Google to Launch Webkit Based Web Browser Called 'Chrome'

[elppa]

Love how the sad tab icon echos the sad mac. Almost a homage!

[InSaNeCyAnUr]

It's up !!!

http://gears.google.com/chrome/?hl=en

Edit: Download doesn't work...:(

[clevin]

It's up !!!

http://gears.google.com/chrome/?hl=en

download won't start?

[albeik]

download won't start?

Yah. It's now gone.

Features Page:
http://gears.google.com/chrome/intl/en/features.html

[Insulin Junkie]

I wonder how often Chrome will 'call home' and collect even more data about Google's users. I'm happy with Firefox. I think I'll give Chrome a miss unless it has real, real good add-ons, which I suppose it may have eventually, it being open source and all.

[albeik]

Download it from here: http://www.google.com/chrome

[clevin]

Download it from here: http://www.google.com/chrome

oh no

download a small installer and download from internet later during installation? -1 for now!

[edesignuk]

Download it from here: http://www.google.com/chrome:D Thanks, yay! :cool:

[InSaNeCyAnUr]

oh no

download a small installer and download from internet later during installation? -1 for now!

Yeah, I hate this, there's just no reason to do this.

[App1€]

It won't load a webpage for me...

[cv01]

feels snappier... than safari, at least on windows! :):D

[clevin]

import IE favs automatically? ...mmmm

Javascript is extremely fast, probably double the speed of tracemonkey and squirrelfish right now. +2 ( real world speed is soso tho)

password notification bar like firefox, +1

no urlbar drop down history? -1

[BoyBach]

Yah. It's now gone.

Features Page:
http://gears.google.com/chrome/intl/en/features.html


You've got to love a features page where none only two of the videos work. :mad:

[Mindflux]

import IE favs automatically? ...mmmm

Javascript is extremely fast, probably double the speed of tracemonkey and squirrelfish right now. +2 ( real world speed is soso tho)

password notification bar like firefox, +1

no urlbar drop down history? -1

mirror or bs.

[clevin]

no full page zoom. -1

very nice UI and fully windows style fonts, +2

[xUKHCx]

mirror or bs.

THe link is not that many posts above. I am personnally watching teh video feed of the release inside Chrome right now.

[InSaNeCyAnUr]

No imports from Safari ??

Might be because it's running for now (can't stop, DL a huge file).

[Mindflux]

THe link is not that many posts above. I am personnally watching teh video feed of the release inside Chrome right now.

Yes, and the link just dies. Hence mirror or bs.

[xUKHCx]

Yes, and the link just dies. Hence mirror or bs.

Well some of us managed to download it and if you don't believe what either clevin or I have said then that is up to you but it is not bs. What do we honestly have to gain from lying?

132824

[clevin]

I followed the second link http://www.google.com/chrome

UI is somewhat buggy, but sure will be fixed

Animated UI, +2

each chrome has independent session in session manager, each takes 17MB RAM. But now with one window on tab, I saw three sessions....

I think it will stay on my computer along with opera and minefield. Will write a more detailed review later when I get to know more.

Its web-app function is exactly same as prism or safari 4

[albeik]

Yes, and the link just dies. Hence mirror or bs.

This link is dying for you: http://www.google.com/chrome ?

Seems to work fine here (from Eastern-MA)

[bladehavoc]

The link http://www.google.com/chrome/eula.html works perfectly fine for me. Right now I'm installing.

[bearda]

Playing with it now. It certainly seems faster than the newest release of FireFox 3. I haven't encountered any problems so far, although the view options are a bit limited.

[sharp65]

I like it a lot because it's a lightweight browser and quite simple. It's meant for simple browsing and it gets the job done. The tabs run separately from each other and its easy to make web apps out of a web page.

[clevin]

I must say its very impressive and promising. Probably hard to switch for addon users. But this is a great product and very fresh and clean. not bundled with google services. (surprise). good speed (tho end-users might not feel the difference).

little big buggy, which is expected.

all in all, well done, google

version info. it refuse to connect to acid3, so I can't tell which version of webkit it is using.

[iphone.luke]

Wow this browser is fast on vista x64, Im loving it so far!

[Mindflux]

I just had it seriously tweak my XP SP3 system. It hung up and when I killed the task everything else just sat in a funky state of being. Had to relaunch explorer (not internet explorer) to get it back.

[Mindflux]

I must say its very impressive and promising. Probably hard to switch for addon users. But this is a great product and very fresh and clean. not bundled with google services. (surprise). good speed (tho end-users might not feel the difference).

little big buggy, which is expected.

all in all, well done, google

version info. it refuse to connect to acid3, so I can't tell which version of webkit it is using.

The about screen shows which version. FWIW The acid3 servers are probably hammered right now.

[bladehavoc]

Really slick and snappy. Scrolling is a bit fast for some reason. Very minimalistic UI, and its actually quite beautiful running under vista.

[Mazda 3s]

WOW, this browser is REALLY fast on my Windows XP SP3 machine. And it automatically ported over my bookmarks/passwords/search history/etc. on first boot without me having to do a thing.

[xUKHCx]

version info. it refuse to connect to acid3, so I can't tell which version of webkit it is using.

I got in no problems it got 76/100 on acid3

[ventro]

Tabs on the top are a great idea. I hope Safari 4 implements them.

[clevin]

The about screen shows which version. FWIW The acid3 servers are probably hammered right now.

Im not familiar with webkit internal numbers, is it built on current nightly?

[clevin]

I got in no problems it got 76/100 on acid3

so its about 5 month old?

[Mindflux]

Im not familiar with webkit internal numbers, is it built on current nightly?

525.13 is the webkit number. it seems to be (from google) the same core as Safari 3.1

[xUKHCx]

Tabs on the top are a great idea. I hope Safari 4 implements them.

Taken from Opera

Im not familiar with webkit internal numbers, is it built on current nightly?

Not the current nightly. I think it is the same version as the current Safari 3.x.x whatever it is. So it is quite old by now. Which is odd. However I suspect it is from a development point of view.

[Trip.Tucker]

so its about 5 month old?

How do you figure that?

[clevin]

this essentially give me same feeling as safari on OSX, clean and light(im not sure about now since webkit nightly is getting strangely bigger lately), but lacking some stuff.

Im very impressed, did I say that before? :) I will use it exclusively for next couple of days and report back with my review. :D

[morespce54]

...Moreover, the fact that the Windows version is being released first suggests that the Mac version is an afterthought, and may or may not be as solid and feature-packed as the Windows version.

Maybe, but as mentioned earlier, anything to take IE away from the Internet is a good thing. I'm not saying this just to bast MS but mainly because IE is using proprietary language and is a nightmare to every web developer/ web designer.

[rdowns]

Sign up here to get new on Mac availability.

http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/mac.html

[elppa]

Mmm… Familiar.

Using the Webkit insepctor.

[camsoft]

Yeah, I hate this, there's just no reason to do this.

I take it you've not really used your brain before typing.

It's probable that when you get round to running the installer it will download the latest version. So people that download it and don't install for a while wont end out with an already out of date version. This software is an early beta and will be updated often.

[App1€]

I've uninstalled it and re-installed it about 4 times now and still nothing. It says every web page has a problem. Including google.com

[Trip.Tucker]

I take it you've not really used your brain before typing.
<snip>

Charming.

[camsoft]

Charming.

OK, fair point. I'm sorry for my aggressive outburst. Please forgive me.

[Trip.Tucker]

OK, fair point. I'm sorry for my aggressive outburst. Please forgive me.

All is forgiven, I dub thee Sir Charm-A-Lot :D

[clevin]

I take it you've not really used your brain before typing.

It's probable that when you get round to running the installer it will download the latest version.

bogus logic, how much brain did you use to insult other people?

and how probably is your probability anyway?

UI on Vista

This thing has absolutely no way of adding any buttons to the UI?....
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8446/googleftwok8.jpg

[happydude]

don't know much about this but i'm interested in testing it out. if it is any faster than safari, could be a good thing. otherwise, it's just another in a selection of web browsers. *yawn*

and what is google's aim here? how does having a web browser earn anyone any money? yeah, google wants to make the internet and its contents free for everyone, but they thrive off ad revenue. will there be default ads popping up on the left/right/bottom of every browser page depending on what site you visit?

[slicecom]

bogus logic, how much brain did you use to insult other people?

and how probably is your probability anyway?

UI on Vista

This thing has absolutely no way of adding any buttons to the UI, not even home button?....
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/8446/googleftwok8.jpg

:confused: Have you even looked in the options? You can add a bookmarks bar and a home button, and the picture you posted HAS A HOME BUTTON!

[odinsride]

I personally don't like the tabs on top of everything.

I tried watching some youtube videos with Chrome and the comments don't seem to work if you try to click "view all comments"

[clevin]

:confused: Have you even looked in the options? You can add a bookmarks bar and a home button, and the picture you posted HAS A HOME BUTTON!

i obviously overlooked it. yes, but home button is the only one that can be added. its even much less than safari, actually.

[starthere]

Google has a better implementation of a privacy mode (aka porn mode) like Safari.

It implements them as a new windows.. So you can keep both private and not so private windows simultaneously.

See the screenshots..

http://monitor20.blogspot.com/2008/09/incognito-google-implements-privacy.html

[slicecom]

Personally, I love it so far. Obviously there are some glitches, as is to be expected from a Beta, but it's LIGHTYEARS better than Safari on Windows. I'll probably switch to Chrome as my main browser at work.

[rjohnstone]

Slow and ugly.
Firefox is still faster at loading Google's own content (GMail, Page Creator, etc.)

Took nearly 30 seconds just to load GMail. Even after multiple attempts.

Nice idea, but still needs a lot of polishing.

[Trajectory]

Personally, I just don't trust Google with all that power and information they can easily collect from you. Their agreement for downloading essentially says they can do whatever they want with the data that goes through their browser. So, if you want Google spying on your every move online, this is the browser for you!

[noisebleed]

i always "allow" websites i want manually... chrome does not have such feature... FAIL.

i am not using a browser that allows random cookies ( especially rick-rolled moments ) to infiltrate me.

also... i must have addons.

overall... this browser is what i'd use when playing games in order to alt-tab and not crash.

[slicecom]

Slow and ugly.
Firefox is still faster at loading Google's own content (GMail, Page Creator, etc.)

Took nearly 30 seconds just to load GMail. Even after multiple attempts.

Nice idea, but still needs a lot of polishing.

