Google Releases Chrome 12

An anonymous reader noted something that will be of interest to the 26% of Slashdot readers who have switched to Chrome: "Google has released Chrome 12, adding plenty of new features to its minimalist web browser and fixing a number of security vulnerabilities. Google software engineer Adrienne Walker said of the safe browsing mode, 'We've carefully designed this feature so that malicious content can be detected without Chrome or Google ever having to know about the URLs you visit or the files you download.'"

Comments

Version numbers

[gizmod]

Sheesh, these browser version numbers are climbing quickly. Quick release cycles these days. Firefox 5 is allready in beta.

Re:Version numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

I pity Debian in all of this.

Re:Version numbers

[Lunaritian]

I have Chromium 12.0.742.91 on my computer. Have they really made hundreds of beta releases?

Re:Version numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

Part of me can't help but suspect that it's so Firefox, with a measly version 4, looks new and less trustworthy.
A piece of software with 12 versions under its belt seems a bit more time-proven than one with 4.

Re:Version numbers

[Lunaritian]

Mozilla has already changed to "Chrome numbering", they're currently developing versions 5, 6 and 7...

Re:Version numbers

[BreezeC]

Firefox 5 will release this month later.
I don't see any new feature in firefox 5.
Firefox 5 like Linux 3.0.0,just the number.
I hate number,I don't need number.

Re:Version numbers

[Bloodwine77]

I understand Linux going to Linux 3.0.0, though. I have moved to a release-early-release-often model and it has made it where every release I do is either a minor release or a maintenance/patch release. So what I have started doing is incrementing the major version number after I the software has become much more advanced and updated than it was compared to the previous major version number.

So if I am at version 6.47.10 and compared to 6.0.0 it is a greatly different and improved product, I go ahead and up the next release to 7.0.0 even though it is a minor release.

In the release early-and-often model, you really don't spend a lot of time between releases working on major upgrades. You do all the major upgrades slowly and incrementally across several minor updates.

Chrome and Firefox, however, are just playing the version number padding game. Opera and IE have slowly built up to their major version numbers.

I understand some people do not care about version numbers, but when you develop against software and libraries they become important. Whether you prefer X.Y.Z or YYYY.MM.DD or YYYY.X as your versioning scheme, that is just personal preference. Personally if you are going to increment major version numbers just for the sake of it then I'd go with a YYYY.X version model (e.g.: 2011.1, 2011.2, 2011.3).

Re:Version numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

IE hardly changed because IE was left to rot after MS won the Browser War I. They're also tied to the OS, according to their defense in various anti-trust cases.

Re:Version numbers

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Depends on how much of the release-churn is purely internal, and how much involves ever-climbing demands on the version numbers of dependencies...

For applications that are relatively self-contained, and make few, or very conservative, demands about their environment, it really isn't a big deal. Where things get ugly, for users of debian stable or other slow-moving distributions(some of the enterprise desktop stuff can get rather long in the tooth as well...), is the applications that expect their environment to be as bleeding-edge as they are.

Having apt report that Foo N+1 is available every damn time it runs is a minor nuisance. Having to maintain an entire parallel universe of libraries and stuff grabbed from testing or unstable just to update your browser is a major nuisance.

Re:Version numbers

[Billly Gates]

It is because corporate users freak out when they here upgrade. IE is now on an anual upgrade to keep up. IE upgrades are big and less gradual but IE 10 should be able to keep up.

Re:Version numbers

[WrongSizeGlass]

I have Chromium 12.0.742.91 on my computer. Have they really made hundreds of beta releases?

Not betas, but builds.

I wonder how many versions of Chrome will ever have a minor version number greater than '0'? I don't recall seeing one recently (at least since Chrome 4).

Re:Version numbers

[somersault]

Hundreds of builds probably.

Re:Version numbers

[lcarnevale]

Look at the bright side of it (?), in a few years you would be using Chrome 452, while people will be stuck in their only two digit version browsers like Firefox 10 (or less at this pace) and IE 18

Re:Version numbers

[sakdoctor]

It was the tying to the OS that was the problem.
Don't want to regularly update a browser? Don't HAVE a browser.

Re:Version numbers

[jitterman]

And today (maybe yesterday) they released 13.0.782.11, which replaced 13.0.782.10, which (I kid you not) replaced 13.0.782.1 (no zero at the end, otherwise, same number). I draw the conclusion that they are happy to make an install available every time they push the "compile" button.

You can see the build history (and get any of them that you want to) at Filehippo

Re:Version numbers

[bill_mcgonigle]

For applications that are relatively self-contained, and make few, or very conservative, demands about their environment, it really isn't a big deal.

This cuts both ways. Google has grabbed a bunch of open source libraries, sometimes respecting the license, hacked on them, and rolled them into Chrom*.

So, with Chrome you've got a bunch of bloat and dead-end forks on your machine. Tom Callaway, Fedora contributor, has a Chromium repo that factors this all back out, using the upstream libraries directly. So, when there's a security fix in an upstream library, you get it before Google does a rev. or two.

And of course the binaries are smaller. For shared libraries, the system memory usage will be lighter as well.

Re:Version numbers

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

That is certainly true. There are excellent reasons why the linux-style light-binaries-that-specify-lots-of-dependencies + a good package manager to sort it all out model is desirable. And, even if you go with a gigantic static binary in the end for convenience of installation, having a source like the one you describe, where everything is neatly broken out, is highly desireable: It is comparatively simple, with the right tools, to turn a list of dependencies into a big static blob. The reverse, not so much.

My point was narrowly addressed from the user side: Unless your environment is so slow moving that X is missing major features or such, installing a new iteration of a big static blob every week isn't a big deal, even if it is architecturally ugly. Something that nicely breaks out the dependencies, on the other hand, can involve very, very, "interesting" explorations into package-management hell and upgrading half your system with questionably compatible backports from Unstable.

In an ideal world, you would really want something like Callaway's work to be the 'canonical' version, ready to be slotted into sufficiently new or fast moving distributions, with the option of programmatically emblobifying the whole mass into a simple-to-install lump for situations where you can't tamper with the system's shared libraries.

Re:Version numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

And today (maybe yesterday) they released 13.0.782.11, which replaced 13.0.782.10, which (I kid you not) replaced 13.0.782.1 (no zero at the end, otherwise, same number). I draw the conclusion that they are happy to make an install available every time they push the "compile" button.

A single number doesn't allow you to take branches into account. Version 13's stable branch is 782. After branching 13.0.782.0, a bug was fixed, and that build (13.0.782.1) was released. Nine more bugs were found and fixed, and 13.0.782.10 was released.

Every build that might conceivably be released gets a unique number. This way you know exactly what code was in a user's build when they report bugs. Chromium is open source, and anyone can cut a release at any time.

I have no idea why people get so upset over the way version numbers change. The only reason you should need to see a version number is when reporting a bug.

Re:Version numbers

[starofale]

If you're on the dev channel what do you expect?

Re:Version numbers

[softWare3ngineer]

Sheesh, these browser version numbers are climbing quickly.

Reminds me of some of my code under source control. Since any committed code increments the version number i have versions in the thousands. not all releasable however.

Maybe we should be labeling software based off the current version, since software like chrome is automatically upgraded anyway. for instance if you are one version from the current you browser will say chrome -1. the current would just be chrome without a version number. it would give a social incentive to upgrade, and show how far you are behind.

Re:Version numbers

[jitterman]

Don't get me wrong - I'm not complaining. I do install every build just to see what they're doing with the code, and it doesn't bother me to do it regularly. My post was only to let Lunaritian know that if he wants to move up or down on his installed version, he can easily find any release he wishes.

I think it's cool of them to let those of us who wish it grab their latest builds, and that they tend to patch bugs quickly (hence "*happy* to make an install available..." it's a good thing, not a gripe).

Re:Version numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

at Google "build" is synonymous with "beta"

Re:Version numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

Has anybody patented the business method of "Chome numbering"? It's clearly a way and a method to increase customer confidence in a congested market.

Re:Version numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

if you have 12.~ chromium that means that you don't update it too often, you should switch to dev build if you don't keep an eye on it because you are like two version numbers behind.

Re:Version numbers

[sur3857]

I updated and jumped to Chromium 14.0.788.0 Built on Ubuntu 10.04, running on Debian testing.
How many people have they working on it?

Re:Version numbers

[fibonacci8]

Has anybody patented the business method of "Chome numbering"? It's clearly a way and a method to increase customer confidence in a congested market.

It's better than MS numbering, everyone realeasing version '12 next year might cause more confusion than help.

Re:Version numbers

[the linux geek]

Burma Shave.

Re:Version numbers

[Ant P.]

So are you using Windows 5.1.2600, 6.0.6002 or 6.1.7601?

Re:Version numbers

[dmiller]

Google has grabbed a bunch of open source libraries, sometimes respecting the license, hacked on them, and rolled them into Chrom*.

If you have any cases where you think that Chrome is failing to comply with the terms of a free software license, then please file a bug at http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list - we take license compliance very seriously. (I'm a Google engineer, though not working Chrome).

Re:Version numbers

[bill_mcgonigle]

we take license compliance very seriously

Good to know, thanks. My recollection may be dated as well - the ones I recall being significant were ffmpeg and sqllite, but seeing as how I haven't read about any friction recently, it's probably safe to assume these have been amicably resolved.

