Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Development, Privacy, and Standards for Chrome

Posted by Soulskill on from the chrome-chrome-chrome-chrome-chrome dept.

Continuing our coverage of Google Chrome, snydeq points out an Infoworld story about looking at the new browser from a developer's perspective, and another about how WebKit should be the focus of development efforts, rather than the browsers that use it. TGdaily notes that Chrome's search box will fetch all types of data, and can be made to display banking information with little effort. ABC and coderrr have slightly more paranoid articles questioning Google's commitment to privacy. NetworkWorld suggests that Chrome's unique process model (explained here) will require the development of new measurement standards.

31 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Completely good and noble by David+Gerard · · Score: 2, Funny

    Webkit is completely safe; Apple is completely good and noble. Google will maintain complete confidentiality within the marketing department of whatever the browser accessed concerning your confidential business data, bank account details, medical information and personal preferences in pornography. Apple won't even tell you about you.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
    1. Re:Completely good and noble by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even KDE's switching to WebKit, at least as an option. It appears to be sinking into Apple's head that they can 0wn this project, but playing nice with others is more likely to get them something that works well. You know ... open source.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    2. Re:Completely good and noble by David+Gerard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Eh? Non-starter? Apple used it in Safari because it was technically way easier to work with than Gecko.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    3. Re:Completely good and noble by foniksonik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Uh... Webkit doesn't have vulnerabiities it has bugs... the browser is what has vulnerabilities. Webkit has no network stack... it can't communicate. All it can do is accept input and render output.

      The javascript engine can have vulnerabilities because of XMLHttp, cookies and filesystem access... but even then it passes all comms through the browser or directly through the filesystem.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    4. Re:Completely good and noble by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't see why a rendering engine can't have security vulnerabilities, just like any other software which processes input from an untrusted source.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    5. Re:Completely good and noble by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And a rather close one, too. It is amazing people let Apple get away with rebranding KHTML "Webkit", but hey. As long as it makes the world better, and the less code from Apple the better :P

      --
      Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
    6. Re:Completely good and noble by truthsearch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm a web developer and no one in my small company has ever used user-agent detection in the years I've been there. The closest we've ever come is checking for what's available to the JavaScript runtime, but even that is done by checking for the existence of objects and methods rather than seeing what browser is running.

      With few exceptions (and those mostly only in design considerations), coding to standards has generally worked pretty well in recent years.

      --
      Developers: We can use your help.
  2. Say "no" to Google spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want to try Chrome, use this version without the silently installed, never removed and hard to disable 'Google Update'.

    1. Re:Say "no" to Google spyware by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Informative

      Direct Google link to standalone installer.

      Note that this doesn't install under Wine - you need the binary Zip file (which I can't find a direct link to) to try it under Wine. And it still doesn't actually work, so find the missing functions and get to work writing them for Wine ;-)

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    2. Re:Say "no" to Google spyware by pablomme · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wine 1.1.4 specifically includes "Several fixes for Google Chrome support". https support is still missing, though.

      --
      The state you are in while your HEAD is detached... - wait, what?
    3. Re:Say "no" to Google spyware by ksd1337 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh, that's real nice. Chrome runs on Wine, but it doesn't even run on Windows 2000. I was disappointed to learn it didn't run on Win2k, because I have no XP/Vista machines.

  3. Two was bad enough by FloydTheDroid · · Score: 5, Funny

    I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror as their managers noticed that this Webkit browser has a couple of percentage points.

  4. Chrome is a resource hog by kasot · · Score: 2

    Yes, it's fast. With a couple of tabs up it also takes up half of my CPU. Browsing three norwegian news sites (ap.no db.no vg.no - all use flash for ads etc.) on my AMD Athlon X2 6000+ uses at least 50% of the CPU and nearly 200 MB of RAM. Try it yourself...

    1. Re:Chrome is a resource hog by drseuk · · Score: 3, Funny

      Obviously you've never been married then. >=50% resource use is perfectly normal.

    2. Re:Chrome is a resource hog by David+Gerard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How's it run on a lesser box? Using available resources to do their job is what apps are supposed to do, after all ...

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
  5. I would love to see Firefox move to WebKit by whatUrunning.com · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would love to see Firefox move to WebKit, it would certainly make life easier for web developers.

  6. Gears and the storage API by Simon+(S2) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So google stripped the HTML 5 standard local storage api from Webkit to use their own implementation Google Gears. Why? The api was already there, and it worked, so they had to strip it out to go with google gears, their own, not w3c compliant. I think they are starting to become evil.

