not crazy about the lay out of the options, especially "under the hood"
but it hasnt crashed, loads Java fine..loads my Web CT class work fine..which IE can not do without errors, so that is good.
looks like a solid browser, and with a name like "chrome" might appeal quickly to a broader audience.:up:
the upside is it loads pages quickly, even rich pages.
Google might have a winner here with more work.
one last thing F11 don't work, what is the key now
Who's standing behind me :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewZorn
Love the new look and it is amazingly fast. On the other hand, i do not like how the bookmarks were arranged and no autoscroll.
Pretty damn fast.
Performance Toast FF scored 60-70k. Chrome 300k.
Dromaeo (javaScripting performance) high 600's on FF. 204 sec on Chrome.
I think this will be my new browser - makers Fasterfox seem like a joke.
Does dromaeo include regexs?Quote:
Originally Posted by LagunaX
Chrome does work with java, but it has to be Java SE 6 update 10 (which is beta).
I'm browsing from Chrome right now.
It's FAST.
I didn't like the bookmarks either at first, but I'm getting to like it. The key is to create different folders and then put different bookmarks in them. I have "Tech" "Games" "Music" "Finance", etc. That way, each one of those folders works like the bookmarks drop down from any other browser but only contains a specific type of bookmark. Intuitive. The lack of auto-scroll, again, is unacceptable. Second most annoying thing is the crappy download manager.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bail_w
It's borked. "Options -> Minor Tweaks -> Show saved passwords -> Show Password" and it actually displays the password. This is so awesome for work huh ;).
On FF you can have it delete all info on close.
What, no one here uses the scroll wheel?
my scroll on the touchpad works only to page dwn no up so its annoying
My lappy seems ok with the scroll action.
very fast from my brief usage of it. but, for some stupid reason, i have to type in an actual username when i want to logon my router with it. i can just type my password in on firefox. and it loads all the router pages fine, IE7 can't do that :(
Thanks google. I really need you to search for updates when my pc is idle. I also love having you load google updater on startup.
If by Firefox you mean Webkit, which is used by Safari then you're close.Quote:
Originally Posted by MomijiTMO
while entering the url www.xtreme chrome already suggested www.xtremesystems.org and even xtremesystems.org forums :D
but i think the gui looks gay :|
Safe Browsing and safe browsing-journal are doing quite a bit of background hd work every now and then, are these update processes or what are they?
I think the GUI looks pretty much like I want my browser to look like, no buttons I don't want and really low-profile. Skins would be cool, but this is being worked on.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
I am not a big critic of GUI. I care more for the functionality. It seems to me to browse faster than IE and FF.
But I play a browser game www.darkorbit.com. FF seems to do OK, but if I got other windows open that are loading things like say youtube then it starts to stutter and the videos do the same. If I check taskmanager then I will find FF using 100% CPU. With just the game, Chrome cant even play it. Pauses within a few seconds, and is using 100% CPU.
IE is the only one I found that seems to be good at multi-tab large content.
Fast browser I must say. :clap: It reminds me of Safari's speed, but backed by a better company. Runs really well on my old Dell too.
scroll works fine :)
anyone knows how to change color theme ?
I like it, but it doesn't seem very customisable. It also works fine with hotmail (unlike opera). It even has a spell checker :D
I haven't tried it with dubious websites yet but i have a feeling it will cope with those.
It's a day old dude. I'm sure there will be some but so far all the ones I've seen are malware for n00bs.Quote:
Originally Posted by gillll
hehe u can deattach and reattach tabs :D
Wow, that's kinda neat!
using gmail is like a native windows application now... its freakishly fast for a web app.
yes, very fast:D I think i like the speed.
yep, very fast indeed! sometimes too fast i got lost. hehe
still getting myself used to it. might make it my default browser.
Never thought any browser could be faster than Opera. I was wrong.
I still won't switch from Opera to this just yet. Needs more plugins. NEEDS mouse gestures. Needs Opera's caching for the previous webpage so it's instant to go back and forward. Needs a hell of a lot more advanced options. We spend a lot of time with our browsers. We need to be able to customize every little bit of it to make it juuuust right.
+1 on everything you said tbh!Quote:
Originally Posted by gallardo
Great browser for being < 1 day old! very quick amazing compared to FF which i've been using for like years! with occasional look at opera etc :)
I like it, looks like it will be a good Browser when it matures
Anandtech did a review. . . . lol.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1843
I guess that secure browsing is a good use for it. :ROTF:
http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/eula_text.htmlQuote:
11. Content license from you
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.
11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.
11.3 You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You agree that this license shall permit Google to take these actions.
11.4 You confirm and warrant to Google that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the above license.
Please, get lost. I'll stay away from this even if they make it usable unless this goes away. (non-screwed scrolling, addons, etc)
And no, Firefox doesn't have any of these terms.
