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.
Google to Launch Webkit Based Web Browser Called 'Chrome'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
wututalkinboutwillis!?
Is it not slated to be released on beta September the Second of Two thousand and eight?! that would make it TODAY, yes today!!! unless they are just getting to the office in Seattle, it's around 11 here in the East coast....
wututalkinboutwillis!?
Is it not slated to be released on beta September the Second of Two thousand and eight?! that would make it TODAY, yes today!!! unless they are just getting to the office in Seattle, it's around 11 here in the East coast....
well, google is based in West Coast, and there are more than enough time...
Anyway, its a browser, beta version, its exciting, but no need to over the top...
I know firefox 4 is planned to be multi-threading, I know it would be beneficial, but I dont know how much benefit it would bring, compare to its downside. It would be very nice to see how google does it.
There is probably no contest when firefox addons are in the mix. But I would really be interested to test the default configurations. Hopefully Google won't disappoint me
haven't have any real browser test for a long time..........Webkit itself came out of Apple. A number of ex-Apple people will be working on this project.
It's not out until ~18:00 GMT I read somewhere (whatever that works out to where you are).
For those who want to run it on parallels to try it, haha .. (I WANt mAC NOW!) they can get 38% off parallels today through mac app a day or mac zot or whatever that site is.
I'm not sure if Google should do this, because making a web browser both standards-compliant (e.g., pass the latest version of the Acid compatibility test) and be able to read most commercial web sites is not trivial undertaking, as the Mozilla team found out during the development of Firefox 3.0.
With Firefox 3.1 now in advanced development with its much-improved Javascript rendering engine, why clutter up the screen and disk space with another web browser?
With Firefox 3.1 now in advanced development with its much-improved Javascript rendering engine, why clutter up the screen and disk space with another web browser?
Did you read the comic strip?
Google have a distinct advantage, they have a ranked index of (probably) the entire internet. They don't have to release betas for users to test (well they do, but perhaps not in the traditional sense). New builds can be tested against millions of high-hit/profile sites in no time to ensure things look right. I obviously don't understand in detail how it all works, but I imagine it does.
This is such a hugely important project for Google, arguably the most important yet outside of Search.
To millions Google is the internet, the browser being the window to that means they know they can't mess up.
Google have some great minds, I'm sure many have been at work on this. I can't see us being disappointed.
With Firefox 3.1 now in advanced development with its much-improved Javascript rendering engine, why clutter up the screen and disk space with another web browser?
With Safari being just about the same in speed with Firefox and a greater score on the Acid 3 test why clutter my disk space with Firefox.
If you read the comic there are a lot of positive things that can come out of this and it looks like it will greatly benefit the web.
The comic is much more readable (higher rez) here... It's a real pain to try to read the (low rez) comic via the link in the original MacRumors article.
They can RUN their new browser against millions of high-hit/profile sites but but how long would it take to LOOK at each page and decide if it worked. Even if you put 100 employees on the task full time each of them would have to look at tens of thousands of pages. I don't think Google's index will help them much.
Looks really cool, I might use this for everyday browsing if its as good as that comic makes it out to be!
See pages 9 through 11
Granted this won't be the human test but it a big plus for Chrome.
Somehow they must have developed some way to tell if the page is displaying properly, otherwise what would be the point in running new builds through automated tests against millions of pages?
Anywho, we'll all find out soon enough
The Dark Side
Google is simply doing this because new IE 8 messes with Adwords. Microsoft of course did this simply to mess with google.
Google is simply doing this because new IE 8 messes with Adwords. Microsoft of course did this simply to mess with google.
Thankyou Google -not
As a web developer I was only thinking the other day how testing everything on IE6, IE7, Safari (Mac and PC), Firefox 2 (Mac and PC) and Firefox 3 (Mac and PC) was becoming so routine, that what would really be cool is yet another browser platform to test for. If this is going to spur innovation I'd really like to know how that works when a developer's time is increasingly given over to testing. What we need is for all the browsers to standardize on a common rendering engine so that incompatibilities in how CSS and HTML are interpreted become a thing of the past. Then we can start to expand the APIs. Does no-one else see that this is just a cynical land-grab by Google. If they can own the web apis, they can edge their competitors out. Simple as that. Nothing to do with innovation. That is just big company marketing drivel.
As a web developer I was only thinking the other day how testing everything on IE6, IE7, Safari (Mac and PC), Firefox 2 (Mac and PC) and Firefox 3 (Mac and PC) was becoming so routine, that what would really be cool is yet another browser platform to test for. If this is going to spur innovation I'd really like to know how that works when a developer's time is increasingly given over to testing. What we need is for all the browsers to standardize on a common rendering engine so that incompatibilities in how CSS and HTML are interpreted become a thing of the past. Then we can start to expand the APIs. Does no-one else see that this is just a cynical land-grab by Google. If they can own the web apis, they can edge their competitors out. Simple as that. Nothing to do with innovation. That is just big company marketing drivel.
No. Waterproof prevents damage from water.
Fireproof prevents damage from fire
Theft-proof prevents damage (ie stealing) from thieves.
It goes to follow that future proof prevents damage from future, not stoping the future from happening.
Where can I read up more on this?
As a web developer I was only thinking the other day how testing everything on IE6, IE7, Safari (Mac and PC), Firefox 2 (Mac and PC) and Firefox 3 (Mac and PC) was becoming so routine, that what would really be cool is yet another browser platform to test for. If this is going to spur innovation I'd really like to know how that works when a developer's time is increasingly given over to testing. What we need is for all the browsers to standardize on a common rendering engine so that incompatibilities in how CSS and HTML are interpreted become a thing of the past. Then we can start to expand the APIs. Does no-one else see that this is just a cynical land-grab by Google. If they can own the web apis, they can edge their competitors out. Simple as that. Nothing to do with innovation. That is just big company marketing drivel.
Well they are using the webkit engine, just like Safari. So they are using a standard engine that seems to be surpassing Gecko as the standard web rendering engine...Isn't that what you want?
Are you even a web designer?
This is golden for web designers. Webkit's support for web standards is the best in the entire industry. Anything running Webkit is good for web designers. Anything running off the Gecko engine is great too. For this to be even remotely close to true Chrome would have to be using a new rendering engine -- which it is not.
Also, anything that puts more pressure on Microsoft to develop a better Internet Explorer is a good thing for everyone, including the poor bastards who still use the product.
(That would be you, right, WindowsGuy?
Seeing as how everything Microsoft makes is golden in your eyes?)
when can I expect to stop hearing the blatant lies like this here at MR?
best standard support is in Opera, 200% better than webkit and gecko.