Slashdot Mirror
New Chrome Beta Adds Themes, Speed, & HTML 5 Video
adeelarshad82 writes "Google developers are always working on and updating Chrome in three channels — Stable, Beta, and Developer — in increasing positions on the bleeding-edge scale. Today the company thought changes to the Beta channel warranted a post on the main Google Blog. The advances range from the superficial addition of themes for customizing the browser's window borders to even faster speed under the hood to internal support for HTML 5 tags such as <video> and 'web workers,' which allows the browser to divvy processing work among sub-threads."
When will google learn that plugins, especially something like adblock, is the killer feature they need to attract the "willing to switch" audience, a lot of whom are using firefox right now. I personally love Chrome for its speed and stability, used it for a week or so, but then switched right back to Firefox because I just didn't realise how it is to do many things in Firefox with extensions such as adblock, no script, autopager, del.icio.us integration etc.
Has Google managed to get Chrome install in the "program files" director yet? The fact that it installs in "application settings" is the number one reason I can't install it.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
The first thing that really got me about Chrome was how well it seemed to learn my browsing habits. At least, that was my first impression when I booted it up. The first view you get in Chrome is the "most visited websites" page or something like that. As a incognito porn site surfer, I was really taken aback and worried about privacy issues.
It took a long time in Firefox to fix the URL history functionality. It used to keep the URLs in some cache so that it could be called up right away when you started entering a URL into the address bar. Now, the URLs at least seem like they are gone forever when you delete them from your History.
IE still has this problem (in addition to completely retarded address bar behavior). In fact, if you delete the entire browsing history at once, the URLs themselves can never be deleted except by completely clearing the cache, but then that also deletes the "cover" sites that I visit to make it seem like my surfing is just innocuous browsing and not the hardcore porn viewing which it ostensibly is.
So if Chrome wants my patronage, I think the first thing it needs to do is convince me that my personal privacy is safe. That my URLs aren't going to be cached and exposed at some inopportune time, and that it isn't tracking them for me to helpfully find other related websites.
In this way, I've found Firefox to be the most accommodating browser on the market today. It does what I want and doesn't try to be smart about it. Funny how so many things in life work better that way.
Yes it does (Not the crappy wine one). There is a beta native version I use regularly, and on 32-bit it even does plugins (Flash)... However, I got myself a 64-bit comp these days, and it does not run plugins on that one... It feels much faster than Firefox on Linux...
Does it have smooth scrolling and adblock yet? If not then I can't move. Especially after the huge speedup in FF 3.5.
Improve at backgammon rapidly through addictive quickfire position quizzes: www.bgtrain.com
I'm just not going to give google more info about me by using their browser.
Dyslexics are teople poo
I'm a not-very-happy Firefox user, since I find it has horrendous memory leaks. I can get it up to 2GB virtual memory in a morning's average browsing. Yes, I have tried the tips on the Mozilla site.
However, I have become addicted to a controlled web experience with NoScript and Adblock. I won't be switching to Chrome until I can get similar tools.
are they supporting theora (like firefox) or just h.264 ? both would be great, of course.
What ? Me, worry ?
Downloaded the latest Chrome Beta (3.0.195.4), installed AdSweep, failed to be impressed. AdSweep loads ads the first time you visit a page in a session then erases them, highly annoying. The biggest problem I had was that I failed to notice any speed difference between Chrome and Firefox 3.5.2 on the sites I visit. If anything my non-scientific observation was that with AdSweep loaded, Chrome was significantly slower than Firefox.
When will google learn that plugins, especially something like adblock, is the killer feature they need to attract the "willing to switch" audience, a lot of whom are using firefox right now. I personally love Chrome for its speed and stability, used it for a week or so, but then switched right back to Firefox because I just didn't realise how it is to do many things in Firefox with extensions such as adblock, no script, autopager, del.icio.us integration etc.
Oh here we go again! :)
SRWare Iron is the same browser as Google Chrome except it has all the privacy concerns removed.
IT ALSO HAS ADBLOCK SUPPORT.
SRWare Iron - http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php ADBLOCKER SUPPORT: "11.10.2008: Adblocker integrated in Iron
The wish of many users comes true: We integrated an Adblocker in Iron! With a filterlist so nearly all online-advertising can be blocked. A working list can bedownloaded here and just has to be copied to the Iron folder (e.g: C:\Program Files\SRWare Iron\). Note: You must first get the latest version of Iron you can find under "Downloads". So Iron is the first Chromium based webbrowser worldwide which has an adblocker included."
Here is the link to download the latest adblock.ini file http://www.srware.net/downloads/adblock.ini
If you want Adblock, I think I heard somewhere that SRWare Iron supports it.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
In the non-cyber world, we all accept ads in the magazines and newspapers, realizing the subsidy they provide to the mags and papers. Same way here.
I wish there is a way to set my browser agent to tell the websites something like:
Will accept text ads.
Will reject all animations gif, flash or javascript.
Will allow 20% of screen real estate to ads.
Content load time not less than 0.33 times ad load time.
Currently looking for ads with keywords : digital camera, DVD cases/sleeves, air tickets to India
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Different != Wrong
In my opinion, it makes more sense for the address bar to be part of the tab, because the address of the page has a 1:1 relationship with the page you're viewing.
Have you driven a fnord... lately?
You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later.
Having passed all of the different Acid Tests with a perfect score on the latest JavaScript oriented Acid test.
My thumbnail look at Sunspider scores shows about a 20% overall speedup over the latest Firefox beta, but Firefox wins in enough of the individual tests that I expect BOTH to improve quite a bit, that is if the fastest times on each are used, even Chrome's time would be 20% better.
...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
is that you don't get flashing / talking / music / girls in bikinis / speeding gophers / outright lies in your newspaper or magazine.
Imho online advertising did this to themselves, they were as annoying and eye catching as possible (and I mean that in the worst possible way) that people learned to HATE online advertising. I don't mind Google text ads and such, or even banners, but the flashing, animation and sound is the one spoiled apple that ruins the whole barrel.
http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/eula_dev.html?dl=mac