Well umm look at the demo and you would have to be an utter nob to click something you didn't want to download. My response was as follows:Quote:
Originally Posted by m^2
"WTH. I do not want a free coupon. Where is this crap so I can burn it."
mouse gestures mouse gestures mouse gestures mouse gestures mouse gestures mouse gestures
^ only thing missing as far as i'm concerned
It's brilliantly fast. I love it. I am a power user and have 10,20,30 tabs open at once and sometimes even more. Chrome handles it's all brilliantly. It loads everything up as a browser should, ie instantly.
It is fast, but doesn't display sites that I frequent correctly. :(
I'll stay with IE 7 and definitely look forward to it. :yepp:
Here's a dumb question to which I don't know the answer: which browser supports mouse gestures?
Opera on the fly and Firefox if you fiddle with it and install additional stuff to pump it up. :p:
Couple it with phishing and most users will click. It's even more dangerous in case of a reputable site being hacked OR catching a virus, like the one distributed with one of FF language packs a few moths ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by MomijiTMO
Chrome just got banned at both my workplaces...all other browsers are allowed.
Maybe this is why?
Edit: Go see post #152
Btw, anyone who wants to get Java working in Chrome needs Java 6u10RC: http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp. Works for me, have fun. :)
mh, well, isn't the msn and icq eula stating the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
i don't like it either, but i think there are a lot of services out there that demand the same - and it seems like nobody actually cares.
People don't use their MSN to write blog posts, news posts on websites, update content, upload videos, etc, etc, they use it to chat to their friends.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
The browser is more important than some chat client.
that's true, but on a chat client you're talking about private things you eventually wouldn't tell anyone on a blog, forum or other kinds of websites. furthermore i've sent more files over a chat client than i've ever uploaded to any website.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
in the end it's the same.
for now i don't know a situation in which msn or icq claimed something a chat user wrote or sent as their property or that they were storing these information, but tbh, i really could think of google being the first who actually collects all this stuff.
google is like a black whole - sucking in everything it can get its hands on... :F
understandable, the policy they try to shove down your throat with it goes too far, I'd ban it too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Actually downloaded it yesterday and found it real fast, but looking at all the issues raised here (some valid, some not that much...) I wonder what part of "Beta" some ppl didn't realize.
I have seen lots of ppl complaining, I liked some of its features, but it is still on a very early stage of development, you cant compete with the tons of addons firefox uses if you released the browser days ago...
This will maybe be a hell of a browser, maybe not, but let it develop and imho no point on bashing it to kingdom come if it states "BETA"... If you want to help develop and raise some real points like some here have thats ok, but stating "i'm not using it cause it sucks..." is not that much of an opinion...
I personally will keep using Firefox until it gives me all I need, but, like gmail, eventually it will rock and work without an issue.
I'm not a Google supporter, but I'm not also an hater, I find lots of the stuff they do real good and innovative, remember, if gmail, when it started, didn't give 1 gig webspace, hotmail would still give you 5 megs...
I like it, like how it looks, like the speed, although in my opinion with the screen resolutions we now use it makes not that much of a difference not to have toolbars on top. Also if its created by Google you have to expect them to publicise it (as most of the webpages do, and some much more than those simple ads from Google).
Just my 2 cents...
Like
Browsers here handles credicards aswell. Quite scary that google basicly writes they have right to use the cards too :p:
Just tried it.
Uses too much CPU. FFox is way easier on the system.
is that really what the license says? What if you just use the incognito when you need to enter private information?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
What if you just avoid using it? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
And read the EULA ;)
Well yeah it's amazing what people will do. Yesterday 4chan had a spam script where the image [via imagemagick] had a caption that said "Save as 4chan.hta **** bricks" and who would have guessed it, a tonne of people did. Nobs. Anyhoo it randomly selects files in your documents and attaches it to the image and when running it [it's a .hta now] it opens and runs the script happily spamming the boards. Totally hilarious.Quote:
Originally Posted by m^2
I know sometimes Microsoft plays dirty tricks but compared to Google is just a 3 years old child. I'll re post the Eula Agreement with Bold letters so even guys with poor vision could see it:
Meaning that anything you use with their browsers they're entitled to it. :shakes:Quote:
11. Content license from you
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.
11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.
Hey type "About:internets" and don't clog the tubes.
Also Chrome has started to play up. I hate it.
don't wink at me. If the site is secure, and encrypted, how could the browser even take that kind of information(credit card)? They say "Services" a lot, they might be referring to Google services, I don't see how using their browser would entitle them to all things written with that browser. If we all started using it, it would imply that they owned just about the whole internet. Reading around the net, it appears that's the same EULA for other google services, including search, so, the "services" may not be implying the browser, but other google products.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
hum, well, is there really a need for them to be entitled if the user agrees the eula? it's the user's own fault if he does, isn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
that's the reason we should stop blindly accepting every eula/license agreement :p:
i uninstalled firefox.
i just use chrome and IE 8.0 now.
IE8 omg!!! that's punishment!
I like it so far. Seems faster to me than FF does. Although the customizability(is that even a word? I miss spellcheck) of FF is excellent.