I'll give you ugly, but slow!? This this is blisteringly fast for me. Gmail loads in just over one second.

[bobertoq]

Slow and ugly.
Firefox is still faster at loading Google's own content (GMail, Page Creator, etc.)

Took nearly 30 seconds just to load GMail. Even after multiple attempts.

Nice idea, but still needs a lot of polishing.Works great for me. Even using the slow PC. The separate processes thing is definitely useful. Gmail loads quite quickly. Even has a spell checker! Love how quickly it opens. The UI is quite nice and simple. I'm impressed. And I love the task manager! Too bad they don't call it an activity monitor, but oh well. :D

Now is that feature in the comic working? The one where websites cannot write or read anything on your hard drive? I hope so. I also hope for a NoScript, FlashBlock, and Adblock Plus in the future.

[Fabiano]

For me its pretty much like Safari. The navigation bar, speling check, detachable tabs, resizable fields... thats what I noticed so far... But it is expected since both ate based on WebKit :)

But the point is that Google have done a excelent job, they got the better of Safari and Firefox and improved it, in my opnion.

[Aranince]

If they make it so it has better theming...I'm sold. This thing is amazingly fast. My Wakoopa page, is painfully slow in FireFox 3 and is super fast in Chrome.

[The Tall One]

I'm leaving this comment from the new browser now (on my mac partition) and it seems to be okay. I don't know if I prefer it or Mozilla, but we shall see.

[citi]

Slow and ugly.
Firefox is still faster at loading Google's own content (GMail, Page Creator, etc.)

Took nearly 30 seconds just to load GMail. Even after multiple attempts.

Nice idea, but still needs a lot of polishing.

I like the application shortcuts for gmail/gcal/docs etc, you can place on your desktop. When you launch them, it removes the address bar etc, to make it feel more like a native application.

[Brendon Bauer]

Works great and is quite fast. I love the simplicity. Just hoping for a Mac version soon. Only found a few problems so far... One being that an embedded flash popup on a website I maintain is not working. Well, it opens but it's very tiny and can't be resized like it can in Safari/FF/IE. Submitted a bug report :rolleyes:

[Mindflux]

Works great and is quite fast. I love the simplicity. Just hoping for a Mac version soon. Only found a few problems so far... One being that an embedded flash popup on a website I maintain is not working. Well, it opens but it's very tiny and can't be resized like it can in Safari/FF/IE. Submitted a bug report :rolleyes:

I hope they tell you to diaf for using a flash popup.
:rolleyes: :p

[bobertoq]

I like the application shortcuts for gmail/gcal/docs etc, you can place on your desktop. When you launch them, it removes the address bar etc, to make it feel more like a native application.I'm having trouble doing that. How did you do that?

[thesdx]

I tried it in a virtual machine, and it's VERY fast. It seems to even be faster than Safari, and that's just in VMWare. Can't wait until the Mac version comes out.

[bobertoq]

Is anyone here having problems with PDF's? They're loading awfully slow.

[citi]

I'm having trouble doing that. How did you do that?

you have to select "create application shortcut" while you are in the application (like gmail). Then a window pops up asking you if you want it on your desktop, start menu, etc.

[slicecom]

I tried it in a virtual machine, and it's VERY fast. It seems to even be faster than Safari, and that's just in VMWare. Can't wait until the Mac version comes out.

I'm a die hard Safari fan, but I have to admit, Chrome is faster or at very least on par with everything I've tried so far.

[bobertoq]

you have to select "create application shortcut" while you are in the application (like gmail). Then a window pops up asking you if you want it on your desktop, start menu, etc.Now that is nifty! So is the Opera like thing it displays on a new tab. I just wish there was a way to edit it.

[Brendon Bauer]

I hope they tell you to diaf for using a flash popup.
:rolleyes: :p

No you don't understand. I'm not being malicious lol. :cool: It's for a church website and to play the sermons online you click a "Play Video" link and it pops up a little window with the sermon in flv format so you can resize it, etc and keep browsing in the background.

Trust me, as a web designer I absolutely hate popup windows, but this was the best way to do it.

[WardC]

Anybody playing with a Mac version of this browser yet? I just registered for the updates on the Mac version, but I haven't seen any screenshots or heard of anybody using a Mac version (yet)

[slicecom]

Anybody playing with a Mac version of this browser yet? I just registered for the updates on the Mac version, but I haven't seen any screenshots or heard of anybody using a Mac version (yet)

It doesn't exist yet, but after playing with it on Windows, I can't wait for the Mac version!

[Ben C]

Maybe you guys who think it looks ugly are using it in XP, or a Vista virtual machine without acceleration. If on your machine it looks like the solid blue one at www.google.com/chrome, then I agree.

But in Vista glass, I think it looks great!

[bobertoq]

It doesn't exist yet, but after playing with it on Windows, I can't wait for the Mac version!I concur! The thing that's got me though, is what will the UI look like? I'm gonna download it when it comes out for the Mac. Even though I'm not supposed to download anything onto my iBook :p

That task manager is so groovy! And the idea of multiple processes is ingenious! Not ungenious...

Edit:
Is there a way to keep a certain process closed or ended? For instance I do not want Adobe Shockwave to open unless I say so. Can I do that?

[panamajack]

This could be awesome, I can't wait for the Mac version!

I love Safari's speed, but I am really not fond of two things:
1. There isn't an (easy) way to make Private Browsing the default.
2. You can't have more than one username/password for any one site.

I hope sincerely that Google can deliver on those two gripes I have. If so, they win my support!

You gotta be dreaming: I'd be shocked if Google even had a private browsing mode. This is a more of a platform for people with google accounts (and all it's lovely tracking algorithms) than a browser.

[Ben C]

You gotta be dreaming: I'd be shocked if Google even had a private browsing mode. This is a more of a platform for people with google accounts (and all it's lovely tracking algorithms) than a browser.
Sign in to your Google account and do a search in normal mode and in incognito mode. You'll notice that in incognito, Google does *not* sign you in to your account.

*edit* Does anyone else think it's funny that "Google" is not in its own spell checker? Apple, in contrast, loves adding its own products to my iPhone dictionary. You know, in case I get the capitalization wrong.

[Brendon Bauer]

You gotta be dreaming: I'd be shocked if Google even had a private browsing mode. This is a more of a platform for people with google accounts (and all it's lovely tracking algorithms) than a browser.

Then you'll be shocked to know that it does! It's called incognito mode... However from what I understand it doesn't keep your downloads private. Not sure why that is, but that's what Chrome told me when I entered incognito mode. But for everything else like history, cookies, etc it does keep 'em private.

Update: Taken from Chrome's incognito mode message: "Any files you download or bookmarks you create will be preserved, however." Not sure why they chose to do this...

[bobertoq]

You gotta be dreaming: I'd be shocked if Google even had a private browsing mode. This is a more of a platform for people with google accounts (and all it's lovely tracking algorithms) than a browser.

Then you'll be shocked to know that it does! It's called incognito mode... However from what I understand it doesn't keep your downloads private. Not sure why that is, but that's what Chrome told me when I entered incognito mode. But for everything else like history, cookies, etc it does keep 'em private.hahahahaha :D

[Ben C]

Then you'll be shocked to know that it does! It's called incognito mode... However from what I understand it doesn't keep your downloads private. Not sure why that is, but that's what Chrome told me when I entered incognito mode. But for everything else like history, cookies, etc it does keep 'em private.
What Google is referring to is that your downloads are still on your hard drive (well, duh). However, it seems that Chrome keeps no record of your private downloads once you've closed the incognito window.

[localoid]

RTFM: Incognito mode (http://www.google.com/support/chrome/bin/answer.py?answer=95464&hl=en)

[Cameront9]

You gotta be dreaming: I'd be shocked if Google even had a private browsing mode. This is a more of a platform for people with google accounts (and all it's lovely tracking algorithms) than a browser.

Did ANYBODY read the damn comic????

[vilasgn]

I don't think there is any compelling reason to use this browser, at least not now.

Firefox has everything that I need for browsing. I am so addicted to all these add-ons (ad-block :D) that there is no way I can use Google browser over Firefox.

[czeluff]

I have found my new favorite Windows browser.

I love using this thing, and I cant wait for it to come out on Mac.

SO MUCH SCREEN REAL ESTATE! And it opens up faster than Safari.

[Brendon Bauer]

Did ANYBODY read the damn comic????

It was long, but yes. Lots of interesting stuff.

[majordude]

http://images.macrumors.com/article/2008/09/01/175138-chrome.jpg

Hmmm. Looks like Google hired Jack Chick (http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0022/0022_01.asp) to make a Google Chrome tract.

[thejadedmonkey]

Chroma... is amazong. on a PC, where the titlebar resides at the very top of the monitor. On a mac, where the titlebar floats a little down from the top edge, it may not be as amazing (since the mouse doesn't stop at the tab-bar)

[Brendon Bauer]

I got in no problems it got 76/100 on acid3

78/100 here. Using VMware w/bootcamp partition.

[jlbrown23]

I only took a quick 10 minute spin on it, but so far I like Chrome a lot. The default home page alone I love(links to Google search & your most visited page. A good alternative to the drop down URL bar that is so sorely missing on Safari). Add to that a very quick feel to the browsing, and the way it automatically utilizes your screen size to the fullest(both by adapting to the size & not wasting space on clutter) and I smell a winner.

It's still to early to really know much for sure, but if we have two strong competitors to IE, it can only mean good things. Either by forcing MS to actually make it not suck, or by giving you several good alternatives. And unlike Firefox, Google has the economic clout to compete with MS. I think Firefox got popular just because IE had gotten so bad that any decent alternative would have done well.

Can't wait for the Mac version, and am enjoying the Apple/Google take down of MS - especially since it is being done by simply offering a better product.

[localoid]

Hmmm. Looks like Google hired Jack Chick (http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0022/0022_01.asp) to make a Google Chrome tract.

Google's comic is missing the hate, paranoia, and conspiracy theories common in the Chick tracts. Luckily, those key elements can be found in great abundance in this thread.

[Dr. Cabrera]

SOOO FREAKING FAST

I just tested it out on Digg.com, and there was zero slowdown

[boones]

Try loading a MobileMe gallery page. Can't render. Javascript gear sits there and spins and spins...