Re:Version numbers

[BZ]

Several hundred, I'd think. Even the small players in the market (Opera and Mozilla) have teams in the 100-200 range (not counting volunteer contributors).

First post

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, Chrome 12 is so fast, I got FP!

Re:First post

[dintech]

Are you sure you remembered to upgrade?

Re:First post

[gizmod]

Using 10 here. Seems bigger isn't always better ;)

Re:First post

[WrongSizeGlass]

Are you sure you remembered to upgrade?

In Googleverse, Chrome updates you! It really does - it automatically updates the browser to the latest version. I just make copies of each major version for testing (much easier on the Mac than Win; not sure how Chrome updates Linux installs).

Wow, 12

[Anonymous Coward]

12 is definetely better than 11, 9 or 4.

Chrome doesn't know what URLs you visit?

[Anonymous Coward]

malicious content can be detected without Chrome...ever having to know about the URLs you visit or the files you download

Uhh.....how exactly does a web browser function without knowing what URLs you visit?

Re:Chrome doesn't know what URLs you visit?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhh.....how exactly does a web browser function without knowing what URLs you visit?

You have to go there in person.

Re:Chrome doesn't know what URLs you visit?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I'm assuming that the clarification lies in the bit you elided: Chrome doesn't have to report to Our Google Overlords the URLs you visit for it to work, and Chrome doesn't need to "know about" the URLs in question(ie. it doesn't have to do some AV-like "download-list-of-the-500,000-new-malicious-URLs-for-today" behavior).

I don't know if the statement is mere fluffy hyperbole about some rather rudimentary heuristic mechanism(along the lines of the existing handy-but-not-rocket-science feature of offering to disable javascript popups for any site that has opened, and had closed by the user, a certain number of the things, which does help prevent one of the classic "trap the noob" techniques used by the malicious) or whether it is something extremely clever; but it isn't immediately incoherent or logically impossible.

Re:Chrome doesn't know what URLs you visit?

[xquark]

I believe they use two sets of bloom filters one for known bad sites and one for known good sites - each is roughly ~1.5MB large and can be found in your google install dir, Search for files with the word "filter" in their name.

Did they add noscript yet?

[Jartan]

I don't understand how geeks could consider using the web without noscript. I shudder at the thought of letting Slashdot actually run all the shitty scripting stuff they want to run.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Hazel Bergeron]

But how will Google make money if you keep your information to yourself?

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

May want to give NotScripts a try:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/odjhifogjcknibkahlpidmdajjpkkcfn?hl=en-US

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Rogerborg]

Beats me. That's a dealbreaker. Switching from IE to Chrome, OK, I can see that. But from Firefox? I just don't get it.

Of course, I'm posting this from Lynx (for realsies) so I may not be representative even of Slashtards.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[jmottram08]

oh no. . . you have to manually install an addon. gasp.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[elrous0]

I shudder at the thought of letting Slashdot actually run all the shitty scripting stuff they want to run.

Don't worry, /. scripting is like the weather. If you don't like it, just wait till tomorrow and they'll change it. Every day brings a brand new opportunity for them to screw it up in new and creative ways.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[chill]

AdBlock Plus, NotScripts, and WebDeveloper are available for Chrome which are the only plugins I really would consider "must have".

Chrome is, for me, significantly faster than Firefox 4 on 64-bit Ubuntu, Windows 7 and Windows XP. It starts up faster, uses less memory, renders pages faster -- all of it.

Yesterday, after viewing dozens of documents in multiple tabs on the web, memory use in Firefox had climbed on my system to over 1 Gb. Closing down and opening the same set of tabs in Chrome, I proceeded to work in that for the rest of the day. Memory usage peaked at 380 Mb, and hovered around 250 Mb.

I could feel Firefox starting to bog down as the day wore on. I did not get that feeling with Chrome.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[dicobalt]

According to the creator of NoScript (Giorgio Maone) Chrome is incapable of running NoScript http://forums.informaction.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1676&sid=23a681ccbaa7d58b3c03c444af2de8f6&start=60

At this moment one of the major obstacles is the multi-processing design choosen by Chromium, which forbids every kind of synchronous communication between chrome and content and therefore prevents critical configuration data (e.g. NoScript's whitelist) from being safely and reliably shared across the application. Other APIs, especially in the networking area, are missing as well. By comparison Electrolysis (E10s), the new multi-processing design choosen by future Firefox (and current Firefox Mobile betas) poses challenges, but they're not impossible ("code just needs to be written") and in fact NoScript is being adapted.

NotScripts user interface is laggy and often misses domains. NotScripts does not have anywhere near the thorough level of protection that NoScript has.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[smartaleckkill]

yeah, in about version 5 actually--and as a built-in, no add-ons needed

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Wiarumas]

Switching - I wouldn't recommend it. However, having both installed does make sense. I make sure to install Firefox AND Chrome on every PC/laptop in the home. Firefox is great for casual browsing, but when in a hurry, I find that Chrome is the better browser to use. Especially on older PCs, it starts up much faster. You might not be as safe without the must have add ons, but if all you need to do is check your email, weather, bank account, etc, its worth the minimal risk.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[jackbird]

Do you have a suggestion for firefox-like live bookmark folders in Chrome? I've tried a couple of the RSS chrome extensions, but none of them feel right.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[chill]

Sorry, I don't use them so don't know what would be good or not.

Someone should start a website that lists Chrome extension equivalents to various FireFox add-ons.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[drinkypoo]

Notscripts' user interface is complete shite compared to noscript and actually lacks functionality, it's not just hard to use. This is the one thing that stops me from leaving Firefox. Well, that and that back when I was using chrome they would often break things in the dailies, but you had to use dailies to even get decent cookie management.

As long as noscript is better on Firefox, I will continue to use (and preach!) Firefox.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[jackbird]

It's not an add-on, it's a core firefox feature. That having been said, I agree. Also, try them. You can make a bookmark folder full of slashdot headlines and go straight to articles that look interesting.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Mateorabi]

I find a basic Chrome install is nice for online banking in a separate browser without having to quit Firefox and reload just to have a clean, banking-only browsing session.

Now if only they'd let you choose to install it somewhere other than 'Documents and Settings'.........grrrrr.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[afex]

do you have anything against google reader? i used to hate it but when i moved to chrome i decided to give it a fair chance, and haven't looked back.

(i know that doesn't exactly answer your question, but...)

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe because FF is bloatware? Maybe?
 
The glory days of FF are far gone at this point. Those of you still hanging onto the past are dinosaurs.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Firefox + AdBlock Plus + NoScript + Flashblock... Must-haves. Chrome has some poor attempts at equivalents but they're not good enough to replace Firefox.

Why use Lynx when Links is way better? Lynx (and w3m) are poorly done 90's era text browsers.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have a fast enough PC, and little concern over security (through a combination of sandboxing/VMing/configuration for all browsers) then I regard fine-tuned JavaScript control as the type of OCD outburst that RPG/MMO gamers show. I used to be into that crap, when it made sense -- like with RequestPolicy, which is 1000x times better than NoScript -- but it's not going to stop many exploits these days, whereas 3 years ago it was a major security measure for browsing.

Then again my browsing habits aren't exactly commonplace. I haven't wanted to disable a specific page element in... well, I can't remember when. (Technically I guess that's possible with Chrome's inspector: you could BP the page and remove the script node.)

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are referencing Google Analytics (which plagues the entire web) then Google released an extension in '09 which disables tracking so it doesn't connect to the GA server. So I guess the answer to your trolling rhetorical question is: via Chrome, HOSTS blocking, or JS filtering.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[jackbird]

It's a seperate application. I have 20 or 30 live bookmark feeds I can scan in about 10 seconds in firefox without stopping what I'm doing.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Chrome doesn't need it, it isn't wide open with security holes like firefox is. Source: secunia (IE had less severe and fewer overall flaws than firefox in the preceding year).

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[afex]

no, reader is web-based - so basically instead of clicking a folder, you click on your reader tab for those 10 seconds....but yeah, i get what you're saying.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[lee1]

Maybe "geeks" know about more sophisticated tools such as Privoxy, which work with any browser.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[oever]

Who needs noscript when you can use a personal proxy with web configuration interface. That way, I get noscript and requestpolicy in a more finegrained way for all my browsers and need to configure it only once.

I wrote my own with Node.JS and will probably add storage to it at some point. The only downside is that does not work for https connections.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Hazel Bergeron]

That's one tentacle. You forget all the Javascript web "apps" which encourage you to needlessly store information half way across the world on someone else's machine. Like Stallman said, cloud computing is stupidity - turning your powerful computer into a dumb graphical display is the worst possible outcome.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fair enough but it could be worse. AppEngine and Storage could be popular. Instead we have a duopoly of Google & Amazon, which is slightly better than a monopoly over combined user information (like Google has with advertisements).

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[dicobalt]

You haven't heart of Firefox profiles have you? It harkens back to the days of Netscape Communicator. http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Managing-profiles I use multiple profiles for Work/Home/Financial/Unsafe browsing

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[dicobalt]

Oh btw forgot to mention you can store your profile anywhere you want too. Just edit C:\Users\%USERNAME%\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\Firefox\profiles.ini
[Profile2]
Name=Mail
IsRelative=0
Path=c:\somepath\someprofilefolder\

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

I usually do not run noscript, but do run adblock + betterprivacy to delete flash cookies. Chrome has Adblock, but last I checked no way to delete flash cookies. Chrome also has a bad habit of trying to force focus to the URL bar. Not a big deal casually browsing the net, but makes some MMORPG games almost unplayable.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Billly Gates]

"Yesterday, after viewing dozens of documents in multiple tabs on the web, memory use in Firefox had climbed on my system to over 1 Gb"ram usage than Chrome when you have +5 to +10 tabs open. I am just curious what caused that on your system? I have 8 gigs of ram on my desktop so it wont hit me as hard and I have never seen Firefox use more than 600 megs ever!

