Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Early Screenshots from the Mac Version of Google's Chrome Browser
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Retards
Google has proven again its utter incompetence in programming desktop software. Where's the title bar? Where I am supposed to click if I want to drag the window when there are more tabs opened? Are you kidding me? They seem to be struggling with the fact that on a Mac, default browser is already extremely easy to use and understand for anybody, so they just removed the title bar to make it look even more "simple" and get some "advantage" over Safari. Ignoring Apple's HIG is what will eventually make Mac OS X more like Windows. Just look at Picassa for Mac. It might be free, but it's just ridiculous.
Google has proven again its utter incompetence in programming desktop software. Where's the title bar? Where I am supposed to click if I want to drag the window when there are more tabs opened? Are you kidding me? They seem to be struggling with the fact that on a Mac, default browser is already extremely easy to use and understand for anybody, so they just removed the title bar to make it look even more "simple" and get some "advantage" over Safari. Ignoring Apple's HIG is what will eventually make Mac OS X more like Windows. Just look at Picassa for Mac. It might be free, but it's just ridiculous.
I used google chrome for my windows comp and liked it, there is still some bugs that need to be worked out tho
Chromium is Chrome's project name. Chromium builds are released several times in a day and are not stable.
Not really convinced that Google Chrome will be as big on Mac as it is on Windows. I already use a webkit browser on Mac - Safari 
and it looks great on OS X - while Chrome or Chromium just doesn't look like native Mac software.
and it looks great on OS X - while Chrome or Chromium just doesn't look like native Mac software.obviously, this is what your heard. Do you believe everything you hear? please, if you think this is the case, look at the source code, and show me what code is doing the sending. Remember, Chrome is open source, so you can look at the code that makes the program. Chrome has been tested by several sites and it is approved as 'spyware free', not 'free spyware'....
..... You have to remember, this is not even pre-beta. It's not even pre-alpha. The screenshot is pretty much the first screenshot of an actual running build of the application. I'm sure they will improve the way it looks by the final release, which will be several months from now.
Also, try the Windoze version. It's wonderful.
Nothing personal, but I sure wouldn't want to work with you. If you are truly an active web developer, you should easily know by now that Google Chrome uses Safari's WebKit rendering engine, not to mention that even if it had a proprietary engine, it would surely have the best standards compliance of any browser. The problem is NOT too many web browsers or browser engines, it is browser developers that refuse to follow W3C web standards and refuse to eliminate years of legacy proprietary extensions for concern of breaking existing websites... Obviously I am referring to Microsoft.
After the fall of Netscape, I hold Microsoft and Bill Gates personally responsible for holding back *YEARS* of innovation on the web which only started up again once Opera, Firefox, and Safari got on to the scene.
You need to chill out a bit. Chrome is the fastest, simplest browser on Windows, and there is a LOT of innovation under the hood that makes it stable and simple, plus the single search/URL window, incognito browsing, undockable tabs, etc etc. And do you really think they're going to release a browser with no way of moving or resizing the window?
Chrome is not for everyone, and the vast majority of macheads will not use it or even miss it - but it's my browser of choice on Windows, and I can't wait to see if its stability, speed, simplicity and extra features are still there on mac.
I just gave chrome a second try after removing the first release a while ago and the first thing that jumps out at me is still no bookmarks menu.
Sure they're trying to be all creative and re-imagine the browser, but the all purpose address bar search is not an adequate replacement. I can remember the names of the sites i visit on a daily, maybe even weekly basis, but what about the ones I only visit once a month or less. Yes, I realize there's a bookmark menu on my special google home page, but a bookmark menu should be part of the interface not the document.
And the fact that they roll their own faux vista interface on XP makes me wonder if they'll use real OSX window controls or fake it.
Sure they're trying to be all creative and re-imagine the browser, but the all purpose address bar search is not an adequate replacement. I can remember the names of the sites i visit on a daily, maybe even weekly basis, but what about the ones I only visit once a month or less. Yes, I realize there's a bookmark menu on my special google home page, but a bookmark menu should be part of the interface not the document.
And the fact that they roll their own faux vista interface on XP makes me wonder if they'll use real OSX window controls or fake it.