[Brendon Bauer]

Acid 3 tests for Firefox, IE 7 and Google Chrome. IE's didn't go so well apparently ;)

[Dr. Cabrera]

Update my download seems to be slower, and upload is faster via Chrome compared to Firefox 3

Firefox 3

Download Speed: 58185 kbps (7273.1 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 3538 kbps (442.3 KB/sec transfer rate)

Chrome

Download Speed: 27447 kbps (3430.9 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 6581 kbps (822.6 KB/sec transfer rate)

both running on T3 line

[Aranince]

The only thing I don't like about it is its ugly and lacks adblock.

[Brendon Bauer]

;)

[Brendon Bauer]

Try loading a MobileMe gallery page. Can't render. Javascript gear sits there and spins and spins...

Good point. Hmm. Submit a bug report :p

[TimothyB]

I noticed in Vista using Chrome I can't click down on the mouse wheel to enter the scrolling mode. That always worked in IE and Firefox, and good for scrolling slowly without moving, or scrolling super fast in an instant.

Sometimes I'm in a long thread and want to get to the top for the page controls. So I always hold down the wheel button and whip it to the top in an instant. No longer happens with chrome. Instead, either roll the mouse wheel a dozen annoying times, or have to locate the scroll bar and drag it to the top manually. It's so much more intuitive with the middle button that I keep finding myself doing it and Chrome doing nothing.

EDIT: I hear it's called autoscroll, often used with middle mouse, where you click and hold, then offset the arrow to make the page scroll slow or fast, and I hate that it's missing.

[bobertoq]

Try loading a MobileMe gallery page. Can't render. Javascript gear sits there and spins and spins...Make sure you report that to Google. They'll fix it. Eventually...
Did ANYBODY read the damn comic????Yes. The whole thing. Where is that feature that keeps sites from reading and writing on your hard drive?
Acid 3 tests for Firefox, IE 7 and Google Chrome. IE's didn't go so well apparently ;)Hahahahaha. That always makes me laugh. HAHA.
I noticed in Vista using Chrome I can't click down on the mouse wheel to enter the scrolling mode. That always worked in IE and Firefox, and good for scrolling slowly without moving, or scrolling super fast in an instant.

Sometimes I'm in a long thread and want to get to the top for the page controls. So I always hold down the wheel button and whip it to the top in an instant. No longer happens with chrome. Instead, either roll the mouse wheel a dozen annoying times, or have to locate the scroll bar and drag it to the top manually. It's so much more intuitive with the middle button that I keep finding myself doing it and Chrome doing nothing.

EDIT: I hear it's called autoscroll, often used with middle mouse, where you click and hold, then offset the arrow to make the page scroll slow or fast, and I hate that it's missing.Awww man! That is a feature I always use

[chas0001]

I have just been using it via VMware Fusion and windows XP and it runs faster than Firefox and IE. I am quite impressed.

[ZombiePete]

I have just been using it via VMware Fusion and windows XP and it runs faster than Firefox and IE. I am quite impressed.

That's my initial impression in Windows XP as well. The application shortcut also works well; I've made a shortcut on my desktop to MobileMe and it's pretty slick. Makes MobileMe's mission to seem more like an app than a webpage more feasible to me.

MobileMe has always seemed a bit sluggish to me using Firefox, and it definitely seems speedier in Chrome.

One minor irritant (very minor) is it's color palate. Too bright.

Can't wait to try this out in Linux.

[wheelhot]

Wow, as soon as I see Google Chrome interface and its sleek compact interface, Im sold. This will definitely pressure Firefox developers though and definitely beat IE in both function and looks:).

Okay for those non-windows mac users, here is some brief review. Google certainly make the browser look good with all those blue and light blue theme. The browser window changes when minimized and maximized.

In Minimized mode there is some top gap(or padding for those web developers) between the tab and the top of the browser window. In maximized mode, the top gap is gone, hence further increase the screen space.
Chrome full screen:
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u26/wheelhot/Picture5.png

The screen space in Chrome is huge, as big as Safari unless you set it to show bookmarks, here is a picture :D
Safari, Chrome - Without Bookmark.
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u26/wheelhot/Picture2.png

Safari, Chrome - With Bookmark (Chrome loses to Safari cause there is an extra gap in Chrome)
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u26/wheelhot/Picture3.png


Bookmarking in Chrome is the same as FF3, where a user just need to press the star button before the address bar.

Some might wonder how about the status bar? Chrome doesn't have any, instead they use a totally new concept that is not seen in any browser so far.

Chrome Status Bar (look at the bottom right)
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u26/wheelhot/Picture4.png


So my initial expression about the looks of Chrome is definitely refreshing, it looks and feels good, now I wonder how the OSX version will look like. I don't think I will change my default web browser though, for Windows most likely but for Mac, I don't think so.

I will test the speed of the browsers soon, but I got no idea how should I conduct the test, anyone care to give suggestions? And if you want me to compare any other browsers side by side or want pictures of certain browser functions, do tell me :)

[Dejavu]

Chrome browser is definitely better than Safari for Windows. :cool:

[ksgant]

Yes. The whole thing. Where is that feature that keeps sites from reading and writing on your hard drive?


http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/images/26.jpg

[johnsingh06]

I Love Safari! its absolutely brilliant and i can't imagine using any other web brower, regardless of what people think of it crashing or design etc..i still think its the worlds best! but google chrome seems so new and powerful...will you switch?;)

Safari 4 btw...is ALOT snappier:) and supports custom web applications!:D

[Garemz]

I Love Safari! its absolutely brilliant and i can't imagine using any other web brower, regardless of what people think of it crashing or design etc..i still think its the worlds best! but google chrome seems so new and powerful...will you switch?;)

Safari 4 btw...is ALOT snappier:) and supports custom web applications!:D

I doubt it:) There is not even a Mac version Yet DOH:eek:

[GGJstudios]

There is already a thread on this topic here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=554957).

[kainjow]

Just been playing around with it under Vista. It is very fast. I just read through the comic and wow, there is some awesome stuff under the hood with Chrome. It'll be interesting to see how this develops.

[rdowns]

Why the need to start a new thread? Especially one where you refer to a "Safari Killer" where the application is not yet available for the Mac.

[nniicckk]

This isn't about building a new browser, this is about building a new platform for better web apps that can compete with standalone applications.

Ask yourself, what are some of the issues with writing large scale ajax like web apps today? (a) Reliability - A web browser crash is not good for a web app. (b) Isolation - One web app should not interfere with another (c) Efficient Javascript - Javascript is the basis for dynamic web pages (d) Better support for foundation frameworks for building web apps - aka google gears ...

This is a well thought out head on attack on the likes of Microsoft. Google doesn't own Firefox and probably could not push the larger 'platform' changes they wanted into Firefox. Firefox is a marketing platform for Google, this is something much more. And if this succeeds, guess who is going to be in the driving seat -- even if there are no Google ad specific hooks in the product? And who cares if the pieces are open source and usable by other products? The goal isn't building a browser, its building a platform that plays to Google's strengths.

Now the next step would be to take on Flash and Silverlight. Flash is everywhere but sucks for performance.. Silverlight, well, is "not open source". So Google, when are we seeing a Javascript based alternative that can be used as a foundation engine for dynamic content that includes interactive animation and video?

[ChicoWeb]

I must admit... Google Chrome seems to be a very quick, responsive browser so far. Of course I had to track down one of the remaining PC's in the office to use it with XP, but at first glance I like. I thought it was going to hose all of my sites, and things where going to look bad, but I was wrong thus far. I was dreading adding another browser to the QA list, but hopefully it's going to go right along with Firefox. I tested about 10 or so of our sites, all seem to work perfectly.

Anyone else used it yet?

Add it to the list for testing :rolleyes:

Google Chrome - PC
IE 6 - PC
IE 7 - PC
IE8 - PC
FF2 - PC
FF3 - PC
FF2 - OS X
FF3 - OS X
Safari 2 - OS X
Safari 3 - OS X
iPhone - OS X

[thejadedmonkey]

Works fine with all my sites. I assume that since it's based off of webkit, testing in Safari or Chrome is about the same... but *sigh* you're quite right, add another browser to the list... IE 6, IE 7, IE 8, FF2, FF3, Sarafi 2, 3, 4...

[localoid]

Flame bait.

[ChicoWeb]

Works fine with all my sites. I assume that since it's based off of webkit, testing in Safari or Chrome is about the same... but *sigh* you're quite right, add another browser to the list... IE 6, IE 7, IE 8, FF2, FF3, Sarafi 2, 3, 4...
I've noticed some things that differ from FF to Safari. Mostly the forms, buttons, and labels...But still

[clevin]

i managed to run sunspider on it, and to my surprise, its only about 1.4x faster than firefox 3, which makes it about the same, or even slower than firefox 3.1's tracemonkey, or safari 4's squirrelFish.

so my question

1. its not really abut standard, since it didn't use anything new in neither webkit or gecko of past several month

2. its not especially fast as far as Javascript is concerned.

why?

Its indeed very smooth in operation, and extremely light as far as system resource is concerned.

It doesn't bundle with google service, AFAIK.

It has very simple UI and basic functions.

can this benefits all from multi-threading? if so, then I would be very interested in mozilla's plan for firefox 4.

But i have a feeling its not all about that. there are more reason behind it, I think is probably the simple functions of the browser.

I don't agree its a platform, it just provide little as far as a platform is concerned.

It feel like a even simpler version of safari. it sometimes severely lack some common functions.

My brief verdict is

Its a good browser, and simply a browser, not a platform.

It won't replace any other browsers, except maybe safari, it just has so many common stuff as safari, while lack of features in firefox, opera, or even IE8.

of course, since its for windows, its good windows users finally can see what safari could, should have been.

[Frisco]

First impressions of Chrome:

1) Definitely better than Safari for Windows. Big mistake Apple.

2) Lightning fast!

3) Nice interface.

4) Works well with many websites that Safari crashes.

5) Overall my 2nd favorite browser to Firefox on Windows, but with a few upgrades could surpass Firefox.

Safari is pretty much dead.

[Chris Rogers]

First impressions of Chrome:

1) Definitely better than Safari for Windows. Big mistake Apple.

2) Lightning fast!

3) Nice interface.

4) Works well with many websites that Safari crashes.

5) Overall my 2nd favorite browser to Firefox on Windows, but with a few upgrades could surpass Firefox.

Safari is pretty much dead.

Right on

[starthere]

Chrome has blown away the competition in Javascript performance test.

Look at the performance numbers and graphs at

http://monitor20.blogspot.com/2008/09/chrome-blows-aways-safari-ie-and.html

[clevin]

Chrome has blown away the competition in Javascript performance test.