I wonder if it is a bad addon? I only use Firebug and NoScript. I use more extensions under Chrome.

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Now if only they'd let you choose to install it somewhere other than 'Documents and Settings'.........grrrrr.

Download the Google Pack (with only Chrome selected) and it will install to Program Files instead with only the profile under "Documents and Settings"

Re:Did they add noscript yet?

[cthulhu11]

I remember when Firefox was the lean alternative to Netscape Navigator. Come full-circle now, haven't we? Chrome will be there too in five years, then we'll have a new lean browser name Marion or something.

Guys: I need to know diff. between Chromium

[Anonymous Coward]

and Google "Chrome". For example: I have "heard tell" (no, I can't produce you a quote) that CHROMIUM doesn't store things "up in the GOOGLE CLOUD" like passwords - whereas by way of comparison, Google CHROME, does.

That appeals to me on Chromium, personally (some of you may like it though, I don't - especially router passwords!).

(So, please: "Set me straight" on this IF I am "off/wrong" etc./et al, and, about anything else you can tell me are the differences between CHROMIUM & Chrome, IF any!)

* Thanks-In-Advance!

APK

P.S.=> Also, lastly: This isn't to spark some "religious fanatic war" on webbrowsers, especially CHROME vs. CHROMIUM!

(Heck - I am mainly an OPERA 11.11 user here anyhow),

However 0- I do like how FAST Chrome/Chromium are too, but, I'd really just like to know which of them is TRULY "the superior warrior" & how/why (mainly from those who are PRIMARILY Chrome/Chromium users, the best source imo)... apk

Re:Guys: I need to know diff. between Chromium

[Lunaritian]

Wikipedia lists the differences between Chrome and Chromium.

Re:Guys: I need to know diff. between Chromium

[Anonymous Coward]

This should be useful:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ChromiumBrowserVsGoogleChrome

Basically, tinhat types believe Google can track all of its Chrome users. In the beginning, there were a couple of things that were questionable - for example, giving each install a unique ID - but more than likely this was just for statistical records about Chrome uptake. People complained, Google responded... all user metrics can be turned on and off by the user.

So, Chrome is now Chromium, with some more features rolled in by Google, and vetted by the Google team. It's good to keep Chromium around, to keep Google honest and keep source for an alternative out in the open (and I guess to satisfy FOSS zealots), but if you're not concerned with such things, Chrome is IMO the better choice.

Re:Guys: I need to know diff. between Chromium

[SanityInAnarchy]

I have "heard tell" (no, I can't produce you a quote) that CHROMIUM doesn't store things "up in the GOOGLE CLOUD" like passwords - whereas by way of comparison, Google CHROME, does.

Not quite. I know that Chrome has the option to set up "sync", which allows you to synchronize everything (passwords, bookmarks, etc) between Chrome installations. However, I have that disabled, and unless you can produce a quote or a link to the contrary, it seems much more likely that Chrome simply stores my passwords locally. It even integrates with local secure password stores -- in my case, since I run KDE4, Chrome stores my passwords in KWallet.

Re:Guys: I need to know diff. between Chromium

[Anonymous Coward]

Last BUT NOT "least" - by way of comparison, does "Chrome" support HOSTS files?

Re:Guys: I need to know diff. between Chromium

[Raenex]

So Google had built-in tracking to Chrome and did not release the source code for it, hence Chrome was not an open source browser. The "FOSS zealots" and "tinhat types" had enough sway for Google to modify their behavior, at least somewhat. Considering that Google has a very long history of tracking user data, it would seem naive is the term for people who think Google wasn't tracking them.

If open source is not important, then Google never needed to tout the browser as open source. And yet a large number of people realize the benefits of open source, and the downsides of proprietary, closed-source binaries. Chromium is the open source browser. Chrome is not.

Adding features to a minimalist web browser?

[JoeTalbott]

Isn't this what happened to Firefox?

Re:Adding features to a minimalist web browser?

[Anonymous Coward]

As they add features, when does it no longer become minimalist?

Re:Adding features to a minimalist web browser?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a HUGE over-simplification.

You can add features to a minimalist browser and still have it be minimalist. It depends on the feature and the implementation.

One of Chrome 12's new features? The ability to define rules for Flash content storing and cookies, and the ability to clear the cookies, natively. This isn't useless cruft, or "we ran out of useful ideas so here's something new and shiny," this is something that browsers have needed since the advent of Flash.

Re:Adding features to a minimalist web browser?

[Anonymous Coward]

Minimalist != bloat-free

Chrome's binaries were always bigger than Firefox's, and the memory usage is also a problem with many tabs.

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[SJHillman]

That's 73.99%... I use Opera (and sometimes even IE9)

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[Anonymous Coward]

Troll.

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[Anonymous Coward]

74% must love bloated shitware written by people who don't know how to use malloc() and free() properly.

First hypnotoad

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[b.emile]

Their soul's what?

GPU acceleration?

[Frederic54]

And since Chrome 10 or 11, they disabled GPU acceleration of flash video... so even if my ION laptop is highly capable of decoding 1080p, I can NOT watch youtube video in more than 360p. It has worked for years and they disabled it, shame...

Before someone ask, I have the latest nvidia driver, flash, I disabled the chrome black-list, etc.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[Shados]

Hmm, really? Not doubting your word per say, but my wife and I spent last weekend watching 1080p flash videos full screen (connected to the TV) pretty much non-stop using Chrome 11.

She has a first generation HP ION netbook. There's no way in hell the CPU could have handled it.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have they finally gotten around to fixing the Flash "flickering" problem that's been happening on the OS X versions of Chrome for god-knows-how-long now? In case you don't know, thanks to Chrome's built-in Flash plugin, every time you go to a site that features Flash video, the video overlay will flicker incessantly. This even happens on YouTube. You'd think Google would try to get one of their products to work well with another of their products. But nope! And since the plugin is built in, you can't update it, replace it, etc.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[WaroDaBeast]

There's no HTML5 hardware acceleration either. At least not on my machine (Athlon X2 5600+, nVidia 8800GTS 640), which stutters in every HTML5 speed tests I've run under Chrome. Firefox, on the other hand, runs those tests just fine.

How very underwhelming.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[Anonymous Coward]

Right-click Flash-video -> Settings -> Video -> "Enable hardware acceleration".
There you go.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[Anonymous Coward]

What operating system do you and Frederic use?

I am curious if Chrome disabled hardware acceleration on Linux platforms due to driver bugs or did Chrome disable GPU in general for all operating systems or disabled it for the Mac.

This is a good test with html and webGL in terms of html 5 acceleration. Flash is different though.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[WaroDaBeast]

Dammit, how senile of me — I keep forgetting the obvious. I conducted those tests under Windows Seven. I tried Mozilla's hardware acceleration test once under Ubuntu, but I can't remember what the result was.

Let's run that webGL test now... (Screen resolution is 1680 x 1050, if that matters.) Firefox - 50: ~38 FPS - 100: ~37 FPS - 250: 28 - 34 FPS FPS - 500: ~26 FPS - 1000: ~18 FPS Chrome - 50: 47 - 60 FPS - 100: 43 - 60 FPS (almost always 60, sometimes dips to 43) - 250: ~57 FPS (weird, I know) - 500: 44 FPS - 1000: 35FPS

All graphical options were on. I initially wanted to run the above tests with my CPU at 1 GHz, but since Chrome will automatically bump up my CPU clock, I had to set my CPU to maximum performance mode with Firefox for the results to be fair. Raising my GPU clocks yielded no gains at all.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[Frederic54]

Do you have W7 or XP? I have XP.

Re:GPU acceleration?

[WaroDaBeast]

Replying to myself here.

Firefox 5.0 gets higher FPS overall, though there is not that much of a difference with 1000 fish.

master password

[JeffSh]

does chrome have it's own local master password yet? until then i am never going to use it.

Re:master password

[creativeHavoc]

Does this do it for you? https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search?hl=en-US&q=master+password

Re:master password

[PARENA]

Also, I noticed today that Chrome was asking to access kwallet which I thought was pretty good. So there is some integration already, as well, without the use of addons.

Re:master password

[JeffSh]

I appreciate you taking the time to look, but not really. Near as I can tell, the only password storing/saving mechanisms available for Chrome are in the form of "online services" which I've no interest in being a part of.

I just want my passwords saved, securely encrypted with seed, to my local hard disk. I don't want to create an account with a service, because I don't trust them to safeguard my passwords, nor have any interest in them knowing which sites i save passwords to or any other number of things online services have access to when you use them.

Re:master password

[JeffSh]

Strike all that. I was wrong. I'll have to check out the chrome/keepass integration. I think that's new since last I checked, thank you!

Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge

[broginator]

"...without Chrome or Google ever having to know about the URLs you visit or the files you download." He then grinned and winked knowingly.