Why on earth have 100+ people voted this as a negative story? Are they so scared of a web-kit based browser outperforming Safari in Stability, Security and Speed that they dread it's arrival?
Doug
Doug
obviously, this is what your heard. Do you believe everything you hear? please, if you think this is the case, look at the source code, and show me what code is doing the sending. Remember, Chrome is open source, so you can look at the code that makes the program. Chrome has been tested by several sites and it is approved as 'spyware free', not 'free spyware'....
..... You have to remember, this is not even pre-beta. It's not even pre-alpha. The screenshot is pretty much the first screenshot of an actual running build of the application. I'm sure they will improve the way it looks by the final release, which will be several months from now.
Also, try the Windoze version. It's wonderful.
Go and read aidenshaw's post in this thread and the computerworld link he posted. Google already admits that it "anonymizes" information from the address/search bar after 24 hours. Is it so hard for you to believe that they wouldn't do the same thing with private browsing? The same person who told me about the unified bar also told me about incognito mode when it was initially released and he turned out to be right about the bar. He is a friend I trust and not some facebook or myspace friend.
It amazes me that a lot of the same people who have a problem with warrantless wiretapping don't have a problem with what google does. There hasn't been a case in human history where someone who has power didn't abuse it. Their goal is to maximize profits and increase stock value. They are no different than any other company. Their main business is probably the most important business in the world and that is information. The same company whose mantra is "do no evil" is also the same company who also makes deals with china to remove search terms like "tiananmen square" and any other that the government/dictatorship has any problem with just so they can make marketshare within china. Those same deals have also been made with other "governments". The same tech pundits who kissed google's ass are the same ones who signed up for twply when it first came out (and encouraged others to do so) only to find out that less than a week later found out that they had sold their email address to advertisers.
You can choose to believe whatever you want to believe about google. I don't know how to read source code. You can believe that everything they give you for free is because they're such nice guys. You can believe that they're the first company in history that care about you. That may be your world but in my world most everyone has an angle. I will continue to trust myself with my privacy and not some corporation.
"source code" argument is a red herring
This has nothing to do with whether or not there are back doors in the Google browser.
The keylogger in the address bar and simply the search patterns that you send to Google, and the sites that you decide to visit - all let Google collect a lot of information about what you are doing.
This has nothing to do with whether or not there are back doors in the Google browser.
The keylogger in the address bar and simply the search patterns that you send to Google, and the sites that you decide to visit - all let Google collect a lot of information about what you are doing.
Call me a lunatic consipacy theorist if you must but I am going to add my voice to the chorus of people uneasy about how much information Google is collecting about us.
Recording my search histories? No thanks. On the rare occasion I log into Gmail on the web and am greeted with ads that correspond to the content of my email? A little disturbing. Now Chrome and their efforts to store people's health records and this Gdrive project where you upload your whole hard drive on their servers...
I know their stated goal is to organize the world's information but this a company that makes money selling ads. I'm not sure I want them to have all my information.
Recording my search histories? No thanks. On the rare occasion I log into Gmail on the web and am greeted with ads that correspond to the content of my email? A little disturbing. Now Chrome and their efforts to store people's health records and this Gdrive project where you upload your whole hard drive on their servers...
I know their stated goal is to organize the world's information but this a company that makes money selling ads. I'm not sure I want them to have all my information.
Agreed.
But of course their marketing division has everyone believeing that they're all just nice guys who make software because it makes them feel all warm and fuzzy inside and then go and play pinball in their free cafeteria.
Don't worry, the backlash is coming; it always does against large monoplosing corporations (just ask microsoft).
People shout at Microsoft for bundling their browser in Windows. But aren't we seeing Google search being bundled in Firefox and the iPhone. I realise there are differences between those examples (so please, there is no need to point them out) but it shows how Google is slowly creeping into every part of your online experience and collecting all your private details at the same time.
I don't want to be logged into google's servers 24/7 yet some people seem to be blindly handing over their private lives to a company making incredible sums of money out of them and they don't even realise. What % of people who use Google search or Gmail are aware of what information Google is storing about them?? Would they still use those services if they knew?
"Think different" and use another search engine once in a while.
Yup. I'm done with Google applications for exactly this reason. They've far overstepped their bounds here.