Look at the performance numbers and graphs at

http://monitor20.blogspot.com/2008/09/chrome-blows-aways-safari-ie-and.html

im not sure it works that way, using google's own js test to bragging their own products.

If you run sunspider, you can see indeed, chrome is VERY fast on SOME of the categories, but the whole pictures is not remotely as impressive as that plot wants you to believe.

Maybe google targeted specific items to optimize chrome against their own data base of popular website and most used js functions. thats good, I have no problem with that approach. But even that, I doubt the difference would be that huge.

[bobertoq]

Still waiting for an ad blocking plug-in for Google Chrome... A No Script (Javascript manager) and a flash blocker, and a cookie manager would also be very nice. And the ability to clear cookies on exit.

But I'm still impressed. If no ad-blocking plugin is released (3rd party or not) I'm staying with Firefox.

[Me1000]

I only played with it for a little bit on a PC, but I shall play with it more on OS X, whenever that comes out.

I read that it doesnt even pass the ACID2 test, let alone the ACID3. :(

'tis webkit... What have they changed that prevents it from passing? If it is using the latest webkit builds it should be scoring 100% on ACID3.

[reevans]

Interesting how Google creates a Windows version of a 'better' browser and calls it Chrome.

Put Chrome on your Windows. The proverbial "chrome plated turd".

[bobertoq]

Interesting how Google creates a Windows version of a 'better' browser and calls it Chrome.

Put Chrome on your Windows. The proverbial "chrome plated turd".what?

[macerroneous]

Original Borg: IBM

Old Borg: Microsoft

New Borg: Google

Steve better remember the past before he relives it.

[headfuzz]

Posting from it now running in XP on VMware Fusion on my Blackbook and it flies. Really liking it so far, can't wait for the fist OS X build to be released :cool:

[macerroneous]

Dump Eric Schmidt pronto.

[headfuzz]

And the ability to clear cookies on exit.

Incognito mode? ;)

[majordude]

...hence...

Yeah, hence (http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2008/06/06/house-bunny-poster.jpg)!

[bobertoq]

Incognito mode? ;):) I still want to keep my history and stuff, I just want the cookies gone. I'll use Incognito mode for other things. ha...haha. Just kidding. I think.

[NeoMayhem]

Wow, this is the most impressive app I have seen on windows in years.

[clevin]

just realize the new tab functions in chrome displaying most visited website are quite similar with autodial (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/8615)addon for firefox.

These are different direction of Opera's speed dial and firefrox's other fast dial stuff (which displays more than 9 thumbnails of preset websites)

I guess the purpose mainly being giving users easier access to his/her fav websites without more than one click. Its especially important for Chrome since it doesn't have a urlbar drop down list like firefox or opera.

For this purpose, I think thumbnails are not necessary, rather, I would prefer it gives more websites like autodial does, (pic)

[dornoforpyros]

yeah the general reaction around the office today was "groaaan, ugg another browser to test for"

At this point in the game the last thing anybody needs is another browser, but the fact that googles name is on it means people will use it.

Having said that, I loaded it up via virtual box and checked a few sites, nothing exploded, so hopefully it won't have any quirks to work around.

[angelwatt]

I was playing around with it for an hour or so. For a 0.2 Beta it's a good piece of software, seemed stable and loaded pages as expected (rendering-wise; though didn't visit a ton of pages). Is it going to be a browser replacement for me? Not a chance (and not just because there isn't a Mac version yet).

The UI I hate. It totally ignored basic UI principles for Windows. I mean where the hell is the menu?
There's no way to manage bookmarks in a reasonable manner. Very frustrating. Unless I go back to the tab page I can't access my bookmarks unless I show the bookmark bar all the time, which just isn't going to happen. Why waste that much space on the UI for something that belongs in a menu?
Serious lack of customization. Needs more preferences
I need my ad blocker (I'm surely it'll eventually show up).
Security-wise it only had options for SSL 2.0, no 3.0.
No page zoom, text increase only.
Lacks status bar. I saw what they have in its place and I find the contrast lacking making it hard to read. I use the status bar a lot so that's important to me.
JavaScript speeds seems no different than Safari or Firefox for me.
The UI lacks intuitiveness. It took me a while to find various things (options, bookmarks, security, etc.).
I really don't like the placement of the tabs, that bugs the crap out of me.

Things I like

Each tab has its own process.
Open source.
There making use of webkit instead of creating something brad new.
Really having trouble making a list of things I like.
One more browser to fight against IE.

So I won't be using it for a while, but once it comes to Mac I'll try it again, and whenever version 1.0 makes it out I'll likely try it again. For the time being though, I'll be sticking with Firefox and all of its extensions that I've come to "need." As a developer the Web Developer Toolbar and Firebug have become indispensable. I use my WebDev toolbar all the time.

[kwong2006]

Is anyone having problems downloading the program? I can't seem to download it.

[objc]

i managed to run sunspider on it, and to my surprise, its only about 1.4x faster than firefox 3, which makes it about the same, or even slower than firefox 3.1's tracemonkey, or safari 4's squirrelFish.

so my question

1. its not really abut standard, since it didn't use anything new in neither webkit or gecko of past several month

2. its not especially fast as far as Javascript is concerned.

why?

Its indeed very smooth in operation, and extremely light as far as system resource is concerned.

It doesn't bundle with google service, AFAIK.

It has very simple UI and basic functions.

can this benefits all from multi-threading? if so, then I would be very interested in mozilla's plan for firefox 4.

But i have a feeling its not all about that. there are more reason behind it, I think is probably the simple functions of the browser.

I don't agree its a platform, it just provide little as far as a platform is concerned.



I did the Sun Spider test with Firefox 3.1a2. Here's what I got:
Total: 6339.0ms +/- 4.8%

Then I ran it in Chrome b1:
Total: 3613.0ms +/- 4.7%

So it's about 1.75 times as fast. I think as the VM is optimized it will get faster. This is just an initial release.

The separate-process tabs are something that would be great in Firefox. The big problem there is that after several days of opening and closing tabs, the browser has a ton of memory usage even if you don't have much open. It also allows the system to multitask them, which means better usage of multiple processor cores.

Also, running Flash in a separate process is a really big deal on a dual-core system because flash is such a cpu hog. It also allows you to kill problem flash apps.

With things like Google Gears (add-on with others, included in Chrome), you essentially turn the browser into a platform. The same could be said for GMail, even without Gears. It is a client-server application. A lot runs on the client.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I also did IE8 beta 2. Wow... about 14,000ms.

[shawnce]

Chrome has blown away the competition in Javascript performance test.

Look at the performance numbers and graphs at

http://monitor20.blogspot.com/2008/09/chrome-blows-aways-safari-ie-and.html

Their timings do look good on that particular benchmark (obviously one they have optimized against). Safari is making large improvements it JavaScript as well.

Safari Version 3.1.2 (5525.20.1)
Score: 171
Richards: 132
DeltaBlue: 191
Crypto: 106
RayTrace: 134
EarleyBoyer: 410

WebKit r36013 (with SquirrelFish (http://webkit.org/blog/189/announcing-squirrelfish/))
Score: 488
Richards: 294
DeltaBlue: 383
Crypto: 689
RayTrace: 449
EarleyBoyer: 791

Safari Version 3.1.2 (5525.20.1)
SunSpider Results (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B2140,1254,1252,1056,1055%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B626,577,577,580,581%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B528,406,453,406,456%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B58,58,58,58,57%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B187,187,190,190,189%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B1150,983,1151,983,987%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B46,46,46,46,46%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B51,51,50,51,51%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B75,75,75,76,76%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B134,133,134,133,132%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B358,331,356,331,332%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B66,66,67,66,66%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B63,64,64,65,65%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B185,161,160,160,161%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B234,183,184,184,185%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B119,118,119,119,119%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B179,179,176,178,177%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B944,796,794,798,797%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B1013,842,861,841,845%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B534,435,431,434,435%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B163,164,164,167,165%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B123,152,119,121,122%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B202,200,199,201,234%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B116,118,116,114,119%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B110,111,111,111,111%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B231,224,195,209,199%5D%7D)

WebKit r36013 (with SquirrelFish (http://webkit.org/blog/189/announcing-squirrelfish/))
SunSpider Results (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B54,52,51,52,52%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B60,60,60,60,60%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B61,61,60,61,60%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B25,26,28,28,28%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B40,40,40,39,40%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B96,97,97,97,97%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B17,17,17,17,17%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B19,18,18,18,18%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B22,21,21,21,21%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B39,40,40,41,40%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B35,36,35,35,35%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B15,14,14,14,15%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B22,21,22,21,21%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B23,23,23,23,23%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B23,24,23,23,23%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B76,77,80,78,78%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B48,49,49,48,49%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B37,37,37,38,37%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B77,78,78,78,78%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B26,27,26,26,26%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B157,157,156,157,156%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B24,24,24,24,24%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B63,62,62,62,62%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B88,89,86,86,87%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B81,82,83,82,83%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B52,52,52,55,52%5D%7D)

To bad I cannot run Chrome on my Mac Pro under Mac OS X to see the SunSpider results when running under the same environment.

Anyway I hope to see a lot of idea sharing between V8 and SquirrelFish.

---------

OK so I rebooted my Mac Pro into WinXP to have a go at SunSpider...

WebKit r36012 (with SquirrelFish (http://webkit.org/blog/189/announcing-squirrelfish/))
SunSpider Results (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B94,109,94,94,94%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B79,94,78,78,78%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B110,110,109,110,93%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B47,47,47,31,31%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B62,62,63,62,63%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B156,156,157,141,140%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B16,16,16,15,31%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B16,15,0,15,15%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B15,15,31,31,15%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B62,62,62,62,62%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B47,47,47,46,47%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B16,16,16,16,16%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B31,31,31,31,32%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B31,31,47,47,31%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B32,31,32,31,31%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B79,78,78,78,94%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B63,47,63,62,62%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B78,78,78,78,78%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B125,125,109,125,125%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B47,47,32,31,31%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B203,187,203,188,187%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B31,47,46,47,47%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B78,78,78,62,78%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B94,94,93,93,94%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B93,78,78,78,78%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B78,78,78,78,78%5D%7D)

Google Chrome (0.2.149.27)
SunSpider Results (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B28,21,24,19,20%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B33,39,35,36,36%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B27,27,25,26,25%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B5,4,5,5,5%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B20,22,19,19,20%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B26,19,26,21,20%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B14,14,14,13,14%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B4,4,4,4,3%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B8,8,8,8,8%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B12,13,13,11,14%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B23,20,23,20,19%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B3,2,3,3,2%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B14,15,14,14,14%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B14,13,12,13,14%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B11,11,12,13,11%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B119,127,118,126,121%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B76,75,76,73,64%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B41,41,44,39,41%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B29,25,24,26,26%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B9,10,9,9,10%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B270,270,268,269,269%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B48,51,44,53,50%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B41,41,41,41,40%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B104,107,103,107,139%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B132,131,133,136,131%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B52,53,51,51,51%5D%7D)

[KingYaba]

Looks like a multicolored Pokemon ball. :rolleyes: The browser looks nice with the XP Royale theme.