Re:Wink Wink, Nudge Nudge

[BitZtream]

Without Google knowing in advance about the URL. This feature totally allows Google to distribute their detection techniques to users rather than on their own network. When their detection code spots something via Chrome, it can then tell Googles services which can add that to the blacklist if it turns out that it really is a malicious site (after Google's services have verified it, so random people can't send a fake 'bad website!' to Google and get any site they want blacklisted.

I don't think they were implying that they'd never know about the URL, just that the browser is capable of catching some things even without it being on Google's blacklist.

Lunaritian: Thank you VERY much (great stuff)

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone mod Lunaritian up for being helpful to me please (I post as AC so I have no mod points etc., but IF I did? He'd get "INFORMATIVE" ratings from myself @ least!).

APK

Re:Lunaritian: Thank you VERY much (great stuff)

[drinkypoo]

Until you log in and play the big moderation game with the rest of us, thus proving that your messages are meant for others and not only to appease your own ego, there is no particular reason to heed your requests.

(My ego is massive, too. I am attempting to turn this bug into a feature by using it for good.)

Re:Lunaritian: Thank you VERY much (great stuff)

[ravrazor]

Coding error fatal to project...cease all development NOW!

Re:Lunaritian: Thank you VERY much (great stuff)

[drinkypoo]

Are you trying to be funny, or threaten me? Either way you fail. Your massive ambiguity is ironic in a programming-related joke.

Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[SanityInAnarchy]

It's getting a bit old that any click within a comment, including within the textarea while I'm trying to reply, gets interpreted as clicking on the "Parent" link, thus requiring me to open the entire thread all the way to the root.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[snowgirl]

It's getting a bit old that any click within a comment, including within the textarea while I'm trying to reply, gets interpreted as clicking on the "Parent" link, thus requiring me to open the entire thread all the way to the root.

Yes, yes, GOD YES. I'm so sick of it.. I tried running Safari to try another browser, and the performance is terrible on my Netbook... I know IE is terrible performance as well. I haven't tried Firefox, so I won't say for sure that Chrome is the only reasonable browser for my Netbook, but its looking darn close.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[splict]

Since it happens on my Firefox installs, too, I'm going to guess that the percentage of affected users needs to be much higher than 24-26%.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[mistiry]

Getting very old.

IMO, the absolute worst part about using Slashdot.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[Qzukk]

Apparently 99% isn't enough for them to fix it, since IE and Firefox both appear to have the same problem.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[Yvan256]

Try Opera.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope you're using the classic discussion system -- expecting anything to work at all in the new one constitutes a user error.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[Billly Gates]

IE 9 has the fastest Javscript engine period! I know that is not a popular opinion here on slashdot but Microsoft is noticing Chrome and Firefox and is getting nervous and playing catchup. It is better with graphically intensive hi res sites as it has the best GPU assisted rendering of text with DirectWrite/Direct 2D. IE 9 is a huge improvement. ... this assumes you run Windows 7 on your netbook of course and it is a free download so give it a shot. If it has a somewhat accelerated graphics it will help scroll IE 9 easier. Chrome is having flake acceleration issues for some users so I do not know. Chrome is great on Linux on my 3 year old laptop. Firefox 3.6 is downright sluggish.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[SanityInAnarchy]

Sorry, no. Inflicting a new UI on people as the default and then having it broken very nearly continuously is very much a developer bug.

I like the new system, and I prefer it to the old system, except for the part where it doesn't fucking work. Seriously, Slashdot, this should be more embarrassing to you than the part where you still can't handle Unicode.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[Waccoon]

This is a web site that shows a spinning busy indicator at the bottom of the screen when you try to close the window (at least on Firefox).

Just how Web 2.0 does a web site have to be that it now needs to "shut down?"

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[SanityInAnarchy]

Definitely doesn't do that on Chrome, and I'm surprised it does on Firefox. When I close a tab, or a window, it makes sense to let the page know and give it a small window to react, but it should be killed before I really notice.

Re:Is 24% enough for us to get a UI fix, Slashdot?

[snowgirl]

IE 9 has the fastest Javscript engine period! I know that is not a popular opinion here on slashdot but Microsoft is noticing Chrome and Firefox and is getting nervous and playing catchup. It is better with graphically intensive hi res sites as it has the best GPU assisted rendering of text with DirectWrite/Direct 2D. IE 9 is a huge improvement. ... this assumes you run Windows 7 on your netbook of course and it is a free download so give it a shot. If it has a somewhat accelerated graphics it will help scroll IE 9 easier. Chrome is having flake acceleration issues for some users so I do not know. Chrome is great on Linux on my 3 year old laptop. Firefox 3.6 is downright sluggish.

Perhaps you didn't note what I said... I've used IE9, and it runs extremely slow. I do have Windows 7, and IE9 is still horrifyingly sluggish.

Firefox had a 6 version headstart with Netscape

[Anonymous Coward]

So look at it like them having 6 free version bumps.

Re:Firefox had a 6 version headstart with Netscape

[Bloodwine77]

Even though Firefox is a completely different beast than Netscape, it is the successor to Netscape so I agree with you to some extent.

What is really sad is my traffic analytics still report the occasional Netscape 4.x visitor. Poor, poor bastards.

Someone mod this AC up too (thank you)

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't have mod points, but your post is easily just as informative as Lunartian's was... I thank you for it, & I'd mod you up as INFORMATIVE myself, if I had mod points (I don't of course, I post as AC too).

APK

P.S.=>

"This should be useful:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ChromiumBrowserVsGoogleChrome" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, @09:09AM (#36386870)

Sure was... awesome stuff & again, thanks! apk

WoW: Never thought I'd say this to YOU, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you, SanityInAnarchy (we've had "our differences" in the past here, but you're not that bad it seems). You have proven yourself as "pretty ok" by being willing to help me, & not troll me while doing it.

(There: LOL, I have said it... even though it took a "crowbar" to pry it out of me!)

The MAIN one that worried me, was browser interface passwords to my router(s) being stored someplace NOT on my systems... goes without saying I think!

APK

P.S.=> On quotes? Sorry man, like I said in my init. post??

I can't produce a quote of what I heard about Google's CHROME allegedly storing passwords "in the cloud" (on their servers etc.), as I don't USUALLY use Chrome OR Chromium (mainly Opera user here), & it seemed to "stick out in my mind" is all.

However... I have tried them recently, & their speed IS "up there" with Opera, easily & I like performance - especially online!

(Chrome/Chromium may in fact be perhaps even faster that Opera, just based on perception of using it here today, they just seem less "feature laden natively" than Opera)...apk

Re:WoW: Never thought I'd say this to YOU, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to move out of that basement, perhaps?

Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Alzheimers]

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?fid=29ea05faa34bade40004a21398e523be&hl=en

Mid-2011 and a web browser this 'Mature' still doesn't have Print Preview. Oh well, at least you can use '3D-Accelerated CSS'.

Which do you think I need more?

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[jackbird]

What's "printing"?

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[swillden]

What do you use print preview for? Obviously, previewing before printing, but for what? Does the preview sometimes make you decide you don't really want to print the page? Are you tweaking HTML to get better print formatting on a particular browser?

I can see using preview on word processors, spreadsheets, etc., but printed web pages pretty much are what they are. I've never felt the need to preview, so I'm curious what your use case is.

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't 26% the total WWW percentage (measured by dubious means)? Slashdot could be significantly lower (or as I suspect significantly higher) than that.

gzip header download bug?

[disi]

No other browser had this problem and I refused to upgrade to 12 before this was fixed: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?tid=5be14c3a63e9b37e&hl=en I'll give it a shot today :)

Re:gzip header download bug?

[Anonymous Coward]

I read a little bit of that link, and it sounds more like shitty websites, rather than a browser bug. Basically, the "error" occurs when the website says "okay we're going to send you x amount of data" but then gzips it and actually sends yx amount of data. Chrome is sitting there waiting for the extra (x-y) amount of data it was told to expect, and after waiting for a bit, concludes that the request was interrupted.

I'm not sure what behavior can be expected of a browser in this case. Complain to isohunt, or stop using their shitty services.

Re:gzip header download bug?

[makomk]

It should be fairly easy to tell that this has happened, because (a) the amount of data after decompression will equal the length given in the header and (b) you can detect end-of-file fairly robustly just using the format of the gzipped data anyway.

TheInquirer is the source.....

[TafBang]

What is all this fake news about... Is slashdot = to the onion... If anybody knows any serious sites with real info and science and news. message me please

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[sehryan]

I am designing a website right now, and I need it to look a certain way when it prints. I am using a print stylesheet to optimize the format for printing.

In Firefox and IE, checking the format is as simple as print preview. I have yet to test it in Chrome, because I am going to have to actually print it to see what it looks like, and then every time I make an adjustment, which could be quite a bit of paper.

The irony is that I usually test in Chrome first for screen. But because no print preview, I have been using FF as my primary. It doesn't even need to be core - make it an extension.

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait, you still print things? Like... on paper?

I think the last document I actually printed on paper was my tax filing for 2007 or 2008...

solution:

[circletimessquare]

click on the "comment subject" input type=text line, then hit tab to get into the textarea field without triggering the errant javascript

yes, i know, this sucks too, it's only a half-measure. it's just easier to manage until slashdot finally fixes their javascript

slashdot: i code for the web. my desktop always has 5 browsers open: firefox, safari, ie, chrome, and opera. i test to make sure my code works in all five

slashdot: please make sure you do the same before you release your code to the wild

thanks

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[eggz128]

I have yet to test it in Chrome, because I am going to have to actually print it to see what it looks like, and then every time I make an adjustment, which could be quite a bit of paper.

