Is it true about Chrome?
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Yes, that's right. google are marketing their new browser. Only, when they do it, I presume it's not evil.
It did start off evil with their "Everything you submit via Chrome belongs to us" EULA: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/03/google_chrome_eula_sucks/[^] But they later changed it, so a little less evil now.
They changed this part of the EULA. So now it's "not evil".
-
Paul Watson wrote:
I kept my reply to your ignorant comment civil, please keep your's.
Do yourself a favour: pull the stick out of your arse you pompous, self righteous wanker.
Winner of the 2008 Man Most Likely To Tell You To Sod Off Award
"pompous, self righteous wanker" Looks like you're looking in the mirror.
'Howard
-
I'm surprised to see Opera sat at the bottom of all these benchmarks. It seems like the fastest browser in practice. What is sure, is that unless every browser offers fast Javascript and everyone uses these browsers, we're still going to be constrained by the lowest common denominator. IE6 then.
Matt Dockerty
-
Paul Watson wrote:
I kept my reply to your ignorant comment civil, please keep your's.
Do yourself a favour: pull the stick out of your arse you pompous, self righteous wanker.
Winner of the 2008 Man Most Likely To Tell You To Sod Off Award
Who are you and what have you done to Martin?
-
"pompous, self righteous wanker" Looks like you're looking in the mirror.
'Howard
I wonder if he realised that this forum uses javascript (the drop down menus, form validation etc)? I have looked at chrome and I cant really see much difference. I am concerned about the browser's security however. Are there any comparison sites about yet? :confused:
**IA Computing Ltd - Neonlight
** -
I wonder if he realised that this forum uses javascript (the drop down menus, form validation etc)? I have looked at chrome and I cant really see much difference. I am concerned about the browser's security however. Are there any comparison sites about yet? :confused:
**IA Computing Ltd - Neonlight
**I looked at Chrome too. The only reason I could see for its existence is to extend the reach of Google At present they can only collect data when we use their sites. If they own the browser then they can collect data on EVERY site you visit.
'Howard
-
I looked at Chrome too. The only reason I could see for its existence is to extend the reach of Google At present they can only collect data when we use their sites. If they own the browser then they can collect data on EVERY site you visit.
'Howard
Judging by the recent argument they had over personal data in youtube. I am a little more comfortable with them holding information on what I do online. Doesn't Google already retain information based on searches, referrers and IP addresses? Apparently there are programs you can install that run random searches to anonymize your browsing habits? is such a thing available for chrome. I've forgotten what it was called.
**IA Computing Ltd - Neonlight
** -
Bigger bars are better or worse? (Is there an article detailing what was actually tested)
'--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
I kept my reply to your ignorant comment civil, please keep your's.
cheers, Paul M. Watson.
-
If the performance is that much better, it doesn't show up in casual use. I've been using Chrome since they made it available last week. I'm a Gmail user, and I do my fair share of surfing. It isn't much faster, if at all. The feature set is nice, but I'm already hankering for a couple of Firefox extensions that aren't here for Chrome yet. Foxmarks chief among them. I have had significant trouble viewing Flash video. Sometimes it just hangs the browser and doesn't work. I've seen numerous error messages about the Flash plugin having crashed. BTW, I'm using a cable modem that peaks at about 4MBit/sec (on a good day!) and have been running Chrome on both a Vista as well as an XP laptop. The Vista machine is a Compaq 8510W with the Intel Centrino and 4GB of Ram. So I'm fairly well equipped as far as hardware and connectivity go.
-
I wonder if he realised that this forum uses javascript (the drop down menus, form validation etc)? I have looked at chrome and I cant really see much difference. I am concerned about the browser's security however. Are there any comparison sites about yet? :confused:
**IA Computing Ltd - Neonlight
**Sweet: "Message automatically removed" I guess he got tagged as Abuse enough to hit the automated delete
'Howard
-
"pompous, self righteous wanker" Looks like you're looking in the mirror.
'Howard
I have no idea who you are, but your opinion is as worthless to me as you are.
Winner of the 2008 Man Most Likely To Tell You To Sod Off Award
-
I wonder if he realised that this forum uses javascript (the drop down menus, form validation etc)? I have looked at chrome and I cant really see much difference. I am concerned about the browser's security however. Are there any comparison sites about yet? :confused:
**IA Computing Ltd - Neonlight
**iacomp wrote:
I have looked at chrome and I cant really see much difference. I am concerned about the browser's security however.
Your concern seems well-founded. Code Project News last week had a link describing a security hole in Chrome, one that was fixed in the most recent copy of the Mac Webkit on which Chrome was based, but due to the fact that Google was using an earlier version of the Webkit the vulnerability was still present.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Amusingly, you're using a web app to discuss your feelings on the subject.
When does a web site become a web application?
Josh Gray wrote:
When does a web site become a web application?
When the page contains enough client-side code to make the web page look and feel like a desktop application, this is usually the point where it gets called a web application. A lot of web developers feel that this is an abuse of the web paradigm of pages that link to other pages; others feel that if you need that rich a feature set on the client, you should build it as a desktop application that queries the web for specific information. It's a heated debate in some circles, one that brings the hot-headed closed-minded individuals out of the stinking brush and into noisy visibility.
-
In a word, no. From what I understand, those benchmarks are specifically designed so that Chrome will score very highly in them. That said, Chrome's JS engine -- called V8 -- is very fast. Make no mistake. It might be a bit faster than Firefox and Safari. Of course it blows IE out of the water. Keep an eye out, though. Firefox 3.1 will feature a new JS engine called TraceMonkey which should put it in the lead. It's going to be an interesting competition, and I really can't wait to see who comes out ahead. The great thing it's probably going to be open source, unless the IE guys really work a miracle with IE8.
-
-
Mohammad Dayyan wrote:
Is it right ?
To some degree - it's marketing so it's best not to swallow it whole. JS up 'till now has been interpreted by browsers, Chrome includes a JIT compiler for it, thus the performance gains. Mozilla is also rolling out a JS JIT compiler it's calling TraceMonkey (someone else mentioned it in this thread somewhere) but it's still in beta so Google had a good excuse to leave it out of the benchmarking comparisons.
T-Mac-Oz
-
Not using "web apps" will help them get it done faster.
Winner of the 2008 Man Most Likely To Tell You To Sod Off Award