I haven't actually seen the Apple updater launch on Windows, but from what I hear, it annoyingly pops up and asks if you'd like to install a bunch of stuff you don't want. The difference with the Google updater is that it doesn't ask-- it just does. It downloads a .dmg, mounts it, runs the install script and unmounts the image. Unless you're sitting there at the time, and notice the image mount on your desktop, you wouldn't know it happened.
That in itself doesn't bother me half as much as the fact that it allows non-Google developers to register their requests with it and it allows installation of kernel extensions and root owned applications.
Really, really bad call here, Google.
I could not agree more! From trying to subvert copyright laws to housing potentially dangerous medical records and more...
They scare me - and I for one will pass. I cannot stand Safari and Opera is just to basic (but very fast) and Firefox (my current web browser) is slow and bloated as well as HUGE in size. At least I am not stuck with IE as an option!
D
Man you people, Microsuck has been mining info about your web habits and more if you're so foolish to use their browser or their OS, so why is Google getting so slagged on here for their browser? Also as a web designer AND a person who directs CMS content for a wide deployment of information at least Google tries to uphold WC3 web compliance standards for the way pages draw and what can and can't be done, not to mention accessibility, as opposed to Microsuck who basically does whatever the hell they want to and slap a "we're the standard" attitude. No REAL designer I know, and I know dozens in various industries, like Microsuck and their browser and their thumbing of their noses at compliance, at least Chrome will adhere to stuff in a logical way so pages render, for the most part, properly. Any browser that chips away at Microsuck's browser's stranglehold which creates THE biggest divide in a designers ability to design a web site, is a good thing. Sadly there's just too many peecee lusers that buy that platform and are too stupid to try a real browser over the crappy prepackaged one that comes on that platform. I welcome Chrome, considering it's WebKit, it'll be another browser that adheres to standards, and myself, as well as scores of designers, welcome this. You want to hate on something, hate on Microsoft, they're the ones that actually deserve it.
Well you probably won't here people here complaining much about an os they do not use and a browser they cannot run doing such thing. That is why the google reasons have only appeared in a thread about chrome release for os x. I'm sure those people wouldn't use IE if they ran a pc as well anyway.
It is not simply because they are stupid. If you have little experience in using a computer you are not stupid, just lacking knowledge in that particular subject.
When a person starts to use a pc for the first time and start learning about the internet the only browser they are introduced to is IE. I have worked training people how to use computers in my local area in the past and the guidelines we had to follow just state to launch IE.
When you do go into getting firefox for example the general reply is "why?". You have to find a way of explaining why you should use something that can access the interet to download something that can access the internet to people who only recently got to grips with double clicking.
Personally i believe all os' should package at least 3 web browsers and allow the user to choose. begginner IT courses, day sessions should also be updated to focus more on different browser options.
Either that or give microsoft a kick up the arse for not following standards.
Web page doesn't load: "Aw Snap"
Browser can't find an internet connection: "WTF"
Page contains unsupported content: "Huhwhut?!"
Page's security certificate can't be verified: "LOL...like, OMG!"
True, it's basically Safari with a non-standard GUI (they even use Webkit.)
To be honest I'm waiting for Google to go bust... they're basically a search engine that sure... must make a LITTLE out of advertising... but not enough to make them as big as people think they are.
Companies like M$ have invested billions in them and that's why they're rich. Other than that all they've done is bought out a bunch of apps and changed their name to "Google ______" while releasing them for free so people go "oh wow Google!!"
What makes Google so rich/successful... venture capitalists/investors or advertising... my guess is they make jack ***** from advertising. Maybe a few million... but not billions...
what's the point
safari and chrome use webkit. so what's the point? google is evil. apple is evil, yeah so what's the point.
nice to have another browser, even if i don't care at all.
safari and chrome use webkit. so what's the point? google is evil. apple is evil, yeah so what's the point.
nice to have another browser, even if i don't care at all.
And that guess would be wrong, they did a 'disappointing' 5.7 Billion in revenue last quarter of 2008, bringing the total revenue to 21.7 billion. The vast majority of that from advertising, no venture capitalists involved.
Unlike other mediums where advertisers deal individually with networks or publishers, Google is a one stop shop for advertising anywhere on the internet.
For good or evil, when it comes to internet advertising Google has it all wrapped up.