Install a PDF virtual printer. Still not quite as convenient, but much cheaper.

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

cutepdf - print to pdf. shhhhhh

Google Gears

[CyDharttha]

They removed Gears from this release. I have an app that has a full offline mode and relies on Gears; as a band-aid fix yesterday I had to downgrade a user to Chrome 11 that had automatically updated. I know, I need to get with the times and port my code to HTML 5. Even more so, as Gears only supports Firefox up to 3.6, and IE up to 8.

Geez AC troll, OF COURSE IT DOES!

[Anonymous Coward]

If your Operating System uses a BSD-based IP stack, then, of course the browser does!

APK

P.S.=> QUESTION: What is your problem w/ HOSTS files, other than your apparent ignorance AND MISTAKES regarding HOSTS files (see below) as you troll me about them?

Some examples of your b.s. & UTTER SCREWUPS on HOSTS files the past few weeks now (& you've been @ it longer than THAT, by far):

---

E.G. #1 - LARGE HOSTS FILES BEING CACHED BY THE LOCAL KERNEL-MODE DISKCACHING SUBSYSTEM (yesterday no less, you screwed up THERE, hugely):

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2220314&cid=36379004

E.G. #2 - HOSTS ON ANDROID PHONES (yes, they work there):

http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2204000&cid=36318508

---

Now: The only people I can see acting as YOU do, trolling me as you do about them nigh constantly (or downmodding my posts on them as well, like this one next below (taking it from a +4 INFORMATIVE down to a 0 INFORMATIVE yesterday)), are MALWARE MAKERS/BOTNET MASTERS!

They're the ONLY people I can see "railing against" HOSTS files!

... apk

Launch apps from Omnibox

[Woogiemonger]

Just a note.. I figured out launching apps from the omnibox, one of Chrome 12's new features, only means an app installed via the chrome app store. You can't just type "cmd.exe" or "Command Prompt" and expect it to launch. But if you install the Angry Birds app via the Chrome Web Store, you can type "Angry Birds" and your game will load.

I'm leaving Chrome soon

[Anonymous Coward]

Opened a new tab in preparation for bringing up my morning news.
Google itself inserted an ad for Angry Birds into my browser's listing of most-visited websites. I'm outta here.

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, so it doesn't have a dedicated print-preview option. But you can print to a file (pdf) and then see the output there.
Admittedly, that's one more click, but it's an option worth considering, no?

Why? You always admit I am right!

[Anonymous Coward]

Proof of my subject-line above? Ok, directly quoted from YOU no less:

"although you're right about hosts files" - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26, @01:21PM (#36252958) Homepage

As you did there about my 20 points on HOSTS files...

So why should I "play games" (especially YOUR game) here on this website?

"Until you log in and play the big moderation game with the rest of us, thus proving that your messages are meant for others and not only to appease your own ego," - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday June 09, @09:53AM (#36387404) Homepage

No thanks... I beat YOUR games, FOOLS' GAMES, easily, & with facts, everytime!

I also gain NOTHING by registering (except the ability to cast upwards moderations which I can just tell someone thanks or good job verbally anyhow) by being a "registered LUSER" here! I'd have trolls like yourself downmodding myself just because I blew their "massive egos" (for what I wonder?) away by blowing those like YOU, away, & with technical facts - you're obviously STILL STINGING from the above, where you HAD TO ADMIT I AM CORRECT ON HOSTS FILES!

(So, in other words? I don't want to be your "peer", when I am CLEARLY, your superior in this art & science).

I don't LOWER myself to YOUR level, troll. That's not directed to the rest of the /.'ers here who ARE registered, but are not trolls like DrinkyPoo here is.

---

"there is no particular reason to heed your requests." - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday June 09, @09:53AM (#36387404) Homepage

Plenty of others did already though, & they were modded up per my request (heck, even SanityInAnarchy had enough class to help out & he and myself have "had it out" a few times here!).

So much for THAT from the "trolling likes of you", as per usual... you are WRONG, yet again!

---

"My ego is massive, too." - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday June 09, @09:53AM (#36387404) Homepage

Based on WHAT, though, exactly?

In fact, when you troll me as you do??

I've asked if you've accomplished anything decent that was noted as so by others in publications around the Computer Sciences genre... you had nothing So, on what exactly do you base your "massive ego"? Delusions of Grandeur on your part?? Apparently so!

(Now - by way of comparison? I had a dozen or more such feats to my credit, & only a partial list of mine too of favs I might have put out, but the ones I do put out?? You have NOTHING like them whatsoever - so your "ego" is based on delusional thinking apparently, not actual accomplishments in the CSC field!)...

APK

P.S.=> Drinkypoo, honestly: Why don't you grow up, & do something with yourself & your life, instead of trolling others?

I mean, lol, that way, I couldn't just throw the fact you're a trolling "ne'er-do-well" in YOUR FACE each time you do this trolling of myself! Think about it... you make it just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'" for me to do to "the trolling likes of you", everytime!

... apk

I own my own home (fully paid too) & rental pr

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you can stop attempting your stupid trolling of myself already drinkypoo (we already KNOW it's you, based on this post and your ADMITTING I AM CORRECT ABOUT HOSTS FILES ALSO), here:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2225174&cid=36387978

I will say 1 thing in YOUR favor though: At least you make ME, look good (I'll give you that, see below)...

APK

P.S.=> Gotta love this drinkypoo... lol (you said it after all):

"although you're right about hosts files" - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26, @01:21PM (#36252958) Homepage

Yes, & as I said to you there also? I always am, unlike yourself!

(Mainly because I don't troll others w/ b.s. & startup with them as you do, troll, and I use facts, not trolling b.s. fictions and I don't speak of that which I do not know, unless I ask a question, as I did here!)

FUNNIEST PART is how you have to "eat your words" vs. myself, each time you do it, as shown above (your own words, now "flavored with the bitter taste of YOUR own defeat" too, no less, lol!))... apk

Hurry drinkypoo, mod the parent post down

[Anonymous Coward]

Or people will see where you had to admit the ac apk is right on hosts files http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2225174&cid=36387978 (how much does anyone want to bet that lunaritian's post will be modded down from +5 informative, now that drinkypoo the trolling nerdowell has been shown to admit ac apk is correct on hosts files to save his massive ego as he himself states he has and for no real visible concrete accomplishments on his part?)

Re:Hurry drinkypoo, mod the parent post down

[drinkypoo]

Or people will see where you had to admit the ac apk is right on hosts files

In other words, this is just more trolling from apk; who else would waste their time defending him? And this is why nobody will take you seriously unless you log in. Even if it isn't you, there's no way to tell the difference. I believe it that in this case, it is. Trollbag.

Do they let you run it as root now?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of the beta's had this annoying "feature" where you could not run as root, which really bugged me on my stripped down bootable usb. I had to switch to chromium, modify the code, and recompile. Did they fix this yet?

Re:Do they let you run it as root now?

[SocPres]

Not from my Chromium 12, although the workaround of using the "--user-data-dir " did allow me to use it as root. But that may not be the case for v13 Dev, if this is to be believed:

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?tid=7b31817f547918b2&hl=en

Google wants to protect me? Fine. Make it a default to not allow root, but don't disable it completely. Jerks.

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

pdf printer.

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Fedy]

Does the preview sometimes make you decide you don't really want to print the page?

Of course that print preview would often make me reconsider printing a page. A lot of (badly designed) pages format really poorly for printing: Text ends up taking only very little space, squeezed from both sides by formatting that may look pretty on the screen but it absolutely useless on paper. Pictures may not scale properly and may be truncated. Etc. Without print preview, you cannot really tell how a page will print because the page may or may not support print-specific formatting.

Are you tweaking HTML to get better print formatting on a particular browser?

Absolutely. In the past, I found myself copying only relevant parts of the page into Word before printing (on Windows) or editing HTML for the page (on Linux) when I wanted to get a good printout.

A workaround for absence of print preview is printing into PDF or PS before you go and spoil a lot of paper... but we really should not have to do such things in 2011.

I do not print nearly as often as I once did. But when I do, having a print preview - and ideally live preview where you can remove content that you do not want to print - would be a big help.

Re:Meanwhile, in Switzerland...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ron Paul doesn't think that US taxpayers should be on the hook for European governments who can't balance a budget.

So the US is now part of the Eurozone. The US treasury surely loves to bind their hands, feet and torso on the monetary policy. It's called bondage.

Who came here trolling offtopic, drinkypoo?

[Anonymous Coward]

Answer the question in my subject-line, troll: Have you been on topic here, once? No!

You ought to be downmoderated for being off topic as is!

Still, like I said earlier?

You can't seem to "get over yourself" & the FACT you had to ADMIT I AM CORRECT ON HOSTS FILES, after you trolled me on them as you always do:

"although you're right about hosts files" - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26, @01:21PM (#36252958) Homepage

Don't try to "take me on" technically, or troll me, troll... or you will have to "eat your words", flavored with the "bitter taste of defeat" (you, defeating yourself no less) as per your trolling usual!

Now, you also stated in this exchange you have a "massive ego", but again, for WHAT exactly?

After all - You've evaded questions from me that asked "what exactly gives you the right to have any ego in the 1st place?" & you haven't accomplished SQUAT in the art & sciences of computing, you "ne'er-do-well" troll!

Period!