[SactoGuy18]

I'm still not impressed.

Sure, Chrome may be fast, but it's already hard enough to get "traction" with the huge installed based of Internet Explorer users and an increasingly large installed based of Firefox 2.0/3.0 users on the Windows XP/Vista side among most corporate and home users.

I use Firefox 3.0.1 under Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 and find it stable, very fast, and reasonably compatible with most web sites. Why should I clutter my computer's disk and screen space with another web browser, especially given how good Firefox is now? :rolleyes:

[ingenious]

Wow.

That's all I can say. Chrome is ridiculously fast. :eek:

I'm posting from it right now (running it in Fusion on Leopard.4)

This is coming from someone who loves Safari. Since they share WebKit, I hope Safari and WebKit share improvements. Google's got something going on here... and it's good.

[SactoGuy18]

Wow.

That's all I can say. Chrome is ridiculously fast. :eek:

I'm posting from it right now (running it in Fusion on Leopard.4)

This is coming from someone who loves Safari. Since they share WebKit, I hope Safari and WebKit share improvements. Google's got something going on here... and it's good.

I think in this case, Chrome is more a threat to Safari on the MacOS X side than it is to IE and Firefox on the Windows side, though.

[growlf]

Apple's webkit? no.

webkit is open source. Apple just happen to use it too.


I don't think it's quite "Apple just happens to use it."

http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/WebKit%20Team

Take all the people who aren't from Apple on the WebKit Team, multiply them by two, then you almost have as many people as there are from Apple.

Yes, it's Open Source, but the notion that Apple is not in control of the project or that Apple's use of it is somehow incidental is laughable.

[bobertoq]

Ehhh... To tell you peoples the truth, I think I will stick with Chrome. Despite missing options, plug-ins, and features. (Master password, clear cookies on exit, ad blocking, javascript and cookie management, etc.) But I just like it. With a fast computer, fast internet connection, Chrome is blazing fast. Now I just have to wait until: Chrome on the Mac, Snow Leopard, Nehalem Processor, that 100 MPBS internet connection, and my iMac. (which I will buy after Nehalem and SL) Hahah. Ha.

[econoline06]

It's not quite analogous, but I'm suddenly reminded of what happened when Spyglass dealt with Microsoft... bah, anything that annoys the Mozilla Foundation is worth a laugh in my books :cool:.

I bags ("this isn't public school, Wilson!") first development on Google AdWords ad blocker. And no, Google, most people don't use the web for "apps" - beyond maybe a mail client. Locally hosted software works just great, and it takes advantage of all that tasty local native speed, reliability and security, just as it has since the early '80s when your intended model last went out of fashion. But keep up the good work with search - it's what you do well.

True this sort of computing did go out of style, but I'm seeing a *slight* resurgence of this school of thought...why use your local computer for the "heavy lifting" when you can have a big powerful beast of a machine hosting the apps for you? I know I know, I'm not 100% sold yet either, but it is interesting...

[TuffLuffJimmy]

My brief verdict is

Its a good browser, and simply a browser, not a platform.

It won't replace any other browsers, except maybe safari, it just has so many common stuff as safari, while lack of features in firefox, opera, or even IE8.

of course, since its for windows, its good windows users finally can see what safari could, should have been.

Oh yeah. That was a really intelligent review. How many people actually use all the features of Firefox or Internet Explorer? I'd bet it's less than 1% of the population that uses many of the features of FF or IE that aren't in Safari or Chrome. Oh and Clevin, in the very first initial release of firefox beta (I forgot what it was originally called) what sort of features did it have over this browser? None? maybe a buggy plugin architecture that was a little more accepting of all sorts of plugins? Give it sometime. Sheesh.

[wheelhot]

It won't replace any other browsers, except maybe safari, it just has so many common stuff as safari, while lack of features in firefox, opera, or even IE8.

Well I opposed that it will replace Safari and not IE8, IE8 basically shows what MSoft does best, copy and make it worse. See how slow tab browsing is in IE7?

IE8 is a copy cat of every browser out there, MS need to do that or IE will die and buried 10feet (extra then the normal one) in the earth.

Firefox is great because of the plugins.

I think in this case, Chrome is more a threat to Safari on the MacOS X side than it is to IE and Firefox on the Windows side, though.

I won't argue that Chrome is a threat to Safari on the OS X but I guess its a threat for every browser out there. But look at it this way, why do there are still many IE users even though we all know how crappy that browser is? Simple, its cause its already installed in the OS, its same to Apple, some people wont bother into downloading Google Chrome no matter how much they promote it like Firefox because its already installed, why uninstall an application that is already installed to you by default?

Remember, we all (the conscious web browser users) have been telling to the public how IE sucks and we should really use Firefox, Firefox has been promoting their safer browser stuffs but look at the numbers after years of persuasive. IE is still the major used browser out there.

It's surprising to know that there are a huge number of people who still rely on Microsoft products while there are better alternatives.

[CmdrLaForge]

Sorry to be rude - but: So what!?!


Well - read the textbook if you really want to know the details.

I think this is realy great! The more browsers that really build on standards on not on proprietary solutions like Flash and Silverlight are great. What Apple and Google are trying is a to create a web that is based on open standards and Microsoft Adobe are trying the opposite in order to protect their market share. Its exactly what Microsoft did all the years - and there are already many applications in the enterprise intranets that rely on Microsofts proprietary solutions - impossible to use Firefox or Safari e.g.

I think Google brings some fresh new thinking as well and maybe Apple can leverage it with another version of Safari.

I am not sure if I would switch to any other browser on the Mac then Safari, because I just love this browser but on Windows I will give it a try.

On Windows I don't think that Chrome will eat into IE market share, only into Firefox and Safaris because if someone knows and cares only a tiny little bit about computers and or browsers he/she long switched to Firefox. Someone who still uses IE has just no idea about computers or has to use it for company policy reasons.

[masterkain]

Well, seems like privacy should be concerned:

http://www.icoretech.org/2008/09/03/google-chrome-eula-excerpt

[wheelhot]

privacy issues
Well, seems like privacy should be concerned:

http://www.icoretech.org/2008/09/03/...e-eula-excerpt

That's a let down, hmm. Im starting to feel that if we continue to support Google easily, Google might be the next Microsoft :rolleyes:

[Analog Kid]

Well, seems like privacy should be concerned:

http://www.icoretech.org/2008/09/03/google-chrome-eula-excerpt
Saw that coming.

Bring on the cloud...

[knightlie]

What I am saying is as most people use PCs, and the average non-geek Windoze user will use whatever browser comes with their computer, which is IE.

So, websites will be tested with IE, as its very popular.

That still has no effect on IE's standards support, which, while better than IE6, is still *****. All you end up with is a bunch of non-standards-compliant websites botched to work properly on IE - which is just about the worst possible scenario.

MS should do us all a favour and just use Gecko or WebKit for IE and be done with it.

[smogsy]

fpr me at work surpasses firefox for memory usage

better than safari by far i find safari very slow on mac, im hoping google browser for mac is out soon.

if you ever used Firefox On Linux = its that fast!

[Cloudane]

I am loving this browser! Sooo fast. Using it right now. Missing quick access to my Google Bookmarks (you'd think they'd integrate those from day 1), but it's not like they're more than a click or two away.

It's snappier than Safari :D

I'm not convinced that it'll catch on with the masses. Their own IM (Google Talk) certainly didn't. For geeks though, at least those who aren't paranoid/cynical about Google (Slashdotters etc), it's going to be a big hit as a Firefox killer.

They couldn't have made the interface more perfect if they'd tried, either. It's different and yet still fits in with both the XP and Vista visual styles, and clean = good.

Bring on the Mac version.

Edit: Here's a spot of conspiracy theory debunking:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-communication/

[knightlie]

Original Borg: IBM

Old Borg: Microsoft

New Borg: Google

Steve better remember the past before he relives it.

What the hell are you talking about?

[elppa]

The UI I hate. It totally ignored basic UI principles for Windows. I mean where the hell is the menu?

Zune, the lastest version of Office and IE 7 (optionally) don't have menus either. They are made by Microsoft. I don't know if I like this trend, but it would be unfair to single Google out.

[knightlie]

My brief verdict is

Its a good browser, and simply a browser, not a platform.

:rolleyes:

You've missed the whole point of Chrome - it IS a platform, it's been designed as a fast, efficient and secure platform for running web apps, i.e. Javascript apps. Go and read the comic.

[iphoneblack]

umm it would be awsome if there is an iPhone verison. iPhone safari crashes way 2 much!

[angelneo]

Zune, the lastest version of Office and IE 7 (optionally) don't have menus either. They are made by Microsoft. I don't know if I like this trend, but it would be unfair to single Google out.
All the new MS Apps seem to be going this route of leaving menu bar out.

As a user, Chrome pretty much is a go for me. I don't get one bloated process eating up 100MB+++ of RAM after a few hours. It's faster than both FF and IE. Not a regular user of addon, so not considering that area.

Been using chrome the whole day, apart from some weird full flash site errors, everything is still fine.

As a developer, I'm still sitting on the fence. Not sure how popular this browser will get or how much it will improve once out of Beta. And without web developer toolbar or Firebug, not really going to use it to debug sites interface

[wheelhot]

What the hell are you talking about?

He is basically referring to Apple past competitors and ally. Jobs when he was young (dont know about now) always hated IBM, he considers IBM as the computer Pentagon and blah blah blah. Then come B.Gates which keep stressing that computer need their program and such. B.Gates finally get into Apple and Jobs made a mistake by bringing in B.Gates too much into Apple development that cause B.Gates to create his own OS and thus as some people will say, B.Gates BS Jobs but hey this is business, you must be careful with who you trust and who not to put your trust into (sad isn't it).

