This is topic Google releases their own open-source browser today, 'Chrome' is the name. in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.
I'm using it right now. First impressions, I like the new interface design. It never made a whole lot of sense to me to treat tabs and windows as effectively different things. Having each tab act as an independent instance of the browser, so that if one crashes, the others still work, is a good idea.
I've only had Chrome for about half an hour, so it's too early to say whether I'll stick with it or switch back to Firefox. It's better than IE7 for sure (although so is trying to browse the internet using a divining rod). I like the sound of the new features described in the webcomic that Google is using to introduce Chrome, but it'll take some time to see whether they really improve the browsing experience.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Looks like a vehicle for more efficiently serving websites based on Google adwords. Genius, but I'll pass.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
Here's the webcomic I was talking about. It goes into some nitty gritty detail about the approaches the Google team took in designing their browser. Their general philosophy seems to have been, "All of the current browsers are based on a paradigm originally designed for the internet of 1997; we should build a browser from scratch designed to work with the internet of 2008."
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
It looks really good. However, I'm uncomfortable with the amount of information that Google collects right now. I'm not signing up for them to get everything I do sent to them.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Using it now, seems ok, surprisingly fast given the extra overhead that the comic refers to. About the only feature that seems to be missing for now is an equivalent to Firefox's "Add-ons" and the few features that I like as a result of those.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
I'm sold. Google is a company I don't mind controlling the world.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
I'm excited to give it a try.
Mucus, it looks like their Gears software will be what enables the equivalent to Firefox add-ons. This is apparently already available - it'll probably just take some time for developers to catch up to what's available with Firefox.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Gears isn't really the same thing as Firefox's plugin framework. Gears enables webapps, while Firefox plugins actively interact with the browser's capabilities.
That might change at some point, but it will be interesting to see how. Plugins will by their nature violate the security model.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
Does it actually collect data on your internet usage? I didn't see anything about that on the chrome site, but I certainly could have missed it.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
I'm test-driving it right now. I wholeheartedly love Opera, but I'm also a Google partisan, so my natural loyalties are divided... I want both to win.
At first glance, Opera's interface wins, hands down; I need my mouse gestures and keyboard navigation. But I'm waiting to see how well Chrome does with memory usage and general stability.
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
Until they launch for linux, I'll pass. Tested it on virtualbox, though. Fast beast.
Posted by Vadon (Member # 4561) on :
I'm trying it out now, and it's charming, but I'm not impressed enough to be an instant convert yet.
One complaint I have is that I tried their save password function, but then I easily found a menu where it shows the websites I have passwords saved for, you then click the website and 'show password.' Now, I'm not sure if you can do this in Safari, Firefox, or Internet Explorer... but for me, it's a bit disturbing to think that you can just walk up to my computer, load up chrome, and grab my different passwords.
I'm looking for this in IE and firefox now, but I'm not finding it. EDIT (Found it in firefox.)
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
Hrm. I'm reconsidering whether to ever use the FireFox saved password feature. Forget to lock my computer at the wrong time, and it takes about 5 seconds to get a list of all my saved passwords! I didn't know those were so easy to list out. (I expected they'd be at least encrypted and you'd have to use API or DOM tricks to read the values when they are populated into dialogs or forms.)
Posted by adfectio (Member # 11070) on :
I've been testing chrome pretty much since they first released it. I'm incredibly surprised at how fast it works, and I love the way it treats tabs.
I won't use it full time, I have too many extensions on firefox that I love. But Chrome has become my quick search browser.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
I had no idea about the saved password thing. That's awful. I just removed them all.
I hate Google so I won't be using Chrome. I'll just wait for the good features to be added to Firefox.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Seems pretty fast so far, but time will tell if it is secure.
Posted by adfectio (Member # 11070) on :
I guess I don't understand the problem with the saved passwords thing. If you're that worried about untrustworthy people having access to you computer, you should probably password protect your whole system.
Posted by Elmer's Glue (Member # 9313) on :
It's a problem because you can get to it so easily. You let someone use your computer for ten seconds and they can see all your passwords.
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
I sure hope they manage to keep their rendering engine consistent...it's enough of a pain to develop against multiple browsers as-is. From what I've read so far, it's based on the same engine as Safari.
I enjoy my Firefox extensions quite a bit more than the 'ideas' this browser presents. It will take quite a bit for me to let go of NoScript, AdBlock Plus, Firebug, Web Developer Toolbar, etc.
Maybe I'll download it later and play with it.
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
I love how it sandboxes different tabs and open browsers. I never did get it to crash a tab, and I tried. I can see how it will be very effective for programs that run off of the web. It also utilizes very little real estate. It will hurt Microsoft--tho probably it will hurt firefox first.