(AND, You're obviously embarassed & stinging still I see, from your admission quoted above... keep trolling, and I will keep throwing your own admissions of my being correct right back in YOUR FACE!)

APK

P.S.=> You're NOT in my league, & you never WILL BE, as long as you keep up your trolling off topic "ne'er-do-well" ways, troll... accept it! apk

Re:Who came here trolling offtopic, drinkypoo?

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't read any of your guys' obviously interesting troll love story, but the only picture I have in my head right now are two squinty fat guys trying to slap each other in the head and having your obesity get comically in the way. Its honestly pretty funny. Please do continue.

Also, APK where are you from? What is your native language?

LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL - It doesn't even support H.264.

Interesting stuff: A slightly diff. "pov" here

[Anonymous Coward]

There ARE "downsides" to "OPEN SORES" too though man (don't get all bent when I use "SORES", it's just a play on words, but it DOES have some "meaning" too... please, read on!):

"And yet a large number of people realize the benefits of open source, and the downsides of proprietary, closed-source binaries." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @01:37PM (#36390786)

Here's where we differ a WEE bit - only on some parts though:

Disassembling & tracing a CLOSED SOURCE APP searching for security issues, or even FUZZING, is a LOT tougher than using sourcecode written in a HLL language (especially HLL ones, vs. Assembly (which is what debuggers give you anyhow from HLL languages)) - & by FAR man, by far!

That's an advantage closed source has!

That is, as long as known vulnerabilities aren't exposed to take advantage of (which works vs. Open SORES too mind you as well/just the same)...

(Which is the "why" of WHY many security researchers are encouraged to approach the vendor with security vulnerabilities issues, first. Not all do, but those that do? Are doing "the right thing", for the rest of us that is... but, if the company involved hides it?? Sure, expose the bug - embarass them into a fix, And, hopefully, not doing the "hiding" too long, ever again... just basic psychology really!)

---

"Chromium is the open source browser. Chrome is not." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @01:37PM (#36390786)

Interesting, IF I understood you correctly... I thought BOTH were "Open SORES" (again, don't take the sores thing personally, it's just humor - I use Linux for example myself, & I do think open source is a good thing!)

APK

P.S.=> Man - This is turning out to be a real learning experience for me, as regards my initial question here on Chrome vs. Chromium!

... apk

Re:Interesting stuff: A slightly diff. "pov" here

[Raenex]

Disassembling & tracing a CLOSED SOURCE APP searching for security issues, or even FUZZING, is a LOT tougher than using sourcecode

And yet the security bugs still appear in closed source products at a steady rate, and you are at the mercy of the vendor to fix them. Not having the source code means you can't fork the product. Not having the source code makes it hard to verify there aren't backdoors or other nefarious behavior.

I thought BOTH were "Open SORES" (again, don't take the sores thing personally, it's just humor

It's not humor, it's a childish insult used as an intellectually dishonest debate/propaganda tactic.

For something to be open source, it means the binary has to be released with source code to recreate that binary. Chrome does not release all the source code for their binaries. Chromium does.

Private Browsing Win?

[psydeshow]

The "Incognito Window" option in Chrome 12 is private browsing done right. Nothing is shared with other windows / tabs. Not even session cookies.

It's not a single-site browser option, but it's as close as we may get for a while. Bravo, Google, you nailed it... EXCEPT WAIT. If you open multiple incognito windows, they all share the same set of cookies. Which is kinda fail.

Damn! They were so close! Oh well.

Re:Private Browsing Win?

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering you can drag around tabs to pull, and merge different window, the way currently actually does make more sense. (You can't do it between incognito window and normal window, obviously.)

Since tab/browser is dynamic, it'll get awfully confusing if each window would have different set of cookies. (what happens, if you drag tab from incognito window A to incognito window B? How about when you open new window from a link on a incognito window?)

Re:Private Browsing Win?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does Chrome 12 use plug-ins such as Adblock in its incognito windows? Thats the one thing that bugs the hell outta me.

Re:Private Browsing Win?

[thisisntme]

You can choose which extensions are allowed to run in incognto mode, in the extensions page there is a "Allow in incognito" checkbox for each one.

Facts, vs. YOUR FICTIONS (Open SORES zealot)

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, since it seems you are, & you took offense to what I stated (when no offense was intended)? Here we go then, facts time (rather than mere zealous statements):

YOUR SWORD CUTS BOTH WAYS, & NOT IN FAVOR OF OPEN SORES!

And, I'll show you proofs from a reputable source on my statement next below, in fact!

I'm going to point out a couple things, with factual, concrete, & verifiable information... put your "mental seat belts" on, & please - go easy, as they're just FACT, ok?

Here we go:

"And yet the security bugs still appear in closed source products at a steady rate, and you are at the mercy of the vendor to fix them." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @02:12PM (#36391384)

Let's compare a closed source "ecosystem" (nearly ALL of what Microsoft gives you, closed source & all, to do development & business with) vs. the Linux KERNEL ONLY (not the entirety of what goes into a Linux distro, which would only COMPOUND IT WORSE for Linux, & yes, "Open SORES"):

---

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft SQL Server 2008: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/21744/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 0 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 7.x: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/17543/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 6 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Exchange Server 2010: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/28234/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 0 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/29809/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 0 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Forefront Endpoint Protection 2010: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/34343/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 1 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Office 2010: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/30529/?task=advisories

Unpatched 0% (0 of 6 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Virtual PC 2007: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/14315/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 1 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Internet Explorer 9.x: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/34591/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 0 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Visual Studio 2010: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/30853/?task=advisories

Unpatched 17% (0 of 1 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft DirectX 10.x:
(06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/16896/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 3 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft .NET Framework 4.x
(06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/29592/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 3 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Silverlight 4.x: (06/09/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/28947/

Unpatched 0% (0 of

Re:Facts, vs. YOUR FICTIONS (Open SORES zealot)

[Raenex]

Well, since it seems you are, & you took offense to what I stated (when no offense was intended)?

You're a dumb fuck. Hee hee, no offense intended. Just a little bit of humor.

Here we go then, facts time (rather than mere zealous statements):

Nothing I stated wasn't a fact.

Seems that "steady stream" of vulnerabilities you stated are WORSE in a OPEN SORES software ecosystem, than in a closed source one... argue with the numbers above, NOT myself!

You're fixated on the number of security bugs while ignoring all the other arguments. First of all, I never claimed that Linux had fewer security bugs. Your links show that Microsoft still has a steady stream of security bugs associated with it, which fits with exactly what I said.

Second, your link also show unpatched security bugs for Microsoft Windows, and if that bug is important to a particular consumer, they are shit out of luck for getting a patch for it unless Microsoft decides they will write a patch for it.

There are unpatched security bugs for Linux too, but if it is important enough a patch can supplied by anybody. Also, the most sever unpatched bug in the Linux kernel was rated "Less critical", while the most severe for Windows 7 was rated "Highly critical".

Third, you ignored the argument that closed source makes it harder to inspect what the software is doing. China, in fact, used their sway to force Microsoft to show them the source for Windows. The average company or user does not have that sway.

And last, being able to fork a project is a very powerful and useful ability. If the main organization in charge of the software is not meeting some needs, the project can be forked. Microsoft Windows has enjoyed a near-monopoly on the desktop for quite some time now, whereas there are many distributions of Linux to choose from.

Chrome 12

[Anonymous Coward]

So I launched Chrome for the first time in months and it was already in 12.xx version, this bothers me a bit...

Re:Chrome 12

[Zebedeu]

Which OS?
In Ubuntu, Chrome adds a PPA to your sources so your package manager can keep it updated automatically.

lets see if they fixed flash gaming

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets see if they fixed flash gaming.
Currently the only browser for Linux where flash gaming still works is Opera.
firefox broke it in the name of "integration" with the new flash API (firefox 4 + flash 10.3),
by putting every local state together in the same "cookie" setting, thereby
_destroying every flash saved game during my upgrade from firefox 3.x to firefox 4_.
The same insanity was in google chrome, so lets see if they did it right this time
(ie separating web cookies from flash local shared objects, and providing different settings for both

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

Never done a print preview to see that you don't get 5 irrelevant pages and one that you are actually interested in?
Do we first have to print to PDF and then print from that?

3.5x++ # of unpatched bugs in OpenSores Kernel?

[Anonymous Coward]

Vs. nearly the ENTIRE GAMUT of what MS gives you? MS, a closed source ecosystem in Microsoft has LESS UNPATCHED BUGS THAN OPEN SORES??

Plus/Now:

I never attacked YOU, yet you are me (resorting to "adhominem" illogic are we?)... what w/ your next quoted statement below!

Ah, anyways/anyhow:

Well - Facts are, that the # of unpatched bugs on Linux 2.6x (KERNEL ONLY mind you, not an entire distro & all of its parts), is 3.5x++ that of not only Windows 7 in its entirety, but also nearly the ENTIRE GAMUT/ARRAY of what Microsoft gives you to do development & business with....

Seems to have "parked your open SORES car", pretty easily... to the point of you having to use attempts @ attacking me, rather than my points, no questions asked!

"You're a dumb fuck. Hee hee, no offense intended. Just a little bit of humor." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @03:34PM (#36392592)

None taken - I know that when I have someone attempting to attack myself rather than the FACTS I bring to the table, I am not worried @ all whatsoever in a debate.