So lets look at the present, Apple has good relation with Google, what happen if history repeats it self? Apple will of course have a better standing this time but how much will it effect them remains a mystery and I wonder what is Google master plan.

Yeah, I've tested Chrome loading time and it blows away all the competitor browser opening speed. I wonder how Google managed to make their App open blazing fast. I wont use Chrome for my daily activities though cause of the EULA.

[colonels1020]

Have you guys read the EULA? It says the following:
"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."
Until this is gone, I won't be using Google Chrome. I don't need big brother Google claiming everything I do on the web is theirs. :mad:

[Clayne]

So what DOES get sent to Google.com?

website addresses? forum posts? transactions?

I need to know exactly what the privacy concerns are before downloading.

[edesignuk]

So what DOES get sent to Google.com?

website addresses? forum posts? transactions?

I need to know exactly what the privacy concerns are before downloading.Edit: Here's a spot of conspiracy theory debunking:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-communication/.

[angelwatt]

Zune, the lastest version of Office and IE 7 (optionally) don't have menus either. They are made by Microsoft. I don't know if I like this trend, but it would be unfair to single Google out.

Well the thread is about about Google Chrome, not Microsoft applications so I didn't leave it out, it was simply irrelevant. I also haven't used any of the products you mentioned except IE7, which I use with menus.

[Clayne]

.

I saw that. It doesn't really address what I'm saying.

Unless they're saying that those are the absolute only conditions under which Google.com gets information.

[edesignuk]

I saw that. It doesn't really address what I'm saying.

Unless they're saying that those are the absolute only conditions under which Google.com gets information.I don't understand the paranoia. If you're looking up how to build nukes then fine, otherwise just get on with it and try it. :rolleyes:

[Clayne]

Yeah, I'm okay with trying it, but I'm not comfortable with it as my main browser unless I can retain privacy (as much as possible on the interweb).

[Nym]

I am running Chrome on my Windows PC at work and it's the fastest browser (launching and rendering) that I've tried!

It will be hard for me to stop using Firefox because of Foxmarks, Flashgot, Piclens and all the other cool add-ons available but I'll install it on my iMac as soon as the Mac version is available. It's the perfect browser for opening up a link as fast as you can. It's that fast!

And Google has already said that they'll be building a Mac and Linux version from the ground-up, Chrome Mac and Chrome Linux will not be a Chrome Windows port! Just to clear that up :)

And I can't seem to understand the constant wave of negativity towards anything "not 100% Apple" that I've been seeing here lately. I know this is primarily a Mac users forum but we (for the most part) are adults who should at least try something before saying it's horrible and think for ourselves. In fact, that's one of the main reasons why a lot of people are still stuck in Windows-land, they automatically refuse to use anything different. Where's the "think different" motto around here lately?

[edesignuk]

Yeah, I'm okay with trying it, but I'm not comfortable with it as my main browser unless I can retain privacy (as much as possible on the interweb).The browser is open source. Key word OPEN. If it was sending home everything you do we'd know about it.

[haravikk]

I've been trying it on Windows and it is quite a nice browser, feels a lot faster/more-responsive than FireFox or Safari for Windows. But I still find Safari on OS X to be better.

I think Google's Chrome needs more options, for example, the ability to open all tabs as "Incognito" (privacy-enabled) by default, rather than having to choose the option all the time, or have session data destroyed automatically on quit or something.

Other than that, it seems fine, nothing really that revolutionary, but a good option for Windows web-browsing.

[clevin]

I did the Sun Spider test with Firefox 3.1a2. Here's what I got:
Total: 6339.0ms +/- 4.8%

Then I ran it in Chrome b1:
Total: 3613.0ms +/- 4.7%

So it's about 1.75 times as fast. I think as the VM is optimized it will get faster. This is just an initial release.



tracemonkey is prefed off in firefox nightly build. you need to open it first by toggle 'jit' related values in about:config. it will be about twice as fast as current speed.

for all other we quoted my brief review. i appreciated. stay tuned for my detailed review later !!! :D

[OS X Dude]

with this, google''s numerous apps and android, i can seriously see a google desktop OS as inevitable eventually. maybe it'll be like linux?

[clevin]

with this, google''s numerous apps and android, i can seriously see a google desktop OS as inevitable eventually. maybe it'll be like linux?

not sure, google doesn't seem to have high quality products on linux side. Sure I would like one.

[Clayne]

maybe it'll be like linux?

Only for people who don't care to customize everything. I'd like that.

[OS X Dude]

not sure, google doesn't seem to have high quality products on linux side. Sure I would like one.

well i mean google's own free open source OS (assuming thats what it'd be) would be like linux but not as in-depth (no terminal etc) for ease of use.

[xUKHCx]

tracemonkey is prefed off in firefox nightly build. you need to open it first by toggle 'jit' related values in about:config. it will be about twice as fast as current speed.

except when I do that I get unresponsive script at "date-format-tofte" so I had to actually disable it to complete the test.

[clevin]

except when I do that I get unresponsive script at "date-format-tofte" so I had to actually disable it to complete the test.

there is no question tracemonkey is buggy and in bug fix process as of now, and the problem sometime won't even repeat itself.
Update, there said to be a bug that has been fixed, try run sunspider again with today's build.

but I do know tracemonkey is going into firefox 3.1.

Here are some result provided by developer, run against sunspider

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/tm-v8-sunspider-totals.png

when you look at V8's sunspider, it obviously runs super fast on some items, and ridiculously slow on others, I think google did massive targetted optimization, Im not even sure if those optimization can be easily transfered onto linux or osx, thats why I think osx or linux version won't be out at least for another 3 month.
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/tm-v8-sunspider-detail.png

Mozilla said the ones that TM is behind are under work already and they have a plan that can do even better than V8, I guess we just have to wait and see.

[Evangelion]

I'm posting this with Chrome. And I'm very, very impressed. This is one fine browser! And on Windows, you get the benefit that if you use the browser in full-screen mode, the tab-bar acts like menubar on OS X. It's right at the top of the screen, so reaching the tabs is very easy.

Excellent work Google! I can see Chrome becoming a major player in the browser-market!

[wheelhot]

That's the problem isn't it? Google did not state what information is sent and the way how it is written (I'm no lawyer) it seems like Google has the absolute rights to take any information from you and you have no say whatsoever.

We need to wait till SquirrelFish(I think that what WebKit upcoming JS rendering engine called), TraceMonkey released to compare with the V8.
So far I heard that SquirrelFish is faster then TraceMonkey.

[edesignuk]

That's the problem isn't it? Google did not state what information is sent and the way how it is written (I'm no lawyer) it seems like Google has the absolute rights to take any information from you and you have no say whatsoever.http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/privacy.html

[Evangelion]

That's the problem isn't it? Google did not state what information is sent and the way how it is written (I'm no lawyer) it seems like Google has the absolute rights to take any information from you and you have no say whatsoever.

We need to wait till SquirrelFish(I think that what WebKit upcoming JS rendering engine called), TraceMonkey released to compare with the V8.
So far I heard that SquirrelFish is faster then TraceMonkey.

The problem seems to be that you actually think that unreasonable EULA's are enforceable....

[clevin]

So far I heard that SquirrelFish is faster then TraceMonkey.

no its not. its actually 1.2x slower than tracemonkey, as of now.

[wheelhot]

The problem seems to be that you actually think that unreasonable EULA's are enforceable....

Huh? Sorry but I don't know American laws. :confused:

no its not. its actually 1.2x slower than tracemonkey, as of now.

wut, since when tracemonkey become faster? did they update it or something after seeing that squirrelfish is faster then tracemonkey?

Aah okay, guess the privacy thing is settled then :)

[clevin]

Huh? Sorry but I don't know American laws. :confused:


wut, since when tracemonkey become faster? did they update it or something after seeing that squirrelfish is faster then tracemonkey?

i think you might be confused about spidermonkey and tracemonkey, spidermonkey is the one inside firefox 3, which is 1.5x slower than recent webkit nightly (presumably has squirrelfish inside). Tracemonkey is the one inside firefox 3.1 nightly build, and pref-ed off, its almost double the performance of spidermonkey, its still buggy as of now.

here is Tracemonkey I got compare to Chrome (pic attached)

i realize there are too many monkeys here tho... :)

i think all these just got to show people, javascript isn't nearly as important as some people make it to be. Chrome uses an old webkit engine, a fast, but not unbelievably fast javascript engine, still made the app itself extremely impressive in speed and operations.

js is important, yes, no question about that, but who can realistically tell the 0.2ms difference? there are more to an app's speed than js.

[slicecom]

And I can't seem to understand the constant wave of negativity towards anything "not 100% Apple" that I've been seeing here lately. I know this is primarily a Mac users forum but we (for the most part) are adults who should at least try something before saying it's horrible and think for ourselves. In fact, that's one of the main reasons why a lot of people are still stuck in Windows-land, they automatically refuse to use anything different. Where's the "think different" motto around here lately?

I agree. The reason I think it's gotten worse lately is the influx of Windows users buying iPhones and posting in this forum are getting on the long time Mac members' nerves.

[wheelhot]

i think you might be confused about spidermonkey and tracemonkey, spidermonkey is the one inside firefox 3, which is 1.5x slower than recent webkit nightly (presumably has squirrelfish inside). Tracemonkey is the one inside firefox 3.1 nightly build, and pref-ed off, its almost double the performance of spidermonkey, its still buggy as of now.

Aah, okay I was confused, thanks. Yea, too many monkeys!!!. Run! monkeys are coming to attack us!!!!

[Zargot]

Troubling EULA point:

"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."

Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10030522-56.html

[clevin]

Troubling EULA point:
Source: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10030522-56.html

im really not smart enough to understand those, some professionals care to explain the real world impact of these?

PS. Chrome's spell checking isn't good enough, half of the situations it suggests nothing!

PS2. isn't very mice friendly, I miss mice gestures already.

PS3. for some unknown reason, its getting slower with more usage. seems sometimes have trouble connecting to the server. I think google's multi-threading isn't stable yet. but I would expect it to be fixed some time in the near future.

[wheelhot]

"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."

Yea, this what bugs me, but according to their privacy page, it is different.

[clevin]

no drag and drop in text editor? -1

copy and paste aren't my fav commands.

no drag and drop across tab neither, no drag text to tabbar neither

only links and images can be dragged

PS. CPU runs too high with Chrome, I never see my Fan runs this much. So its system resource in exchange for performance? Im fine with it to a certain degree tho.

