Chrome beta today

[NogDog]

For those of you who like to be on the bleeding edge of the browser wars, Google has announced (http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-google2-2008sep02,1,2493823.story) they will be releasing a beta version of Chrome for Windows today.

[rulian]

yeah I was just reading up on it, I went on but couldnt find a dl link anywhere I take it I have to wait a bit longer

[NogDog]

Download link (http://www.google.com/chrome/)

[NogDog]

Already submitted my first bug report: it won't scroll up via my notebook's touchpad input, it will only scroll down.

[nrg_alpha]

Ah, thanks for the link. I was looking for that ;)
Going to install and give it a whirl.. but something tells me not to get my hopes high on this browser.

[rulian]

wow, it needs some major tune ups already.
But it is handling some of my JS better then or equal to FF
Let see what happens but right now it needs some major tune ups, I do like their developer toolkit it shows you resources it's good, it also does render fast
PNG support is also lacking

[nrg_alpha]

wow, it needs some major tune ups already.
But it is handling some of my JS better then or equal to FF
Let see what happens but right now it needs some major tune ups, I do like their developer toolkit it shows you resources it's good, it also does render fast
PNG support is also lacking

As far as JS is concerned, nobdy pushes it like Safari.. Javsscript simply screams on Safari.

I feel that the browser is too minimalistic.. looks nice and simple and clean (which is their goal evidently).. but for it's simplistic use, I feel Opera 9.52 is faster. Granted, I think Chrome is a Beta.. so who knows.. mabey it will be faster when it reached RC stage.

As for PNG, it does support it. My website (http://www.olsenportfolio.com/v2/index.php) is build using PNG panels (the background can be seen tiling beneath it), and it seems to display just nicely.

[rulian]

mine it had some trouble when I loaded my website with PNG bg's, put the browser to the background, came back to it a few minutes later and my pngs were all opaque

[dougal85]

I love this browser! It's clean and its super fast.

It's faster than safari at JavaScript. The V8 JavaScript virtual machine is nice!

Just to back that up, there are plenty of comparisons on the web but this one looks pretty good. http://timepedia.blogspot.com/2008/09/google-chrome-smokes-competition-on.html

Seems that FF 3.1 with the new JIT engine is just about matching Safari. but in terms of speed, Chrome looks to be way ahead just now...

[NogDog]

It's based on the same engine as Safari, so I would expect it to have similar performance.

Some food for thought, though:

Section 11.1 of the EULA:11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.
Sort of makes you wonder what sort of info they might be gathering on your web surfing, if they can view and publish any web page you visit (your online bank statement?), etc. While I'm sure they'll say they'd never do that, how can we be sure?

Anyway, until I hear more about this aspect, I won't be using Chrome for private purposes until I see satisfactory evidence that what the above section seems to say is not what they mean. (The Firefox EULA (http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/legal/eula/firefox-en.html) has no such clause in it.)

[dougal85]

It's based on the same engine as Safari, so I would expect it to have similar performance.

It's got a totally different JavaScript engine. It uses V8

http://code.google.com/p/v8/

[nrg_alpha]

So I decided to test Chrome Beta using acid test 3 (http://acid3.acidtests.org/). You know.. just for the hell of it.. see where this browser stands with regards to what web developers / designers want out of browsers...

Oh? What's that, Chrome? Page is down or cannot be found? Every single time I try? Even when all the other browsers got the page on the first shot? Well.. ain't that something? Thankfully, there is a link to try out the cached version.

Chrome fell short (only managing %58.. but then again, FireFox 3.0.1 fell short at %56!).
Chrome's more established cousin (a.k.a Safari [in my case...windows version]) faired better (%72). The browser that so far has performed the best was Opera 9.52 (at %78). On all tests, I had scripting / javascripting enabled. (Opera didn't have Java though..so I could not enable that one). IE 8 Beta 2 faired the worst by a long shot (%20).

Granted, with all this, Chrome is still in Beta.. I checked the limited amount of options out, and there was nothing listed about Java nor Javascript.

So I am curious if in the end once the stable Release Candidate of Chrome launches, if it will perform acid tests better than Safari. Chrome is fast, no doubt.. but I hope its developers didn't overlook the features web designers are looking for in a web brower.. so far though, so good.

[dougal85]

hmm I don't know what you did but I went to the link and it loaded fine. I also scored higher than you did too.

In my case it done better than Safari.