---

"Your links show that Microsoft still has a steady stream of security bugs associated with it, which fits with exactly what I said." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @03:34PM (#36392592)

Bugs that ARE PATCHED by a closed source company in Microsoft...

( & less in an ENTIRE ARRAY OF PRODUCTS you need to do development & business with from Microsoft has 3.5x++ LESS BUGS UNPATCHED than your "Open SORES" stuff (which I use myself no less also))...

Again - BIG difference there (as you seemed to imply that "open sores patches faster & has less bugs")

---

"Nothing I stated wasn't a fact." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @03:34PM (#36392592)

What I put up CERTAINLY IS FACT, and backed by reputable sources... where are yours? Oh, you didn't put up any!

You don't back it up with any concrete & verifiable data from reputable sources though, only your own "words"...

Whereas I took your "steady stream of bugs" in closed source you stated & utterly DELUGED it with contrary data.

Big difference there...

---

"Second, your link also show unpatched security bugs for Microsoft Windows, and if that bug is important to a particular consumer, they are shit out of luck for getting a patch for it unless Microsoft decides they will write a patch for it." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @03:34PM (#36392592)

First of all: I don't see all those "Open SORES eyes" allegedly PORING OVER LINUX KERNEL ONLY's CODE & fixing bugs... 3.5x++ as many as are present in Windows, and not only Windows, but also the entire GAMUT of what MS puts out for development in fact!

HUGE difference there... & the "Open SORES" crowd tries to say "since it's open, more people will patch it" yea, well... what I put up from a reputable source says QUITE OTHERWISE!

(Sad fact is? Most folks that use Linux?? Don't code, & CAN'T FIX THOSE UNPATCHED BUGS, which are, fact, 3.5x++ as many as are present in Windows & the rest of Microsoft's CLOSED SOURCE software ecosystem!)

---

"There are unpatched security bugs for Linux too, but if it is important enough a patch can supplied by anybody." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @03:34PM (#36392592)

Then, WHY DOES LINUX (kernel only mind you, NOT what's in an entire distro which COMPOUNDS that # of unpatched bugs even more, FAR more in fact) STILL HAVE BUGS @ THE CORE?

Answer that please... & why 3.5x++ as many as a closed source entire ecosystem of tools & OS by Microsoft?

---

WHAT?

"Third, you ignored the argument that closed source makes it harder to inspect what the software is doing - by Raenex (947668) on Thur

Re:3.5x++ # of unpatched bugs in OpenSores Kernel?

[Raenex]

Again, you are fixating on the number of bugs, and ignoring the larger point that there is still a steady stream of bugs. So if you are using closed source because it is harder to find bugs, it's rather pointless. Both Microsoft and Linux are good about patching their most severe security bugs. However, if Microsoft doesn't patch a bug (and they haven't patched some), then you are at their mercy.

I never attacked YOU, yet you are me (resorting to "adhominem" illogic are we?)

I was making a point about your childish and intellectually dishonest use of "open sores", while claiming no offense and appealing to humor. I could have used Microsoft Window$ as an alternative. Either way it's childish name calling, which have you continued to engage in during this entire conversation.

Whereas I took your "steady stream of bugs" in closed source you stated & utterly DELUGED it with contrary data.

You actually showed my statement to be a fact. There is a steady stream of bugs in Windows 7, and even more crucially products like Internet Explorer. You linked to the 1 month old version 9, but version 8 had advisories nearly every month. You have also backed up my fact that if a closed source vendor doesn't supply a patch, you are out of luck by showing that there are indeed unpatched bugs.

And mind you, these are only security bugs that you have fixated on. Other bugs or missing features exist, and you have no recourse for somebody else to either supply a fix or fork the project.

It IS is the REASON WHY WE ARE NOT ALL RUNNING SOME *NIX (UNIX specifically) variant today... too many "cooks in the kitchen" between BSD variants, AT&T Bell Labs variants, & SCO, SOLARIS, etc.

Of that, I'm grateful. I'd much rather have an ecosystem of software to choose from than whatever Microsoft or Apple decide. I think it's awesome that I can run Debian, which provides the backbone for Ubuntu, and not be stuck with a would-be monolith like Red Hat.

Watching drinkypoo run from a SIMPLE question?

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed, it IS funny as hell!

"Its honestly pretty funny." - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, @03:52PM (#36392816)

It is funny, especially when drinkypoo accused ME of being a troll, and yet he has not been "on topic" once here, and is definitely attempting to troll me... what is funnier still?

See my subject line, & this "choice quote" of his from the last time he trolled me, once more:

"although you're right about hosts files" - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26, @01:21PM (#36252958) Homepage

That's from drinkypoo's last attempt @ trolling me, & his "BIG FAIL"... lol!

Now, unless you're stupid?

(so far you don't seem to be, except for the fat guy crack, but... I am former collegiate athlete & letterman here in a sport you CAN'T be "fat" in or you'd die from the running, especially @ midfield which I was FORCED to play, lol, after leading my team in scoring my freshman yr. no less (& I'm still in GOOD SHAPE for a 48 yr. old guy) Lacrosse, & for a national champ here, see letter K 1985 -> http://www.lemoynedolphins.com/sports/mlax/history/mlaxletterwinners )

?

Well - It doesn't "take a brain" to realize drinkypoo's STILL "STINGING" from having to make that quoted admission above... lol!

(Hence, his attempts @ trolling me now, yet again, AND, funniest of all? He won't answer if he came in here trolling or if he was on topic here even once... says it ALL for me!)

---

"Also, APK where are you from?" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, @03:52PM (#36392816)

To quote the Highlander from the original movie?

"LOTS OF DIFFERENT PLACES"

(I travel for work quite extensively over 17++ yrs. now, & for the longest time? I really didn't have a home... migrating every 1-3 yrs. typically for work in this field! However, because of it, I now have my own home & have settled in NY State!)

---

"What is your native language?" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, @03:52PM (#36392816)

Which one? I speak 2 & extremely fluently, & a 3rd pretty well also... I'm a U.S. Citizen, child of immigrants, & 1st generation American!

APK

P.S.=> LMAO, ah... in the end, on drinkypoo?

Heh - he makes me LOOK GOOD! I love it... lol, I truly do!

HOWEVER, in closing:

I do wish he was a BIT more intelligent & a bit more of a challenge, instead of a easily seen thru troll whose fav. color is "TRANSPARENT", lmao, because his evading questions, AND admitting I was right too? Priceless... apk

Flash gaming for Linux is Opera-only now

[sick_soul]

Lets see if they fixed flash gaming.
Currently the only browser for Linux where flash gaming still works is Opera.
firefox broke it in the name of "integration" with the new flash API (firefox 4 + flash 10.3),
by putting every local state together in the same "cookie" setting, thereby
_destroying every flash saved game during my upgrade from firefox 3.x to firefox 4_.
The same insanity was in google chrome, so lets see if they did it right this time
(ie separating web cookies from flash local shared objects, and providing different settings for both

nope, it's still broken. Also, the "cookie exception" patterns do not help much since there is no way to remove all cookies at the end of the session for everything BUT a certain domain.

So flash gaming for Linux is on Opera only now. Lets hope the Opera guys don't copy this horrid "feature" from chrome/firefox.

SteadyStream of bugs = MORE on Open SORES

[Anonymous Coward]

AND, more of them UNPATCHED on Linux in its KERNEL ALONE (not its entirety either, that only makes the # of unpatched bugs go UP more for it, worsening the comparison based on FACTS, for you)... end of story, period!

Or, was the factual data from a reputable source for it wrong? I know not.
---

HOWEVER?

Oh, this one "takes the cake" from you:

"You actually showed my statement to be a fact. There is a steady stream of bugs in Windows 7, and even more crucially products like Internet Explorer. - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @05:15PM (#36393668)

Ahem: I suggest you take a look AGAIN, & especially @ Internet Explorer 9 stats I put up from a reputable source for unpatched security bugs data... hint: ZERO bugs unpatched & ZERO BUGS KNOWN period!

Also?

Linux 2.6, KERNEL ONLY (again, would be more if the ENTIRETY of Linux was shown with all of its bugs)? 3.5x++ as many as on Windows 7... period & again FACT!

Hell, the ENTIRETY OF THE DEVELOPMENT & BUSINESS SUITE I PUT UP HAS LESS BUGS UNPATCHED THAN THE LINUX KERNEL ALONE!

(Like I said before: Don't argue with me, argue with the #'s... they're just fact!)

I MUST ASK: Is English your native language, and, can you read? (or did you read that list I showed you??)

Heck - Fact is, everything MS gives you (save the OS proper itself) has ZERO UNPATCHED BUGS IN THEIR LATEST MODELS (which I compared to the latest mainstream Linux core, CORE KERNEL ONLY, add on the rest? It gets worse for Open SORES!)

---

"Again, you are fixating on the number of bugs, and ignoring the larger point that there is still a steady stream of bugs" - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @05:15PM (#36393668)

AGAIN: The facts I put up show that despite Linux, KERNEL ONLY not its entirety? HAS 3.5x++ as many security vulnerabilities UNPATCHED than does the ENTIRETY (almost) OF WHAT MICROSOFT GIVES YOU TO DO BUSINESS & DEVELOPMENT WITH!

Just fact...

There's ALWAYS bugs (or useability issues) - I know, been coding since 1982, & since 1994/1995 as a pro! You can't win... especially when the introduction of "new features" takes precedence over stability & testing!