[baaron]

The biggest weakness chrome has is that there are very few plug-ins that will work with the browser at the moment.

And you forget how important those plugins are until they dont work! :(

However, their V8 engine is blazing fast for javascript apps.

[FetalSage]

i think all these just got to show people, javascript isn't nearly as important as some people make it to be. Chrome uses an old webkit engine, a fast, but not unbelievably fast javascript engine, still made the app itself extremely impressive in speed and operations.

js is important, yes, no question about that, but who can realistically tell the 0.2ms difference? there are more to an app's speed than js.

I see your results, and raise you these (http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/3053/picture3rr9.png)..latest Safari 4 preview build.

[Clayne]

It started out fast. Now it's going slowwww.

[clevin]

I see your results, and raise you these (http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/3053/picture3rr9.png)..latest Safari 4 preview build.

lol, you do realize this test is 99.9% decided by your CPU speed and RAM?

Only comparison on same machine has relative meanings, absolute numbers are absolutely meaningless.

PS, as you can see, I do have a slow machine with ATOM cpu....

ps2, i will post a SquirrelFish v Tracemonkey later with my mac mini, just for your viewing pleasure. :D

[headfuzz]

And I can't seem to understand the constant wave of negativity towards anything "not 100% Apple" that I've been seeing here lately. I know this is primarily a Mac users forum but we (for the most part) are adults who should at least try something before saying it's horrible and think for ourselves. In fact, that's one of the main reasons why a lot of people are still stuck in Windows-land, they automatically refuse to use anything different. Where's the "think different" motto around here lately?

...and we have a winner!

FFS people. It's a new browser, it's very fast and has some very clever stuff going on under the bonnet (hood, for those of you across the pond ;)).

There is no obligation to use it whatsoever, but before you start bashing it without having used it at least read the comic through and understand why it's A Good Thing ®.

There's a paradigm shift here which will almost undoubtedly become the de facto standard in every other browser within a couple of major revisions.

Too many people are posting negative comments based on pure conjecture.

*Feigns surprise*

[TuffLuffJimmy]

lol, you do realize this test is 99.9% decided by your CPU speed and RAM?

Only comparison on same machine has relative meanings, absolute numbers are absolutely meaningless.

PS, as you can see, I do have a slow machine with ATOM cpu....

ps2, i will post a SquirrelFish v Tracemonkey later with my mac mini, just for your viewing pleasure. :D

ummm clevin, wasn't it you who first posted comparison numbers on squirrelFish vs Tracemonkey (or was it spidermonkey?) and now you're saying those numbers are meaningless?

[clevin]

ummm clevin, wasn't it you who first posted comparison numbers on squirrelFish vs Tracemonkey (or was it spidermonkey?) and now you're saying those numbers are meaningless?

oh, i guess i didn't make my expression clear then

single absolute number from the test is meaningless.

But paired numbers from different browsers at SAME machine is meaningful.

let me know if you are still confused. :p

[TuffLuffJimmy]

oh, i guess i didn't make my expression clear then

single absolute number from the test is meaningless.

But paired numbers from different browsers at SAME machine is meaningful.

let me know if you are still confused. :p

I get that, but here I'll say something that I've said many times on this site before: My Stats teacher would kick you in the face. You really think that ONE machines numbers have any meaning? Let's put that to a P test, shall we? Z? fail... and uhhh fail. Look at that!

[Trajectory]

It looks nice. Doesn't render everything properly. Needs more work.

[clevin]

I get that, but here I'll say something that I've said many times on this site before: My Stats teacher would kick you in the face. You really think that ONE machines numbers have any meaning? Let's put that to a P test, shall we? Z? fail... and uhhh fail. Look at that!

well, i guess you have the right to not trust my numbers, thats fine, but its really easy to prove me wrong anyway. You don trust my result on my machine? do it yourself! its not something so difficult that you can't try out anyway! :eek:

PS. as promised, for your viewing pleasure here is webkit 30653 (today) and tracemonkey/firefox 3.1 20080903051823 (today).

The race is so tight, I can't wait for safari 4 and firefox 3.1!:D

(still, do keep in mind as I mentioned before, js speed, as it is, doesn't deserve the hype its getting nowadays)

[MisterK]

I've used Google Chrome on my work PC and am extremely impressed. I wasn't expecting to like it so much... and so quickly. I'm looking forward to it coming to my MBP. I am interested to see how well it translates into the Mac universe.

I'm not a very fiddly person, when it comes to my browser and the Firefox Plugins don't really interest me. Close friends are web developers and there are a lot of great tools for them on Firefox, and my fiancée loves StumbleUpon. I'm not big on RSS. I use the web browser for web browsing. I generally use Safari for it's simplicity, but Chrome may have it beat. There's only one bar. If you enter a web address, then fine. If you enter something else, it recognizes it as a search term and takes you to Google search results. The browsing is the fastest I've experienced on any machine. I like the tabs on the top. It seems like a small thing, but it definitely helps me make the mental leap to trusting and treating web apps as desktop ones.

I listen to MacBreak weekly and Merlin Mann needs to stop being such a jerk when it comes to this stuff... I love Apple too, but surely there's nothing wrong with more choice with the browser. Especially when it's based on Webkit and open standards. He says he likes Firefox, and good for him. But I thought search wasn't broken before Google came along too. They certainly fixed that misconception.

[JW8725]

I wish they'd hurry up and release some add ons. I need an adblocker and a gmail notifier pronto.

[TuffLuffJimmy]

I listen to MacBreak weekly and Merlin Mann needs to stop being such a jerk when it comes to this stuff... I love Apple too, but surely there's nothing wrong with more choice with the browser. Especially when it's based on Webkit and open standards. He says he likes Firefox, and good for him. But I thought search wasn't broken before Google came along too. They certainly fixed that misconception.

Oh God. I couldn't stand that episode. I think Merlin is one of the funniest people, but he kicked dirt at Chrome for ten minutes for seemingly no reason. I think he just doesn't trust Google, which is strange because he seems to really like Alcor who now works for google.

PS: unrelated: Google Mobile is the best app for the iPhone. I no longer need to worry about how slow address book and the phone app are, as google mobile brings up my contacts instantly! You can really see the quicksilver in the app, thanks to Alcor's involvement.

[Keeval]

Looks like Google realised that the EULA was wrong (or backtracked after all the uproar) Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chrome-eula-controversy-our-bad-well-change-it.html)

[Clayne]

Looks like Google realised that the EULA was wrong (or backtracked after all the uproar) Ars Technica (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chrome-eula-controversy-our-bad-well-change-it.html)

Cool. I'm interested in seeing what changes.

[OS X Dude]

i emailed them with a suggestion that googles apps (mail, reader, docs etc) could have proper shortcut buttons in the menu bar to make the apps feel like an integral part of the Chrome experience.

Jeez, I sound like a PR bitch!

[angelneo]

After using it for 2 days, I had it crash on me once, the trouble being a problematic flash video player plugin.

[Latro]

Hey, Google didn't mention it, but they provide instructions to natively build and run Google Chrome on Intel Macs (http://www.maciverse.com/build-google-chrome-for-mac.html).

May make testing a bit easier for you.

[Eraserhead]

Well the thread is about about Google Chrome, not Microsoft applications so I didn't leave it out, it was simply irrelevant. I also haven't used any of the products you mentioned except IE7, which I use with menus.

That Microsoft isn't including menus in it's applications means that it being standard isn't an argument against not using them. You also have to slam Apple in the same line for smashing the standard Windows UI with iTunes and especially Safari.

[macridah]

i hope apple continues to improve safari.

[dam0dred]

Looking forward to it. Competition is good, and any improvements to WebKit is a win for Mac users.

[charlituna]

wow that looks like it sucks i like opera

looks and sounds like they are just cobbling together features from existing browsers and not really adding anything new and original.

I'll give it a look when the Mac version comes out (if it is not already) but somehow I don't think it is going to blow me away

[xUKHCx]

looks and sounds like they are just cobbling together features from existing browsers and not really adding anything new and original.

I'll give it a look when the Mac version comes out (if it is not already) but somehow I don't think it is going to blow me away

Seriously did you read the comic because it does has some very interesting innovative features

[objc]

tracemonkey is prefed off in firefox nightly build. you need to open it first by toggle 'jit' related values in about:config. it will be about twice as fast as current speed.

for all other we quoted my brief review. i appreciated. stay tuned for my detailed review later !!! :D

Hey, whadaya know. I enabled it and this time I got a score of:
3177.6ms +/- 1.9%
That's with last night's nightly build. Good job Mozilla peeps!

Wow... optimization is not too good on Mac/PPC.
Total: 4949.4ms +/- 1.1%
That's on a G5 2.3 Ghz. The other scores came off a 2.8Ghz P4.

AND... webkit on the G5:
Total: 3079.0ms +/- 7.8%

[daneoni]

I just downloaded it a few hours ago (posting this from it) and i have to say i REALLY like the interface its simple/clean. Not a fan of the blue browser header (reminds me of XP blue) and it doesnt seem to have a status bar which i like.

However its reasonably quick and usable, will be interesting to see how it matures going forward

[Trajectory]

This article in Silicon Alley Insider (http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/9/google-s-chrome-already-owns-1-of-browser-market-and-6-of-sai-readers) says that Chrome already has more than 1% of the browser market and will most likely overtake Safari on the PC.

[xUKHCx]

well, i guess you have the right to not trust my numbers, thats fine, but its really easy to prove me wrong anyway. You don trust my result on my machine? do it yourself! its not something so difficult that you can't try out anyway! :eek:

PS. as promised, for your viewing pleasure here is webkit 30653 (today) and tracemonkey/firefox 3.1 20080903051823 (today).

The race is so tight, I can't wait for safari 4 and firefox 3.1!:D

(still, do keep in mind as I mentioned before, js speed, as it is, doesn't deserve the hype its getting nowadays)

Nice harddrive name.

Here is the comparison on my iMac, they are basically the same. Would be interesting to see what chrome is like on the mac but that is not possible.

133166

This article in Silicon Alley Insider (http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/9/google-s-chrome-already-owns-1-of-browser-market-and-6-of-sai-readers) says that Chrome already has more than 1% of the browser market and will most likely overtake Safari on the PC.


With it advertised on google's homepage now I can imagine it will rise quite high.

I have been using it on my windows PC and it has good crash recovery in regards to text/scroll/tabs/everything. It does freeze for a second or two quite often, although I do have a pretty crappy PC however Opera doesn't do that.