However I am so used to adblock plus that I can't see myself switching anytime soon. At first I loved firefox for tab browsing. Now I love it for foxy tunes and adblock plus.
Considering Google's dependency on ads for revenue, I can't see them implementing a similar feature anytime soon.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
It seems to be hanging more than I'm used to... but I suppose that just serves as a reminder that it's in its first day of beta release.
I was going to say that Opera's Wand prevents you from viewing the passwords you've entered, but apparently somebody's created a utility to get around that. The forum I found it on was filled with one-time Firefox users who were thrilled at this fix for what they'd seen as a design flaw in Opera.
With that said, honestly, no security system can defeat somebody who's got access to your own computer. For starters, if I had access to your computer, and you had the browser set to enter passwords, I could just rummage through your sites and change all the passwords to new ones, taking over your accounts.
In summation: Don't keep anything on your computer that can't be trusted with the people who access it, and don't allow people to access your computer unless they can be trusted with the data on it.
Posted by Vadon (Member # 4561) on :
My solution to the password problem was simple. I just stopped storing them and I'm going to be remembering them.
I do have to let others use this computer though. With our limited computer use, the kids I coach in debate need time to type some cases. So I let them use my laptop. Let's just say that I'd rather not let them have access to my online banking password. Or at least, not in such easy access.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
Makes sense!
This is also why I have never used the Wand for any of my financial passwords -- banking, credit cards, PayPal -- even though I'm the only one who ever uses my computer. In the unlikely event that somebody breaks into my home and steals my system, I don't want them getting the...
[long pause of dawning realization]
...the five bucks I have on deposit.
Hmm. I begin to wonder why I care... Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: So I let them use my laptop.
This is what the Guest account is for.
Posted by Vadon (Member # 4561) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: So I let them use my laptop.
This is what the Guest account is for.
Good catch on my laziness.
Yeah, I probably should make a guest account. For more than just the passwords, but to also keep my other files and folders safe.
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
Scroll up with my middle mouse button isn't working in Google Chrome. I'll give them some time to fix that--it's incredibly annoying.
Posted by Earendil18 (Member # 3180) on :
It's quicker than Firefox in some instances, and a wee bit slower in others. The fact that it's open sourced so Mozilla or MS can easily look at the code, seems like a shot in the arm to the marketplace, and a great PR move at the same time.
Sandboxing is a major plus in my book. I'm not sure if it comes at any cost, but I've had it with random shat coming onto my box, calling its friends, and having a big friggin virus party.
Nice unobtrustive UI, good "omnibox" functionality...
In terms of speed, is the problem the speed at which the browser displays the webpage, or how fast the page is given? The amount of data on a webpage also is a factor yes?
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
They seem to make a big deal on the "crashing browser" syndrome... Am I missing something here? I don't recall Firefox *ever* crashing on me, and IE has crashed simply because it's Microsoft's nature to do so with any product. How much of an issue is this really?
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
I think they're less talking about actual browser crashes as one window's javascript stalling the entire browser interface, which happens more often and more intermittently.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Yeah...the stalling IS a problem at times.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk: They seem to make a big deal on the "crashing browser" syndrome... Am I missing something here? I don't recall Firefox *ever* crashing on me, and IE has crashed simply because it's Microsoft's nature to do so with any product. How much of an issue is this really?
If I might ask... how many browser windows/tabs do you tend to have open at a given time, and how long do you tend to keep your browser running?
I have yet to encounter a browser I couldn't crash, and I'm including Firefox, IE, Opera, and Safari. The realistic question in my experience isn't so much "does it crash?" but "how gracefully does it recover after it crashes?"
(But then I normally have several dozen tabs open, and generally close my browser only when it starts getting unstable, or actually crashes. In practical terms, this ranges anywhere from hours to days.)
In theory, Chrome's goal of isolating any issues to the specific tab seems an excellent improvement. In practice, I'm finding that if one tab stalls, none of the other tabs are accessible until the problematic one gets over it, even if you can switch to and use other programs without much trouble. (On a similar note, if a plugin crashes in one tab, it gets shut off in any other tabs running at the time as well... but at least new tabs seem to be unaffected.)
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
Apparently Chrome's EULA has some odd and slightly troubling sections in it.
quote:"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."
From the commentary I've read, this seems to be a standard thing in most google EULAs, but what it actually means in the context of a web browser is a little fuzzy. It's probably only meant to refer to places where google sites are used automatically (such as an auto search when short 404 pages come up), but I didn't see it clearly defined anywhere.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
They define services above to include software, so they're being pretty clear.
I've heard you can get a build of the browser under the name Chromium (so they maintain the trademark) through the site for open source development of the project, which doesn't have the EULA.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vadon:
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: So I let them use my laptop.
