Is it true about Chrome?

fletchsod

Well, everyone have preferences to using a web site or a web application. I like the web site method better. I understand the Chrome is in beta. So, have anyone tried it and how did it go? Opinion or comments on Chrome?

Geoff Gariepy

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.

Howard Richards

Sweet: "Message automatically removed" I guess he got tagged as Abuse enough to hit the automated delete

'Howard

martin_hughes

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

Top Secret Plan for World Domination

cpkilekofp

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.

cpkilekofp

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.

Arterion

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.

nilotic

BOT : I'd quite like to read an impartial precee of what Chrome is about, pls anyone got a good link?

I'm peculiar to myself, therefore I am.

T Mac Oz

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

Heywood

I agree. Web apps are crapola.