I think you might find some of the tests fail in a cached version. This would be because of cross-site scripting restrictions I guess.

I attached a screen dump

[nrg_alpha]

I just re-tried Chrome with acid test 3 link again (this time it loaded no problem) and scored %78! Wow.. not bad at all!

[nrg_alpha]

hmm I don't know what you did but I went to the link and it loaded fine. I also scored higher than you did too.

In my case it done better than Safari.

I think you might find some of the tests fail in a cached version. This would be because of cross-site scripting restrictions I guess.

I attached a screen dump

Well, it will fail if it isn't at %100 ;)
But I wasn't aware of lower success rates using cached versions.. so it worked the last time I did it.. score matched Safari EDIT(oops.. I meant Opera 9.52).. so for a Beta.. looking very good indeed.

[dougal85]

But I wasn't aware of lower success rates using cached versions.. so it worked the last time I did it.. score matched Safari.. so for a Beta.. looking very good indeed.

I just remember there being lots of huffing and puffing about IE8 when the beta's came out. The acid test worked for some people and not for others. It turned out it was only working properly on the site it was originally hosted on. This was due to some security features in cross-site code. I don't remember the details exactly but assume its connected.

[nrg_alpha]

I just remember there being lots of huffing and puffing about IE8 when the beta's came out. The acid test worked for some people and not for others. It turned out it was only working properly on the site it was originally hosted on. This was due to some security features in cross-site code. I don't remember the details exactly but assume its connected.

Well, I retested IE 8 Beta 2, and once again, it bombed in miserable fashion (again, sitting at %20). When I put IE 8 into 'Compatiblility View' mode (IE 7 simulation), it did even worse (%15)! Now since IE 8 Beta 2 overwrites previous versions on my harddrive (I no longer have the last stable release of IE 7), I cannot tell what that version's score would be.. but man.. IE is looking pretty freakin' rough about now (at least on my system).

I'm still sticking to FireFox and Opera for now.. but with Chrome entering the fray, I don't think Mircosoft is too happy in this department.. They better get their act together.. or their browser's market shares will continue to drop (which is perfectly fine by me!).

[dougal85]

To be honest, I don't rate the ACID test anyway. All it does it try out a few obscure things that are generally hard to do. If you pass the ACID test it doesn't mean you are compliant, it means you have implemented the rubbish needed for that test.

I actually think IE8 so far is a decent browser. I don't mind it.

[nrg_alpha]

Indeed, the acid test doesn't equal W3C compliance.. It's more of a 'wish list' that designers / developers would like to see in browsers more than anything else.

But from what I have been reading, apparently IE 8's final release is still going to be behind the likes of Firefox as far as W3C compliance is concerned. While it is shaping up to be better than any of it's earlier incarnations, I am steering clear of it. Chrome will add yet another option to people who prefer alternatives.. so hopefully, IE drops even more in usage.

I really don't like how MS sat on IE 6 for so long withouth remaining competitive.. You would think that given windows is their OS, they would have crafted the most compliant, sleekest, fastest and safest browser around... man they dropped the ball on that one! They deserve to drop out of the brower race entirely IMHO.

[dougal85]

I really don't like how MS sat on IE 6 for so long withouth remaining competitive..

Only because they have had no real competition. Fair enough other browsers might be more standard compliant etc etc but it doesn't matter what you can do if you don't control the market share.

You should see some of talks/articles by Chris Wilson (I can't find the specific one I'm looking for right now). He's the Platform Architect for Internet Explorer. It's interesting as he talks about the troubles they have with updating the worlds most popular browser. They need to be very careful about how they proceed and changing things can cause loads of trouble, hence having computability modes. You may not take this in since I'm guessing your not a MS fan but I think its quite interesting. I try to remain neutral.

Anyway, they are getting better slowly and MS seems to be slowly updating its development methods. Thats the biggest problem if you ask me, they are such a huge beast and still stuck with methods from 10 years ago (or more?).

[nrg_alpha]

Only because they have had no real competition. Fair enough other browsers might be more standard compliant etc etc but it doesn't matter what you can do if you don't control the market share.

It didn't take long for the competition to arrive though. MS should have responded as soon as others started arriving IMO. They sat nice and prettty like for a while (too long).. but the party of one is over.


You should see some of talks/articles by Chris Wilson (I can't find the specific one I'm looking for right now). He's the Platform Architect for Internet Explorer. It's interesting as he talks about the troubles they have with updating the worlds most popular browser. They need to be very careful about how they proceed and changing things can cause loads of trouble, hence having computability modes. You may not take this in since I'm guessing your not a MS fan but I think its quite interesting. I try to remain neutral.