    --
    I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
    1. Re:Gears and the storage API by David+Gerard · · Score: 3, Informative

      Uh, Google is participating wholeheartedly in the HTML5 effort. Which isn't a W3C standard as yet to become compliant with. Also, Ian Hickson, the editor of HTML5, works for Google (and has previously worked for Opera and Mozilla). It's entirely too much in flux to assert that they're trying to break a standard here.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    2. Re:Gears and the storage API by David+Gerard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see no reason not to assume stupidity instead of malice. Remember, they started writing this as a pure Windows application they now have to try to port to Mac and Linux (registry twiddling, DLL hell, etc), rather than writing it cross-platform from the outset - there's copious evidence of stupidity along the way. Developers set free to go "not invented here, I could sooo roll my own better" is hardly unique to Google ...

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    3. Re:Gears and the storage API by Simon+(S2) · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I see no reason not to assume stupidity instead of malice.

      I do actually. The HTML 5 compatible client side storage API was lready there. To remove it, they HAD to know it is there. So they stripped it out and replaced it whit google gears. No stupidity there. Any other excuses?

      --
      I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
    4. Re:Gears and the storage API by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 4, Interesting

      After several real-life friends began working for Google, their views on the company have been extreme. It much reminds me of my time at some early mid-90's startups that, no matter what, said company could do no wrong.

      With that in mind, I would not be surprised at all to a lot of the Google hype on /., especially when it comes to blindly justifying possible "evils" of this corporate entity, are simply a bunch of Google employees operating independently in their off-time.

      The drive behind my thoughts on this was one company I worked for ended up having a lot of controversy when multiple employees were doing this, but made the mistake of doing it from the corp lan, and got exposed internally, but when news hit other sites, it was considered some kind of evil campaign funded by said company while actually just frenzied staff operating on their own.

    5. Re:Gears and the storage API by Anpheus · · Score: 2

      The webkit implementation in Chrome right now is over a year out of date, due to Google using it internally while writing Chrome and not changing the subsystem. So, for example, webkit can do Acid 3 to 100/100, but Google Chrome can't.

      No conspiracy theory here. Wait for Google to update the current webkit version.

  7. Bug by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Indexing of HTTPS pages is most certainly a bug. Did the poster of the article report it to make Google Chrome a better product or is he just going to complain? It's only in beta.

    And the work around is simple: Use Incognito mode for all sensitive work. Which is what it's for.

    1. Re:Bug by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's only in beta.

      I don't accept this excuse from Google, because they have effectively destroyed the concept of a beta version. Even gmail is still in beta, and it's probably among the world's top three email providers now.

      Google, please do official releases of your products. Or, if you really need to childishly continue to call them development versions, invent a new category. Maybe, call them "gamma" versions. You are spoiling a useful metaphor for everyone else.

    2. Re:Bug by ya+really · · Score: 2

      Gmail has been in beta for how long now though? Roughly 4.5 years, right? So, will chrome still be in beta half a decade from now? Beta to me starts sounding more like an excuse for why it has bugs. After all, firefox, opera safari all have bugs, but they're not hiding behind the beta excuse. IE on the other hand, should have probably never left beta or alpha for that matter.

    3. Re:Bug by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe I'm a little cynical, but it's an easy excuse for them. It basically strips them of all liability. Did it delete your %PROGRAM_FILES% and post your bank account numbers on a website (theoretical)? No problem for Google! You were using a beta product, you should have known better using a beta for anything important. Does GMail lose all your mail (real)? We feel for you man, but it's a beta, nothing we are required to, er, can do.

    4. Re:Bug by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We feel for you man, but it's a beta, nothing we are required to, er, can do.

      I wouldn't be too sure about that. I know where you're coming from, and ordinarily I'd agree, but I think if someone wanted to push the point a court would probably be sympathetic to the argument that it really isn't a beta any more - it's been in extensive, public use for far too long, and as another poster points out is probably one of the top 3 email providers. Just slapping on a label that says "this shit might break" doesn't necessarily save you.

      --
      It's official. Most of you are morons.
  8. Re:Unique process model, come on! by bhtooefr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You realize that the windows don't have to be maximized all the time, right?

  9. It works with Wine... here's the recipe by dkegel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    http://wiki.winehq.org/Chrome https is not yet supported, but page loading speed isn't bad.

  10. Re:WTF? by Your.Master · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know the whole problem with IE started when it became the only rendering engine in town?

    We all benefit if Webkit, KHTML, Gecko, Presto, and yes, even Trident are upgraded.

  11. Re:Bad habbits formed from Firefox useage by shvytejimas · · Score: 2, Informative

    From firefox help:
    Open in New Window : Shift+Left-click