Author Topic: Google Chrome -- a new browser coming (in beta) in a few hours (Read 237749 times)

mwang · « **Reply #25 on:** September 02, 2008, 10:45 AM »

I'm afraid I disagree with mouser on this one. I think Google set its goal higher than simply keeping its throne in the search (and search ads) field. Google wants to take the lead in the cloud computing arena, IMHO, and it wants its vast array of current and future services to succeed.

Let's face it, modern browsers (FF, Opera and IE) have pretty good performance already in terms of rendering regular web pages. And yet for web2.0 and cloud computing services to effectively compete with their desktop brethren, performance remains an issue.

I think Google is getting impatient about browsers' development in this regard, and for certain it doesn't want Microsoft to take the lead. The V8 thing is a hint. Google wants better performance with javascript, and more.

By making Google Chrome open source, it welcome others to borrow its code. If that means its key technologies becoming de facto industry standard, and better performance -- probably followed by greater market share -- for its various cloud computing services, it's all the merrier for Google.

Just my 2 cents, of course. We never know until it's really out there.

Lutz_ · « **Reply #26 on:** September 02, 2008, 10:49 AM »

Google has ambitious goals wit their online-apps. They simply needed a better, more stable and faster, browser for the AJAX universe.

mwang · « **Reply #27 on:** September 02, 2008, 10:58 AM »

It's Tuesday and still nothing. no download yet of this browser.
I've heard now it's going to be Wednesday.
-cmpm (September 02, 2008, 10:38 AM)

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome) says:

The beta for the Windows version is due to be released September 2, 2008. Google will host a press conference that day at 18:00 UTC (11:00 am PDT).

The official announcement was scheduled for September 3, 2008 ...

I don't know their source of information, though.

fenixproductions · « **Reply #28 on:** September 02, 2008, 10:59 AM »

I will happily welcome this browser because of few reasons which are important to me: limits of rendering engines and usability issues.

Currently you can have to fair enough engines on Windows: Presto (Opera) and Gecko (Firefox). We can all forget about Trident, like it forgot about standards. Safari for Win (WebKit) is just a joke for everyone. I've found IE more usable for me.

When it comes to think about first two mentioned I cannot use them for 100% of my browsing time. I have many problems with Google apps and some movies in the Internet under Opera. On the other side: Firefox is big slug for me. Even if I try to optimize it via strange settings, it is still slower then Opera. Unfortunately: other web browsers use already mentioned engines because of its policies (KMeleon) or because of being just addons (Maxthon).

I've learnt to live with pros and cons of each browser and vary their use on needed content but sometimes I would like to have another way to fight with.

Maybe GBrowser (

) will be an answer, maybe - not. Time will show.

kartal · « **Reply #29 on:** September 02, 2008, 11:26 AM »

I think that company like google would have short and long term goals. The short term goal is coming up with a browser that serves better web apps. In the mid run probably they will try to turn this in to some form of operating system thus being the ultimate ms killer. And in the long run they just want people to wake up with google , go to bed with google.

I will keep myself out of this game.

Lutz_ · « **Reply #30 on:** September 02, 2008, 01:34 PM »

The Chrome press conference is running :

http://news.cnet.com..._109-10030035-2.html

Download will be available at noon pacific time.

allen · « **Reply #31 on:** September 02, 2008, 01:58 PM »

Google Chrome download is live! http://www.google.com/chrome

sri · « **Reply #32 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:18 PM »

Chrome doesn't like me. No web page loads for me $:-\$

allen · « **Reply #33 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:23 PM »

Ouch...

I'm having success with it. I dare say it's the fastest I've seen the web.

mnemonic · « **Reply #34 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:25 PM »

First impressions:

It's *very* quick and loads in under a second (Vista on a 2.20GHz Dual Core).
Page loads are very quick too
Creating an application shortcut for GMail in my start menu is working very well - far better than in Prism
Nice, clean interface

Looking pretty good so far

sri · « **Reply #35 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:26 PM »

Is this true?

"If I'm not wrong Chrome is a bigger memory guzzler than FF!!"

http://twitter.com/n...y/statuses/907157174
http://twitter.com/n...y/statuses/907161826

Dirhael · « **Reply #36 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:26 PM »

I kind of like it, though I think the blue color used in the interface is a bit distracting (though I found the correct theme DLL to reshack, so I'll play with that later). It feels very fast indeed and once I had set ad-muncher to strip advertising from pages it feels no slower than Opera

The animations when you open/close tabs makes it feel very smooth, though at the same time it does look a little like many of the Adobe AIR/Flash applications that have popped up recently. The built-in task manager to handle tabs is a very nice touch (hit SHIFT+ESC to bring it up), especially if you follow the "stuff for nerds" link in the dialog that pops up. The installer allowed me to import favourites from Firefox and IE, but not Opera. The functionality to allow webpages to look/function more like standalone applications is not bad, though at all times it still feels just like a very simplified browser window. Need to play more with it to see if there's any advantages to using this function.

What I don't like is that there are hardly anything you can configure, I fear the lack of auto-scrolling (middle-click to scroll) will drive me nuts sooner rather than later and the lack of mouse gestures is perhaps even worse (though for now you could configure and use StrokeIt as a workaround). Now to play some more...

jgpaiva · « **Reply #37 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:30 PM »

I dare say it's the fastest I've seen the web.
-allen (September 02, 2008, 02:23 PM)

Have you looked at the taskmanager?