[CoreWeb]

Nice harddrive name.

Here is the comparison on my iMac, they are basically the same. Would be interesting to see what chrome is like on the mac but that is not possible.

(Image removed)


I'm just curious -- have you enabled TraceMonkey? Apparently you have to go into some preference on the about:config (and a quick google tells me the preference is javascript.options.jit.content).

I have no idea how it compares to Safari, but I'm just curious if you enabled it.

[Cobol to Java]

I tried using Chrome on my laptop. Worked fine. You can't really say that it's light since it runs 2 or 3 separate background programs to support the opening of multiple tabs. But it's considerably lighter than firefox, and a bit faster too. Well, when they do start putting all the extensions on Chrome, maybe that's the time it will run slower.

[clevin]

Nice harddrive name.

Here is the comparison on my iMac, they are basically the same. Would be interesting to see what chrome is like on the mac but that is not possible.

133166

With it advertised on google's homepage now I can imagine it will rise quite high.

I have been using it on my windows PC and it has good crash recovery in regards to text/scroll/tabs/everything. It does freeze for a second or two quite often, although I do have a pretty crappy PC however Opera doesn't do that.
thanks, the name is a common first name for hispanics, absolutely no religious meaning :D
Hey, whadaya know. I enabled it and this time I got a score of:
3177.6ms +/- 1.9%
That's with last night's nightly build. Good job Mozilla peeps!

Wow... optimization is not too good on Mac/PPC.
Total: 4949.4ms +/- 1.1%
That's on a G5 2.3 Ghz. The other scores came off a 2.8Ghz P4.

AND... webkit on the G5:
Total: 3079.0ms +/- 7.8%

I think after firefox 3.1, mozilla probably will stop PPC support soon.

I'm just curious -- have you enabled TraceMonkey? Apparently you have to go into some preference on the about:config (and a quick google tells me the preference is javascript.options.jit.content).

I have no idea how it compares to Safari, but I'm just curious if you enabled it.
yes, he did. AFAIK, tracemonkey is still working on some thing that supposed to improve more, but hey, its in the area that nobody can practically see the difference anymore..

[iNassar]

im just saying that i loved it..

[xUKHCx]

thanks, the name is a common first name for hispanics, absolutely no religious meaning :D

Yeah a couple of my friends have it as middle names just didn't know which variant you were using :)

I think after firefox 3.1, mozilla probably will stop PPC support soon.

yes, he did. AFAIK, tracemonkey is still working on some thing that supposed to improve more, but hey, its in the area that nobody can practically see the difference anymore..

It is sad to see PPC support going because it still seems so recent but that is the way things are going. I'm just glad that I took the chance to move to intel when I did because I got the best iMac available (i.e no glossy screen :p)

I'm just curious if you enabled it.

Just to confirm clevin was right it is enabled.

[PowerFullMac]

Hey, Google didn't mention it, but they provide instructions to natively build and run Google Chrome on Intel Macs (http://www.maciverse.com/build-google-chrome-for-mac.html).

May make testing a bit easier for you.

Cool, thanks!

Should provide me with something to do!

[jbucaran]

According to the engineers at Google they are working on it but so far they are closer to the start than the finish and there is no expected date nor any predictions.

Currently there is no UI and the latest builds just compile the core components like WebKit and other sub projects. The problem is that the OS architecture of MacOSX and Linux is much different than Windows so they need to figure out how Chrome will adjust to this.

Source(s):
http://googlemac.blogspot.com/2008/09/platforms-and-priorities.html
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/build-instructions-os-x

[charlituna]

Seriously did you read the comic because it does has some very interesting innovative features


yeah I read it. even with all the "don't we sound impressive" tech talk bloat in the first 17 pages.

it's a good thing that comic was sent to a limited audience cause most folks wouldn't understand half of it. all they care about is if it works. and how.

and in the how is a lot of stuff that ain't nothing new.

about the only groovy new tricks they have done are the nine pages trick and putting the history lookup in their 'omnibox'. and we'll see how well those work in the end.

i give them points cause they are right about one thing. being a search engine company they have the means to find and test on tons of sites before we ever see the program. and that will likely help with debugging. but I reserve judgement until I can test the program myself and compare it to the others out there

[MacHiavelli]

It was making my hard drive whine like crazy, so I uninstalled. Too fugly for my tastes.

[xUKHCx]

yeah I read it. even with all the "don't we sound impressive" tech talk bloat in the first 17 pages.

it's a good thing that comic was sent to a limited audience cause most folks wouldn't understand half of it. all they care about is if it works. and how.

and in the how is a lot of stuff that ain't nothing new.

about the only groovy new tricks they have done are the nine pages trick and putting the history lookup in their 'omnibox'. and we'll see how well those work in the end.

i give them points cause they are right about one thing. being a search engine company they have the means to find and test on tons of sites before we ever see the program. and that will likely help with debugging. but I reserve judgement until I can test the program myself and compare it to the others out there

I guess you missed the pages where they talk about treating each tab as a separate process. Which is new and very impressive and something you will see in browsers of the future. They also bring in interesting features of their Javascript engine which will compete with squirllfish and tracemonkey and has features that may well feed into them. And if you think the history lookup thing is new then you are actually wrong. Check out opera and firefox.

[Mal]

I'm getting an error in trying to build the Mac version, if anyone's familiar with Xcode.

make: *** [V8Attr.h] Error 2
Command /bin/sh failed with exit code 2

Any ideas?

jW

[jbucaran]

Well here is a step by step tutorial (http://www.jorgebucaran.com/blog/?p=80) on how to compile Chrome for the Mac. :D

Are you ready to spend a few hours on it? :)


Cheers

[Mal]

Yep, was using the step-by-step, but as I said, it got stuck trying to build (already finished the longest part, downloading the actual project). I'm looking for someone who actually knows what the error means or at least might indicate to help me sort it out.

jW

[jbucaran]

Yep, was using the step-by-step, but as I said, it got stuck trying to build (already finished the longest part, downloading the actual project). I'm looking for someone who actually knows what the error means or at least might indicate to help me sort it out.

jW

Well I can't help you with that but we could make a group and start reading through the sources and see if we can figure it out. In any case let me know any of your progress I am also very excited about Google Chrome!

Cheers.

[winterspan]

*snip* things like this browser are what will enable google to charge even more to advertisers than they already do. *snip*

Well, regardless of Google's intentions, companies definitely like the idea of more targeted advertisements. And Google's money is mostly made from their 'Adwords' search advertising, which works essentially as an auction on different keywords so in fact "the market" actually sets the prices.

Don't get me wrong though, Google is not a messiah -- they a for-profit business, not a philanthropy organization trying to save the world.

[bobertoq]

I found a chart of IE market share from 1994 - 2008.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Internet-explorer-usage-data.svg

I wonder how Chrome will affect IE's market share.

[TuffLuffJimmy]

I found a chart of IE market share from 1994 - 2008.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Internet-explorer-usage-data.svg

I wonder how Chrome will affect IE's market share.

Probably not much unless it's well marketed. Firefox has been better than IE for a long long time, yet it still has no where near the market share. Simply because most users will just use what ships with their computers. It would be nice if Google could gain the influence to pressure computer makers to ship Chrome with their computers.

[PowerFullMac]

Probably not much unless it's well marketed. Firefox has been better than IE for a long long time, yet it still has no where near the market share. Simply because most users will just use what ships with their computers. It would be nice if Google could gain the influence to pressure computer makers to ship Chrome with their computers.

True, but this is Google, think about this: Google has a link to the Chrome page on the main site (www.google.com/www.google.co.uk etc.). Now think about how many people visit that page everyday, how many people have it as their homepage... Thats a helleva lota marketing. Also, remember Google has piles of money at its disposal, it would easily launch a huge marketing campaign.

[raythemoneyman]

I am like a moth to a bug light when it comes to Chrome. It is still not working well on one of my Broker's websites but we have other sites we have to use in business and even Mozilla is slow on them [Internet Explorer unusable] but Chrome just SMOKES through their pages. :eek:

[wheelhot]

I am like a moth to a bug light when it comes to Chrome. It is still not working well on one of my Broker's websites but we have other sites we have to use in business and even Mozilla is slow on them [Internet Explorer unusable] but Chrome just SMOKES through their pages.

Somebody, get the fire extinguisher! :cool:

[SactoGuy18]

By the way, I found out why I don't like Chrome: whenever the program is running, hard disk activity on my HP Pavilion a6400f goes through the roof. I'm hoping that Google eliminates this and when the native MacOS X version comes out you don't get a lot of hard disk activity, either.

[Kiddo86]

I'm pretty heavily biased towards everything mac and I've been using and regularly updating webkit for almost a year... but I'm using Chrome for the first time right now on my vista partition and the performance is mind blowing. I wouldn't say that it's any faster than Webkit or Firefox for normal browsing, but I'm currently using it with Blackboard (anyone in college should know what that is) and Chrome is beating out my other two browsers by a mile. Load times from page to page in Blackboard were 2-3 seconds in Webkit and Firefox... in Chrome, pages are loading as fast as I can click. It will definitely be my choice of browser when I'm using vista.

[bobertoq]

I wonder... I wonder if Google could make an "open source, free" operating system. Or just an OS at all. After thinking about it, Chrome is a lot like an Operating system. Google could make a simple, small, fast, safe and secure OS. I'm just thinking about what they could do.

[PlaceofDis]

I wonder... I wonder if Google could make an "open source, free" operating system. Or just an OS at all. After thinking about it, Chrome is a lot like an Operating system. Google could make a simple, small, fast, safe and secure OS. I'm just thinking about what they could do.

sure they could. there have been rumors of such even. but there would have to be a compelling reason to write applications for it, support it, and adopt it most of all. which if you look at linux, you see the problem with such a thing.

don't get me wrong, linux is great, but its hindered by low adoption rates for desktop and home usage because people don't like change. heck, look at OS X.. sure its picking up steam at times but still... people are afraid of change and all that.

[229dan229]

i have used this on vista and its not all that tbh, i will be sticking with firefox.

[john2006wright]

Can't wait to see how it handles Ad-blockers :D

Why would they allow ad-blockers? That is the only way they make money. They log your every move on the internet, they don't do this for fun.

[PowerFullMac]

Why would they allow ad-blockers? That is the only way they make money. They log your every move on the internet, they don't do this for fun.

I think he was joking, hence the :D smily.

[john2006wright]

I think he was joking, hence the :D smily.

oops, little bit trigger happy there. Apologies.