This is what the Guest account is for.
Good catch on my laziness.
*bewildered* I don't recall it being more than about 5-minutes' setup. I take my laptop with me to cons, I want to be able to let other people use it, so I have a Guest account.
Am I missing something?
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk: I don't recall Firefox *ever* crashing on me
Clearly, you're not trying very hard. I usually only have about 8-12 tabs open (although I frequently have week-long browser sessions on my home 'puter), and I have managed to crash FF many times.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Firefox itself probably isn't the cause of your crashing. Firefox is pretty stable, but not all the plugins are. Another common cause of crashing is somewhat flaky memory (and this often doesn't manifest in other programs for a variety of reasons). There might be some other weird interaction on your computer.
I routinely have dozens and dozens of tabs open in multi-week browser sessions, and firefox doesn't crash very often for me (and I suspect than when it does, it is because of a flipped bit).
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: Firefox itself probably isn't the cause of your crashing. Firefox is pretty stable, but not all the plugins are.
While your point is likely true, to the end user the result is much then same. Posted by Vadon (Member # 4561) on :
You're not missing anything, Rivka. It's mostly been an issue of my not thinking of it, and when I do, I figure it'd be easier just to let them use my laptop on my account rather than make a new one and switch over. So yeah, I've just been lazy.
But to make sure I contribute more to the main purpose of the thread. I really am enjoying the fancy address bar, but I am experiencing some difficulty with it running slowly at times. It doesn't crash, but when it runs slowly, it seems as though all of the windows do. It may be a problem isolated to only me, though.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vadon: It's mostly been an issue of my not thinking of it, and when I do, I figure it'd be easier just to . . .
Ah! Now you're speaking my language. I can't tell you how many things I haven't done can be described starting exactly that way. Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
quote:I routinely have dozens and dozens of tabs open in multi-week browser sessions, and firefox doesn't crash very often for me (and I suspect than when it does, it is because of a flipped bit).
Ha, so I'm not the only person who does that. I find that NoScript probably helps me to maintain that, too. By not running a ton of javascripts, I think my browser can sustain more pages.
Posted by Tarrsk (Member # 332) on :
I've been having issues running software within Chrome- specifically, viewing PDFs and Flash media. Both slow the browser down to a crawl. Anybody have similar problems and/or have solutions?
Posted by Joldo (Member # 6991) on :
Is that webcomic a Scott McCloud piece? It looks like his work.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Yes, it is.
Posted by manji (Member # 11600) on :
I heard it has a pretty big security flaw inherited from an older version of the WebKit framework. Hilariously, Apple already fixed this flaw in their own browser, Safari, but only after it was floating around for two months.
There's always something. Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
So if Chrome turns out to have a lot of flashy cosmetic features that don't really add to the experience, how do you describe that? Posted by adfectio (Member # 11070) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: I've been having issues running software within Chrome- specifically, viewing PDFs and Flash media. Both slow the browser down to a crawl. Anybody have similar problems and/or have solutions?
This was partially designed in, as I understand it. Flash and the like run outside of the browser.
I don't ever view PDFs inside browsers anyway, so that's not an issue for me.
Posted by Shmuel (Member # 7586) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: I've been having issues running software within Chrome- specifically, viewing PDFs and Flash media. Both slow the browser down to a crawl. Anybody have similar problems and/or have solutions?
Happens to me, too.
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
I can't move on to chrome, I only downloaded firefox last week.
--ApostleRadio - Behind the Times
Posted by Trent Destian (Member # 11653) on :
Chrome is good fun and all, but I suspect it will be some time before it becomes worthwhile for me to switch from FF. It's pretty and it's fairly quick, depending on future upgrades I might consider it to be my numero uno. However the other major browsers are gearing up with their own advancements, so we'll just have to wait and see won't we?
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
The website I'm working on has certain parts of it that don't work in Chrome. Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Unless those are parts driven by javascript, that means there are probably incompatibilities with all the other webkit browsers, too.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
So I tried a couple of sites with Chrome that use plug ins. And they didn't work. Just kept prompting me to install the plug in - no error when I installed them, it looked like it installed but then...back to square one. So I gave up. Firefox is good enough for me that I don't want to spend any time figuring it out. Maybe I'll try Chrome again in a few months and see if it works for me then.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I went back to Firefox for now.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I tried it for half an hour or so, but the blinking wiggling ads everywhere drove me back to Firefox and the beautiful AdBlock Plus.
Posted by Trent Destian (Member # 11653) on :
Flash doesn't work too well with chrome as I tried it which is pretty odd considering they own Youtube. You'd think they'd make that a priority. I'll use it for a couple more days though just to say that I gave it a fair chance.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)