I usually have 13 tabs open in Opera, and I only use 3 or 4 (the other ones are just waiting for my attention, usually), I think that having a process for tab might be a bit over the edge.
Still, I have to agree with you: great speed, both opening pages as well as opening/closing tabs.
~~I really hate the fact that it doesn't allow me to change the search to the regular google with 100 results, though.~~ I stand corrected, great search manager.
I also love the fact that it takes very little screenspace, even though I don't exactly "love" the fact that they have removed the title bar of the application.
[edit]
Bah, just like ff, it doesn't like my logitech mouse's back/forth button...
[/edit]

Dirhael · « **Reply #38 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:33 PM »

Is this true?

"If I'm not wrong Chrome is a bigger memory guzzler than FF!!"

http://twitter.com/n...y/statuses/907157174
http://twitter.com/n...y/statuses/907161826
-sri (September 02, 2008, 02:26 PM)

Haven't had time to compare with Firefox, but here's a comparison screen of Opera and Chrome started empty and opened the same exact 5 pages which all contain either a lot of images or javascripts.

EDIT: You need to subtract the memory used by the "about memory" tab in Chrome though.

mnemonic · « **Reply #39 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:35 PM »

I fear the lack of auto-scrolling (middle-click to scroll) will drive me nuts sooner rather than later
-Dirhael (September 02, 2008, 02:26 PM)

I think there's something broken here. Using the "scrolly-thing" on the side of my laptop's trackpad allows me to scroll down, but not up...

fenixproductions · « **Reply #40 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:43 PM »

Just installed and already pissed.

Looks like it went into:
"C:\Documents and Settings\<USER>\Local settings\Application data\Google\Chrome\Application\chrome.exe"
WTF?

1st: You can only get downloader from Google's site.
2nd: No option to specify where should it be installed.
3rd: Where is bookmarks manager?

jgpaiva · « **Reply #41 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:44 PM »

dirhael: thanks for the pointer to the memory page!
I have 13 tabs open in Opera and Chrome, and one of them is Gmail (and opera has been open for 2 days

), and Chrome is using 136mb vs the 266 of Opera.

jgpaiva · « **Reply #42 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:45 PM »

Looks like it went into:
"C:\Documents and Settings\<USER>\Local settings\Application data\Google\Chrome\Application\chrome.exe"
WTF?
-fenixproductions (September 02, 2008, 02:43 PM)

Agreed. I'm on vista, and it's on C:\Users\USER\AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\. What's up with that? What a stupid idea.

Rover · « **Reply #43 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:47 PM »

Is this true?

"If I'm not wrong Chrome is a bigger memory guzzler than FF!!"

http://twitter.com/n...y/statuses/907157174
http://twitter.com/n...y/statuses/907161826
-sri (September 02, 2008, 02:26 PM)

What I'm seeing is that it does use more RAM than FF 3.0.1. However, it is currently an early beta, they might tighten the memory in GA.

The other reason is the design. I would expect Chrome to use more RAM and I'm ok with that given the isolation of tabs, javascript, etc.

So far, I thinks I likes it.

Grorgy · « **Reply #44 on:** September 02, 2008, 02:51 PM »

It also installs a 'google updater' to run at windows startup, got enough starting already without google jumping in!

fenixproductions · « **Reply #45 on:** September 02, 2008, 03:00 PM »

2jgpaiva
I have almost all of my software categorized in my Program Files folder. each app goes to i.e. archive / system / tools/ etc. BUT...

Google Earth created Google directory in PF. Sketchup went there automatically without option to change it. Browser... went into Docs&Setts. I understand some user accounts restrictions. I understand that apps settings should be stored inside user's folders. I don't understand why whole app went there. It's against any kind of logic. It only creates unnecessary mess. Executables should be placed under PF from where less privileged users can only read.

I can't even imagine what will happen when I will try to access Google's browser from different account. Will it copy itself to next folder? Or perhaps will give other users an access to my folders under D&S because an EXE is there? Will it (at least) give access error or will not find an app?

Once again I am disappointed by big name giving "sick" apps (Desktops previously gave similar feeling).

ljbirns · « **Reply #46 on:** September 02, 2008, 03:33 PM »

Here is Walt Mossberg's take from the WSJ

http://online.wsj.co...hps_us_editors_picks

Lew

edit by jgpaiva: fixed url

Ehtyar · « **Reply #47 on:** September 02, 2008, 03:59 PM »

Like fenixproductions, I just installed and I'm already pissed:
1. You can only get download from google's website.
2. Installer attempts to acquire SeDebugPrivilige.
3. Attempts to install autorun for google updater.
4. Has 3 levels of extraction/installation after download.
5. Uses non-standard appdata folder for installation.
6. Between the 3 instances it apparently needs to load youtube, it's using just over 50mb of memory, which is 15 more than baseline Firefox 3 needs for the same.

Ehtyar.

dantheman · « **Reply #48 on:** September 02, 2008, 04:01 PM »

Confronted to FF3, it simply pales out.

No extensions (can't live without Adblock and Firegestures!).
Poor bookmarking options (no keywords).

Not for me.

Grorgy · « **Reply #49 on:** September 02, 2008, 04:04 PM »

Its worth watching though i think, its new, and still a beta (yeah I know almost all googles stuff is lol) so it may improve in a few more releases and the bugs and complaints dealt with.