Google Chrome web browser

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro

i find it quite amusing to notice myself pushing the button and then pushing the mouse up/down and remembering "oh, right, this sh1t doesn't work here :p:"

---

Holy cow that is so annoying.

-click click-

Remember its beta. I will contiune to use FF 3 and will keep my eye on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vengance_01

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 sake

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Metric

:stick:

---

Thanks metric. Slightly better than IE when it comes to standards compliance, but worse than firefox, and much worse than safari.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck

I think ill stay clear until I see its secure.

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck

I think ill stay clear until I see its secure.

---

FF's also open source.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hurleybird

Obviously I did need to write two paragraphs to get through to you. My other two attempts where I said "all that I needed to say" you didn't get it, and it was only after I took two paragraphs to explain it to you that you did. And yes, combined back/forward is objectively better than separate back/forward. It makes the interface simpler, and the user can see more data at the same time. There's no good argument to have them be separate.

---

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

If an app has a resolution setting you generally want to go as high as possible without having parts of the app clipped off. Fullscreen mode can be the difference between having the entire app show or parts of it being cut off. Again, a minor complaint but a legitimate one.

---

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.

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

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hurleybird

FF3 has one button that shows all history of a tab in a single drop down menu, both forwards and back. Say if you have a tab that has five pages forward and five pages backwards in the history you can see them all in the dropdown. Chrome's implementation is much worse. You can can't see all history at once, you can only see backwards by pressing and holding the back button, forwards by pressing and holding the forward button.

---

What wasn't to get in that statement? Anyway, let's put that behind us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryboto

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.

---

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewZorn

Just got this, the warnings when going into Incognito are hilarious.

---

Who's standing behind me :confused:

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.