Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Google Chrome -- key reasons for its debut
tomos:
that's an interesting slant App, knowing me I'd end up just using chrome for gmail then, or just stick with thunderbird but that approach would obviously "gain" (there's another word there, press gang maybe) a lot of users who just wouldnt bother using other browsers
totally off-topic: just downloaded your my personal pest. thanks :D
zridling:
[app103]: The mere fact that it will never support my current OS is proof of that.
--- End quote ---
Which OS is that? They've already announced that they will release Linux and OSX versions after the Windows version is beta tested.
[app103]: So what is Chrome about? So far, it's about Javascript, and how fast it can run in a browser. Google has plans on creating stuff...websites... that will never work in any existing browser. It could be your webmail if you are a gmail user.... I hope you aren't too dependent on any Google service and running an OS that will never be supported by Chrome. You could end up finding yourself locked out of your account.
--- End quote ---
Google went to the trouble of rewriting Javascript, the programming language that underlies many webware apps. According to online Javascript speed tests, Google’s version is twice as fast as IE7’s. The Webkit rendering engine is also open source. And yes, Google is building a platform for running the software of the future, thereby de-emphasizing Windows and other operating systems. This opens rather than restricts data sharing. Google will not lock you in. When you're ready to switch, you can take your data with you. Can't say the same for you-know-who. The fact that it is open source means its enhancements can be used (okay, Microsoft can't) to make other browsers faster. Which, for Google, means their ads are delivered faster. No one is selling a browser, so let's hope the ones with the best features and performance wins the largest share of the market, right?
[app103]: I only hope Google gets what Microsoft got for all the same crazy crap. Remember MSJVM, ActiveX, JScript, VBScript, and the rest? It all created a browser nightmare and a lot of browser incompatibility with sites designed just for IE.
--- End quote ---
Chrome uses open (W3C) standards and is open source. The whole point of open standards for developers is a write-once run anywhere code. Otherwise, you end up rewriting and endlessly futzing for what we had with IE, when it had a 90+% share of the browser market.
Most browsers were built over a decade ago. Since then, things have changed. The web certainly has. As Google’s blog puts it, "We realized that the Web had evolved from mainly simple text pages to rich, interactive applications and that we needed to completely rethink the browser." Check out the Chrome beta if you get a chance -- it's definitely stripped-down: no status bar, no menu bar, and only a single toolbar (for bookmarks). Chrome is minimalist in the extreme.
Two security features make it attractive for many: (1) each tab runs in its own “sandbox,” so that if there’s nasty spyware-type software running on one website, it has no access to the rest of your computer, or even the other tabs; and (2) Incognito mode, in which no cookies, passwords or cache files are saved, and the browser’s history list records no trace of your activity.
f0dder:
app103: as a user of old&slow machines, you should've appreciated MSJVM... it performs helluvalot better than sun's crap. The fact that MS did some somewhat dirty practices with it of course is bad, but the whole lawsuit thing sucks because in the end we're stuck with a single sub-par JVM.
I hope Google is following the ECMA standard for it's JavaScript engine. If they've done that, and not acheived their speed gains by extensions, then it's a kick-ass thing: (supposedly) 10x faster than the JS engine currently in FireFox, and open-source? Great work! (and done by a Danish team, btw :))
justice:
They're actually hoping other browsers will implement their javascript improvements to create a more equal level playing field, and provide the support to do so. So this should be all good.
f0dder:
They're actually hoping other browsers will implement their javascript improvements to create a more equal level playing field, and provide the support to do so. So this should be all good.-justice (September 04, 2008, 05:04 AM)
--- End quote ---
"JavaScript improvements" as in extensions (okayish) or deviance from the ECMA standard (bad!)? Or simply use their JSVM/JIT?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version