Google Chrome

It's clearly beta software, this is especially true on sites where deeper functions are only accessible when logged in. Testing of course would slump in those areas compared to other sites (judging by how the comic suggested they did much of their testing). With that said I just love the performance. It's incredibly snappy and even so with many tabs open doing relatively demanding tasks such as watching an HD stream, streaming audio, and viewing a large picture gallery at the same time.

I must say though, once plug in support starts to show up I could be switching. I'd really like to see ad block in some form show up and especially a plug in similar to Firefox's Gmail notifier. All the other areas are there for the most part to fit my needs and demands. I'm very impressed with it at this state.

I used to use gmail notifier, but then I started using Digsby because it can check my hotmail and facebook notifications as well. It's a messaging client, but you can set it up strictly to notify you of your webmail accounts.
 
I'm not sure wether this has been already mentioned here (just woke up :p ) but anyway
When you install the browser, you at the same time accept that Google has the rights to use, modify, copy and publish anything you write/publish/whatever using their Chrome browser.
And that of course includes using what ever you do and write on it to send the information to their affiliates for marketing purposes etc

In finnish:
http://www.itviikko.fi/tietoturva/2008/09/03/googlen-selain-vie-oikeutesi/200822886/7?rss=8

The info is quite surely available in english too somewhere
 
I'm not sure wether this has been already mentioned here (just woke up :p ) but anyway
When you install the browser, you at the same time accept that Google has the rights to use, modify, copy and publish anything you write/publish/whatever using their Chrome browser.
And that of course includes using what ever you do and write on it to send the information to their affiliates for marketing purposes etc

Same in Danish. You maintain the copyright, but Google can use anything as they please. The sharing of data with third parties, - without specifying what third parties constitutes, is also pretty scary.

They can essentially take any private email, document, whatever and use in any way they see fit.

Cheers
 
I'm not sure wether this has been already mentioned here (just woke up :p ) but anyway
When you install the browser, you at the same time accept that Google has the rights to use, modify, copy and publish anything you write/publish/whatever using their Chrome browser.
And that of course includes using what ever you do and write on it to send the information to their affiliates for marketing purposes etc

In finnish:
http://www.itviikko.fi/tietoturva/2008/09/03/googlen-selain-vie-oikeutesi/200822886/7?rss=8

The info is quite surely available in english too somewhere


This is the english "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."

I'm not sure how they define services, but I'm pretty sure they don't mean the web browser itself. Also, they cannot publish your emails because it would be against the terms of service for your email. There are still probably issues with this, but don't think google has the right to start copy pasting your emails all over the internet.
 
They can essentially take any private email, document, whatever and use in any way they see fit.

Cheers

I do not believe that is true at all. Your mail has its own terms of service agreement which should protect your right to privacy. Google cannot override that, and state that in the TOS for Chrome.
 
Hmmm ... okay I amend my statement, once there are mouse gestures and no-script and the source code has been trawled for "Call Home" features and there is an independent distribution without Google's obnixious EULA I'll try it out.

For a company who doesn't want to be evil they sure write a mean license ...
 
I'm not sure how they define services, but I'm pretty sure they don't mean the web browser itself.
Well I don't know what they mean to do with the license, but in actuality it does refer to the web browser itself :
"Your use of Google’s products, software, services and websites (referred to collectively as the “Services” in this document and excluding any services provided to you by Google under a separate written agreement)"
 
Ok, something is definately weird. I tried to play a Flash game (Fantastic Contraption) and the browser constantly freezes for a couple of seconds. According to the Task Manager, it's not even the Flash Plug-in, which didn't take more than ~70% CPU load. Every few seconds the Flash CPU load drops to zero while the "Browser" CPU load shoots up to 100% and that's when the freezes occur.

I don't know. Maybe Chrome doesn't like single-core CPUs. In its current state, it's unusable for me, at least on my notebook. I mean, ok, browsing porn seems to work fine and doesn't leave any traces so I guess it's worth keeping installed. If they fix the glitches and make it a bit more customizable I might have another look.
 
Well I don't know what they mean to do with the license, but in actuality it does refer to the web browser itself :

Interesting. I'm curious about "call home" features as well. I still don't think they can legally read your emails, but it might be an issue for uploading pictures etc.
 
As a developer, I think Google missed the boat with Chrome: they could at least have extended JavaScript with a real object model, types and persistent local objects, increase the Canvas functionality and allowed you to mix drawing and controls. And add better relative positioning control to that.

I would really want to use all of that when making webapps.
 
As a developer, I think Google missed the boat with Chrome: they could at least have extended JavaScript with a real object model, types and persistent local objects, increase the Canvas functionality and allowed you to mix drawing and controls. And add better relative positioning control to that.

I would really want to use all of that when making webapps.

But that's the difference of making the browser standards compliant and writing new standards, no?
 
But that's the difference of making the browser standards compliant and writing new standards, no?
Yes, it's a gray area. I rather have a standards compliant one than one that isn't but has extras.

But, when everyone simply makes their browser compliant, no new developments take place. And webapps are really a great pain to make, in just about any area.

So, I would love it if Google made one that is W3C compliant, but offered those yummie extras at the same time. Like how OpenGL does/did it with extensions.
 
Chrome seems to work fine for me. One annoyance though is that continuous scrolling using the middle mouse button doesn't work, and I tend to use that a lot.
 
http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/09/03/google-chrome-out-for-one-day-already-reasons-to-avoid

Article said:
The first, is the popular "carpet bomb" vulnerability that still exists within Chrome, as pointed out on our forums by our member matessim. This vulnerability allows malicious websites to drive by download and execute programs on your machine. Our visitors may remember the uproar that this same vulnerability caused for Safari users, and that Apple patched the carpet-bombing issue with Safari v3.1.2. Chrome is vulnerable to this exploit because it is based on the same engine, WebKit 525.13, and Google did not patch or update the engine before releasing the software.

Emphasis mine.
 
Back
Top