There's no doubt in the need to be careful on how to upgrade.. but had they remained more aggressive, taken earlier initiatives and advanced IE 6 sooner, they may not have been in the boat they are now in. And yes, you're right.. I'm not an MS fan ;)


Anyway, they are getting better slowly and MS seems to be slowly updating its development methods. Thats the biggest problem if you ask me, they are such a huge beast and still stuck with methods from 10 years ago (or more?).

I agree.. they definately are improving (but are they improving because they want to, or because they have to? My money is the latter). And yes, they seem stuck to the past.. their OS alone is at its core archaic. Pretty indicative of how they operate in general it seems...

One thing is for certain no matter how you slice or dice it, it is undeniable that MS has made some very bad choices as of late... (Vista being a flop for perhaps a number of reasons, Xbox 360's $1 Billion (yes, that's billion with a b) red ring of death issue due to poor hardware designs (some suggesting MS rushed 360 out the door to beat PS3 to market), Zune trying to compete against iPod (or is that now iPhone?) and of course, let's not forget our beloved IE :)

If MS doesn't improve things, well.. as one business article mentioned (in an interview with famous economist Peter Drucker as to why the government was so concerned about MS being a monopoly), Peter basically didn't understand why the government was so concerned.. after all...all empires eventually collapse...

So in the spirit of this thread, I welcome Chrome with open arms :) The more quality browsers, the better IMO.

Move over IE.. the room just got a little more crowded.

[Weedpacket]

Ben Goodger was chief engineer on the Mozilla Firefox project, and now he's part of Chrome development. I wonder if there'll be any flow of tech between the two.

[NogDog]

The only reason any corporation does anything is to increase the size of the stockholders' dividends and/or increase the value of their shares.

Now, ask yourself how much IE affects Microsoft's stock dividends/prices. Since they do not sell IE as a separate product, there's certainly no direct income from it. It is part of a billable product, Windows; but how many people/corporations base their decision on buying an OS based on the browser? When is the last time you saw a Microsoft ad for Vista making a big deal out of the fact that it comes with IE7?

Frankly, I suspect the only reason they have not yet bought out Mozilla, Opera, or Safari and made that the default browser packaged with Windows is that they've painted themselves into a corner over the years with the close-coupling of IE with the OS, and there are now too many corporate clients depending upon applications that use ActiveX controls and other features unique to IE for MS to make such a drastic change (or suffer the public relations hit such a move would likely cause - just think of the fun that supercilious punk in the Apple ads would have with that ;) ).

[rulian]

Yup Microsoft is suffering from self defeat, but Apple is also getting full of itself
Yes Apple, your cooler then PC, but your also 4x more expensive.
I think in the Browser/ OS wars, function still reigns over form. That is why microsoft failed when it simply made vista look better but not work better (IMO simply rid vista of window's defender and your much better off)

[nrg_alpha]

Yup Microsoft is suffering from self defeat, but Apple is also getting full of itself
Yes Apple, your cooler then PC, but your also 4x more expensive.
I think in the Browser/ OS wars, function still reigns over form. That is why microsoft failed when it simply made vista look better but not work better (IMO simply rid vista of window's defender and your much better off)

Oh but wait.. once the ads with Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Gates hits the airwaves (and it only costs $10 Million for Mr. Seinfeld's services), MS's deteriorating image will be magically restored!

I know my next comp is an iMac. Sadly, I still have some apps that use windows, so it seems I'll still have to support MS to some degree.. :glare:

[NogDog]

Apparently Google used a generic EULA, and have since changed it, omitting most of section 11 except for one short paragraph. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chrome-eula-controversy-our-bad-well-change-it.html

As stated in the EULA (http://www.google.com/chrome/eula.html) at the time of this writing:
...
11. Content license from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.

12. Software updates
...
Off to update my blog now....

[nrg_alpha]

Nog, when I tried to post a comment on your site, I hadn't realized that I had to register with WordPress to do so. So I registered, and after 15 minutes, still no password emailed to me.. so I'll post here instead.

In your 'Google Chrome Beta' article, I came across the last paragraph...

"they will have to convince me that they won't be adding any obtrusive Google advertisements to content and other marketing mechanisms that would get in my way of just viewing the desired web content."

