Google Chrome

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.

There was an effort to do this, it was called Javascript 2, and it died in committee because the semantics would have broken the majority of existing web apps. Javascript is a late-bound language, and classes ala Actionscript add an early binding model which is compatible with the way web pages are loaded.

Secondly, they do have persistent local objects. Chrome includes Google Gears, and HTML5 will add persistent local storage.

Finally, if you want a scenegraph-style API, use SVG instead of Canvas. Canvas has no concept of "controls", it's a procedural, immediate mode, drawing API. It's like asking OpenGL to add Buttons, Trees, and Table widgets. It's just not relavent to the core API.
 
I would like to know how many downloads Google has had so far for Chrome. I just noticed there is a link to it on the front page of Google which I'm sure has generated a lot of traffic for it beyond the tech press doing massive coverage of it as well.
 
In my tests, Chrome stomps all over the state of the art competition, performance wise. Atleast 1.8x Firefox 3.1 and Safari 4. (don't even talk about the joke of IE, even IE8). It also used 1/2 the memory of Firefox 3.1. It's no wonder, since Chrome's V8 engine is done by the same guys who did Java's HotSpot JIT.

The per-tab and per-plugin process isolation is definately a step up in security and stability once they get the bugs shaken out, and I like the simplicity of the interface,

Google more than anyone else, has big, complex AJAX applications, like Gmail, Docs, etc and they need AJAX to run faster, especially if it is to hold off proprietary stuff like Flash and Silverlight from making more inroads.

Internet Explorer is being made increasingly a big joke by Firefox and WebKit (Safari and Chrome) IE8 did nothing to really to stop this, it's still missing alot of stuff, and still slower than the competition. I can't wait for the day when I no longer have to worry about supporting IE in my products, I waste so much time tracking down issues on that heaping pile of crap.

Here's hoping Google's weight can bite even more out of MS's browser marketshare.

I'm downloading Chrome now, but this is where I wish Google could've lent their engineering resources to the Gecko engine. Rather than potentially fragment the userbase even further, I think they could've helped solidify behind FF since it is open source.
 
In a manner of speaking, they've done just that. Chrome is also still open source after all. The Gecko and Firefox teams can take whatever they like from Chrome and implement that in their browsers also. By releasing their own browser, however, Google becomes less dependent on these two parties and can push technology forward in directions that suit them according to their own priorities.
 
I like having choices but right now I don't see any compelling reason to use Chrome. As an Opera/Safari/IE user I don't see a need for FF or Chrome. It's a great effort by Google and it will help make other browsers even better.
 
Google fund quite a lot of the FF development as far as I'm aware. If nothing else they now have a conflict of interests on their hands.
 
Google fund quite a lot of the FF development as far as I'm aware. If nothing else they now have a conflict of interests on their hands.

About 85% of Firefox development is funded by Google. But no, they don't have a true conflict of interests. In the top right hand corner of Firefox is a search bar that comes by default set to Google. I'm willing to bet it generates considerable revenue, not to mention Google's real goal with all of this is to hurt Microsoft and not Firefox.
 
By conflict of interest I meant ... in 2011 when the current agreement between Google and Mozilla expires, Google will have a choice to continue that funding, or not. I find it difficult to see that Google are doing Chrome just for fun, or because they think six browsers is better than five. I think they're doing it because they think Chrome deliver more Googloids to Google in the long-run than Firefox will. At some point Google will conclude that funding Firefox is in conflict with their push to advance Chrome. Then Mozilla will be looking for a new sugar daddy.

I suppose I meant conflicting interests rather than conflict of interest :)
 
A lot has to happen. Chrome could just end up being another product by Google to fad away during that time, or it could really take off and become huge. I think that's why Google went ahead and confirmed funding to Mozilla till 2011. The money spent on Mozilla is likely made back by the inclusion of being the default search engine and it protects their bases should Chrome fail to capture the market.
 
Honestly, I think Google will keep it's partnership going with Mozilla unless Chrome really destroys the Firefox userbase, which I don't think is going to happen. For Google, information is power. They will want to make sure Google continues to be the default search for Firefox so they can collect all of that wonderful search data.

I don't really see any conflict of interest.
 
There was an effort to do this, it was called Javascript 2, and it died in committee because the semantics would have broken the majority of existing web apps. Javascript is a late-bound language, and classes ala Actionscript add an early binding model which is compatible with the way web pages are loaded.
Yes, all improved standards submitted that I know of have died in the approval committee. That's why we need a big player to actually implement them.

And it isn't so hard, they can take one of the methods and keywords used now, and actually make them work (like prototypes), or (even better:) create a few new ones on top of it that simply inplement types and inheritance.

Secondly, they do have persistent local objects. Chrome includes Google Gears, and HTML5 will add persistent local storage.
Yes, I'm waiting eagerly for one of those to become mainstream, especially GG. Although installing a pluging is a big no-no for most large companies, and so only partially useable.

Finally, if you want a scenegraph-style API, use SVG instead of Canvas. Canvas has no concept of "controls", it's a procedural, immediate mode, drawing API. It's like asking OpenGL to add Buttons, Trees, and Table widgets. It's just not relavent to the core API.
I know, but SVG isn't very usable for drawing either. That's why canvas was developed. And the only browser that natively supports SVG is IE, the rest use canvas.

The main (read: really flabbergasting) problems with webapps are, that there's no good way to store and process datasets locally (AJAX helps, but without a local store and the only container being an untyped array...), no usable way to actually draw things like your own controls (canvas helps with the drawing, but you have to move controls on top, and no realistic way to use objects with events), and the totally awful DOM model (endlessly duplicated amounts of layers and stuff, but still no good hierarchy that actually makes sense, no actually usable general purpose areas -not even DIVs- where you can DRAW your own controls on, or simply put predefined stuff on in a predictable way).

It's great that we at least have solid CSS suport across all the browsers now (read: IE), and I know about the Google canvas class for IE, but I haven't been able yet to create and draw my own stuff like with Windows apps.

And using solely CSS for positioning is a great pain when using VS.NET, the demanded development platform for most stuff.
 
Btw, for me Chrome crashes a lot and streams aren't very smooth, if they work at all.
 
Interesting problem popped on someone on another forum - after installing Chrome his Opera lost Flash completely, and reinstalling flash had no effect
 
Google Chrome browser?
I immediately think : is that a web-based web browser? :LOL:


Yep. That's why adblock was invented. Sometimes I feel bad because I know sites need the money. Other times I load a site and all I see is flashing animations and a myriad of colours swarming a tiny and nearly illegible amount of information; That's when I get pissed.

flashblock is what I use, all flash content is turned into a square with a play button. very useful to reduce eye strain and CPU usage. I recommend it as a green environmental friendly, as I suspect gigawatts are wasted on flash content :p.
I also had the nice suprise of seeing a > 1GHz PC brought on its knees to unusable state because of opening five tabs each with four flash ads. stupid!

I have "nuke anything" to delete ads and gif stuck in the middle of an article.
 
I tried to install Chrome several times and I can't ever open a sigle web page withot it crashing. I can't even open google search page...
 
Ack! Where's smooth scrolling??!!!

Edit: Lol Google Chrome keeps crashing on this page of B3D. Only seems to happen on this page.
 
Back
Top