How exactly can they be tracking EVERYTHING you do with a browser? wouldn't there need to be logs, or something? do all of these posts get timestamped with a browser version?(I really don't know)...and what about when I sign into a blog website, who technically has a similar EULA, where the content I post isn't necessarily all mine, but the website's also, and I write through chrome... do both Google and said website own my posted content?Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
i have no idea about the EULA stuff, but i'd say that if someone has the money and ressources to build farms and clusters to store all that data - it's google.
between chrome and ie 8, there's nothing that can't be done really well.Quote:
Originally Posted by illidan
well, for my purposes at least.
I like it! but I'm not uninstalling FF3 just yet ^^
Read the privacy statement. When you install it, a unique ID is generated to identify the machine and the IP address it is connecting from.. which is stored in google's databases along with all your youtube surfing habits, search terms, submitted data, favourites...Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
I like the "source code available soon" bs.
sure, youtube I can understand, but if it's not communicating to google when you make a post here, how could they know this was written in chrome? also, source info is here, http://dev.chromium.org/developers/h...etting-started, or I think it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmad
If chrome logged and send to google such information google would know, wouldn't it?
I'm pretty sure that it doesn't happen now, but I wouldn't be surprised if in a few months google started to collect statistics about how much do you write in diffrent languages, how often do you visit the same websites, how strong passwords do you use etc.
Yup the link for source code is up. Let's see how easy it is to disable google's spying mechanism.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
now thats an overly exaggerated statement I hope! There is no way google has *any right, what-so-ever* to:Quote:
Originally Posted by XSAlliN
" 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. "
say for example ur creditcard number, ur netbank number & password etc - think about it.. u d/l & install chrome.. u logon to ur netbanking.. google retains number & password, & then as per one of the words aforementioned in eula, "publicly display" the number & password they retained - they would be in so deep poo-poo, it'd make ur head spin :yepp:
3K post! :woot:
Google really is going after world domination! I can see this becoming more popular than Firefox soon, especially because its ridiculously fast.
I know it's beta, but this is still scary:
http://www.heise-online.co.uk/securi...--/news/111458
Two links are there, a demo for the Carpet Bomb (downloads only a notepad jar) and a demo that crashes Chrome with an "undefined handler followed by a 'special' character".
Considering all this publicity it's no wonder that people all over the globe are trying to crash it. Actually it's a free security audit for google..
has anyone raised any concerns about their EULA
11. Content license from you
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.
11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.
11.3 You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You agree that this license shall permit Google to take these actions.
11.4 You confirm and warrant to Google that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the above license.
http://tapthehive.com/discuss/This_P...e_s_EULA_Sucks
I sure would like them to try and claim rights to some of the material I view. I think my employer would have a few disagreements.Quote:
Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss
exactly my point.. yes, agreeing with the eula gives them a dam lot of power - but not *that* much.. they are not 'God' as soon as u accept that eula :rolleyes: :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberration
agreed, and they of course have nothing calling home when you view https pages (don't think they've licensed port 443 yet :D but may be MS did :confused: )Quote:
Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss
Someone on Overclock.net caught this,
Quote:
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.
You guys are missing that line. They can only use the stuff to advertise chrome basically, like "look at what you can do with chrome:. Not that it's okay, but it's not as bad as it sounds.
I'm not a lawyer, but IMO they can do whatever they want with this data. I really don't expect that they will collect passwords, or edit forum posts, but some less sensitive things - definitely.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
BTW, the latest news:
http://www.golem.de/0809/62171.html
Translation: http://www.worldlingo.com/S1790.5/tr...809/62171.html
You, Chrome users, will be getting even more personalized spam.:rofl:Quote:
Googles Browser Chrome sends some data to the manufacturer, from this Google does not make make no secret. With the installation each Browser gets a clear number assigned, which is sent again and again together with other data at Google.(...)
This website discusses the only times Chrome transmits to Google,Quote:
Originally Posted by m^2
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google...comment-132727.
EULA was modified.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spawne32
This was due to Google just copy-pasting a common license for all their products.
I'm getting BSODs with chrome, so I am waiting for it to come out of beta before I try it again. Loved it otherwise.
Yes, I've seen this.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
Please excuse me repeating my words from another forum:
------------------------------------------------
1. The source of information is google itself.
2. It's not detailed enough. i.e.
doesn't tell what information is being sent to google. I think that the minimum is "IP xxx has Chrome installed and is running now". I would except that they abuse it a little and send current Chrome version + OS version too. Do they? Or maybe they send something else too?Quote:
- Google Chrome checks for automatic updates every 25 hours. Other modern browsers check for updates as well, e.g. to plug security holes. Given today’s sometimes-hostile web, I think checking for updates like this is a very smart choice.
Yes, I'm paranoid. :lol:
And I remember how they changed desktop search tool's license to let it send information to google few months after it's release...so it's not THAT important what it does now, but rather - what will it be doing later.
------------------------------------------------
Well, now we can be pretty sure that updater sends something more - personal number, so even people with variable IP are being tracked correctly.
Also..what are the "Usage statistics" entries in the registry?