It's funny you should mention that.. I came across a link last night discussing Google's Chrome and how it can affect online advertising:

http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/google/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=210300377

The article basically discusses the potential impact of online advertising should the web users en-mass widely adopt Chrome. Apparently, Chrome does 'ad concealement' as opposed to ad blocking.. which translates into Chrome minimizing ads so they are not in plain sight for the user. The result is that since those ads are actually loaded, it's still billable towards advertisers.

Obviously there's more info in the link.. I found it quite interesting... I'm more curious to see how Chrome and online advertising pans out in the long run.

[NogDog]

Nog, when I tried to post a comment on your site, I hadn't realized that I had to register with WordPress to do so.
The registration will only be on my site, not with the WordPress site. Maybe I should see if I can alter that registration page to make it look like it's for my site and not theirs?

Anyway, I've had literally over 1000 spam comment posting attempts over the last 3 days. I activated the Akismet plug-in which stops them from showing up on the blog, but not from being processed and saved in the DB (and I still have to go in once in awhile and delete them, hoping no valid comments are being lost accidentally - I don't have the patience to sift through a couple hundred posts to look for them); so I turned on the "must register to comment" option. I may turn it off again in a few days in the hopes that their robots have given up on my site, but don't hold your breath.

[dougal85]

This thread is going waaay off the beaten path. Nevermind...


NogDog, Why not add a captcha plugin or something?

[nrg_alpha]

The registration will only be on my site, not with the WordPress site. Maybe I should see if I can alter that registration page to make it look like it's for my site and not theirs?

Ok, well what I have done is in the right-side menu, you have a section named 'Meta' and within that, there is a register link. I clicked this link which brought me here:

http://www.charles-reace.com/blog/wp-login.php?action=register

So it is within you site, but has the wordpress logo.. so I registered at this point (entered my desired username and email).. Haven't heard from anybody since lol

Am I using the wrong registration system? I checked the login within this Meta section, and it too seems to involve wordpress within the confines of your site..

...
I don't have the patience to sift through a couple hundred posts to look for them); so I turned on the "must register to comment" option. I may turn it off again in a few days in the hopes that their robots have given up on my site, but don't hold your breath.

I wouldn't bother turning it off if you are getting that heavily bombarded... not worth the hassle IMO. Just let me know if I am going about this whole registration thing wrong ;)

[nrg_alpha]

This thread is going waaay off the beaten path. Nevermind...


Meh.. this whole forum (Echo Lounge) is off the beaten path ;)
I would have posted my last chrome post in Nog's site (which I think the link has *some* relevance to Chrome beta..) so while this thread has twisted in odd directions (talk of MS and IE), I'm done with that now and focusing on Chrome again. :D

As a side note, I am using Chrome more and more and getting quite attached I must confess.. I don't use it for online banking or such.. but other than that, it feels quite stable.. quite solid (then again, I'm not trying to see how many ways I can break the thing).

Spell checker works in that it displaes your typical red squiggly lines... but as of this Beta, right clicking does not offer suggestive words.. (perhaps Beta 2?) Speaking of which, anyone know when that comes out?

[NogDog]

This thread is going waaay off the beaten path. Nevermind...


NogDog, Why not add a captcha plugin or something?
I hate captcha's, and most of them can be defeated. Akismet appears to do a fine job of filtering out the spam, though.

Ok, well what I have done is in the right-side menu, you have a section named 'Meta' and within that, there is a register link. I clicked this link...

There's no confirmation email -- once you submit it you are registered, at least unless/until the spambots start registering and I have to toggle the user registration confirmation feature. :rolleyes: (I checked the admin pages and you show up as a registered user.)

Oh, and as originator of this thread, I hereby grant permission to wander as far off topic as desired. Of course, by posting anything in this thread, you give me "a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit." ;)

[nrg_alpha]

There's no confirmation email -- once you submit it you are registered, at least unless/until the spambots start registering and I have to toggle the user registration confirmation feature. :rolleyes: (I checked the admin pages and you show up as a registered user.)

But I didn't get a password emailed to me (do I not need one for login purposes?) Glad to know I'm in the system though ;)


Of course, by posting anything in this thread, you give me "a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit." ;)

lol.. that will be THE Google humour from here on out... I can feel it. :)

[NogDog]

But I didn't get a password emailed to me...

Ah, shoot, I forgot about that part. Did you check your spam folder? If it's not there, email me and I'll reset the password.

[pedro28]

I love all your informations.