---

Now, hold your horses on this one, cowboy:

"Either way it's childish name calling" - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @05:15PM (#36393668)

You seem to forget that I use Linux myself, & probably LONGER THAN YOU HAVE... for starters.

AND, I never called YOU a name (not like when you called me a "dumb fuck" lol)... I only point out that "Open SORES" has downsides.

Those downsides?

Simple - again, it's EASIER to find bugs in HLL code than disassembling & tracing (or even fuzzing) CLOSED SOURCE CODE... period!

(Ask any coder that, they will tell you the same: There's a world of difference in it!)

Now, you went & got all "bent" & called ME a dumb fuck, when all I did was point out a downside of Open SORES!

---

"Other bugs or missing features exist, and you have no recourse for somebody else to either supply a fix or fork the project." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @05:15PM (#36393668)

Again, NOT true of myself: When I want to fix something or build it? I do... been doing it (to decent acclaim in publications & trade shows too since 1996 here) for ages!

Hooking the OS, or building a "filtering driver" (only ways I KNOW OF to 'circumvent' CLOSED SOURCE in essence)??

Not that big a deal in CLOSED SOURCE, IF you can code, that is...

What you just said doesn't apply to me... that is, IF I want to go thru the hassles of setting up 2 systems to kernel debug the OS itself that is (hassle).

Point is though? I can... & yes, have.

---

"Of that, I'm grateful. I

Re:SteadyStream of bugs = MORE on Open SORES

[Raenex]

AND, more of them UNPATCHED on Linux in its KERNEL ALONE

Again, you are fixating only on the number, and ignoring the steady stream of bugs, and the fact that you can't fix a patch if the vendor won't. You are arguing a strawman -- I never said open source had fewer bugs, only that closed source still has a steady stream of bugs. You have not refuted that; quite the opposite, you have demonstrated it.

Internet Explorer 9 stats I put up from a reputable source for unpatched security bugs data... hint: ZERO bugs unpatched & ZERO BUGS

Yeah, that's great, except I addressed that but you ignored it. To repeat myself: "You linked to the 1 month old version 9, but version 8 had advisories nearly every month."

ou seem to forget that I use Linux myself, & probably LONGER THAN YOU HAVE... for starters. AND, I never called YOU a name

Name calling is name calling. The objects of debate are closed source and open source, and you chose to use childish name calling in your arguments. Whether it was personal or not is besides the point.

Hooking the OS, or building a "filtering driver" (only ways I KNOW OF to 'circumvent' CLOSED SOURCE in essence)??

Get real. Companies don't do this because it is too expensive and time consuming. You also can't fork the project and distribute your changes to others, because it is closed source and copyright law forbids it.

HISTORY SHOWN US ALL ALREADY WHY UNIX DIDN'T "WIN" & WHY WE ALL DON'T RUN SOME VARIANT OF IT

No need to shout and act so emotional, bolding and capitalizing every other sentence. It's really a drag to read your posts.

To your point, Unix did win, just not the monopoly version from AT&T. We ended up with a thriving ecosystem of variants, from the wide use on the server end, to free alternatives on the desktop, to usage in devices like routers, to an Apple derivative of BSD that forms the basis of OS X (even if Apple is closed source, it benefited from open source).

I'm happy to have lots of great, free, open source software to choose from on Linux, even if it's not the "year of the Linux desktop". If there are people who don't find value in open source, then that's their choice and opinion, but their is value.

So if you want to know why there are "zealots" that make a distinction between Chrome and Chromium, I have done my best to answer it. I'm not claiming that closed source is without value, or absolutely better or worse than open source.

Good debate... I am enjoying this one, immensely!

I'm not, and this is my last reply. I'm repeating myself way too much.

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

in Vista or W7, you can print to an XPS file - which is kinda like a PDF

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[Billly Gates]

Strange. With postscript, monitor profiles, and Microsoft equivalent of postscript (forgot name) I would assume this should be a none issue. A huge part of desktop composition deals with making sure what you see on the screen is identical to what you print out. Apple solved this 25 years ago. Are web browsers different than typical gui applications in this regard? Using a printing style sheet sounds very archaic and backwards. I would like to know since I want to develop a website where printing receipts will be a core function.

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[BZ]

If I go to print a page and just print it, it's pretty common to get 3 pages of print out, with my content on the first page and ads on the other two.

Preview lets me see that and decide to print only the first page, or some other range of pages.

You don't READ my posts, do you? Evidently not

[Anonymous Coward]

I am "fixating" on the # of bugs being larger in Linux KERNEL ALONE (not the entirety of a Linux distro)... because it makes my point!

Despite your "all those open sores eyes will fix the bugs in Linux" b.s. as well as "the fix can come from anywhere"? LINUX HAS MORE BUGS UNPATCHED PERIOD!

That's in its kernel only too.

Now/Again - Toss on the rest of what comes in Linux distros (or, as I did with MS' entire dev & business suite)? It gets worse for "Open SORES", way, Way, WAY worse in fact!

(E.G. -> Take a LAMP stack setup (since I put out all MS webstuff in IIS, IE9, & SQLServer) - toss on THEIR BUGS TOO? Linux & Open "SORES" gets WASTED BY COMPARISON & easily and even MORESO STILL!)

Fact!

Hell, the Linux kernel ALONE has more bugs than all the programs I listed from MS, lol... that? That's pretty damn bad!

---

"Again, you are fixating only on the number, and ignoring the steady stream of bugs." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @06:40PM (#36394622)

So what? Again, I am fixating on them! Both have bugs, streams of them BUT, for ALL THOSE "OPEN SORES EYES"? LINUX HAS MORE, & IN THE KERNEL ONLY...

And??

More unpatched security bugs than the Windows 7 OS, and lol, MORE THAN THE ENTIRETY (almost) OF WHAT MS OFFERS FOR DEVELOPMENT & BUSINESS PURPOSES!

Period, & fact!

---

"and the fact that you can't fix a patch if the vendor won't." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @06:40PM (#36394622)

That's not true, because using 2 OS (debug symbols loaded ones) & 2 machines + a kernel level debugger? A decent coder, given time, can fix ANYTHING (that's usually how it's done @ that level in fact). Guess what? Coder here, & one that's done well over time too in the eyes of others!

(E.G.-> Commercial software code to my name, ideas that took finalist positions @ MSTechEd 2 yrs. in a row, & FAR more in newspapers, books, trade magazines, etc.).

---

"Get real. Companies don't do this because it is too expensive and time consuming" - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @06:40PM (#36394622)

I never SAID ANYTHING ABOUT "COMPANIES": I am talking me, I have done so before (it's a pain but sometimes it's ALL YOU HAVE). I outline a good chunk of it above in fact, and sorry to say this?

Companies DO do this... Microsoft has a "Crash Debug Analysis Team" that assists in it in fact!

---

"Yeah, that's great, except I addressed that but you ignored it. To repeat myself: "You linked to the 1 month old version 9, but version 8 had advisories nearly every month." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @06:40PM (#36394622)

One month old? Try more than that, for starters, AND it's current (just like Linux 2.6x kernel in mainstream)... your point is what??

AND?

I could toss on browsers for Linux too, say Konqueror/ReKonq, & point out their errors, but I don't have to... lol, because the kernel ALONE has more unpatched bugs than the ENTIRETY of what MS puts out for business & development (that's pretty sad, lol!).

3.5x++ as many unpatched bugs, despite "all those Open SORES eyes poring over the code & fixing security bugs" (funny, still more bugs in the Linux KERNEL ALONE, than all of what MS puts out (nearly all)).

---

On this one? Please... give us a break - what a truckload of "doubletalk" b.s.:

"Name calling is name calling." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @06:40PM (#36394622)

You mean like when you called me a "dumb fuck"?

---

"The objects of debate are closed source and open source, and you chose to use childish name calling in your arguments." - by Raenex (947668) on Thursday June 09, @06:40PM (#36394622)

LMAO, please... c

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[rdnetto]

I use Chrome everywhere, but Chrome has terrible printing in comparison to Firefox. Compare the output when printing (e.g. Wikipedia) - Chrome doesn't layout nearly as well and uses twice as much paper.
And for the sibling post who asked what printing is, not everyone has a tablet. It's also the easiest way to convert to PDF.

LAMP stack security (new NEWS/NewsFlash)

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/10/domains_lamped/

---

PERTINENT QUOTE:

"Phishers compromise LAMP-based websites for days at a time and hit the same victims over and over again, according to an Anti-Phishing Working Group survey.

Sites built on Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP are the favoured targets of phishing attackers,"

---

That's JUST FOR YOU, Raenex... & of course, this as well, for comparison's sake, Apples-To-Apples:

---

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft SQL Server 2008: (04/29/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/21744/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 0 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 7.x: (04/29/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/17543/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 6 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Exchange Server 2010: (04/29/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/28234/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 0 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Internet Explorer 9.x: (04/29/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/34591/

Unpatched 0% (0 of 0 Secunia advisories)

Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Visual Studio 2010: (04/29/2011)

http://secunia.com/advisories/product/30853/?task=advisories

Unpatched 17% (0 of 1 Secunia advisories)

---

And?

Well, We already KNOW that Windows 7 has less bugs unpatched than Linux 2.6x also (the mainstream kernel, & KERNEL ONLY, not the entirety of a Linux distro mind you, vs. a COMPLETE OS in Win7)

APK

P.S.=> Now, that's a comparison for you Raenex:

LAMP stacks (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP) being BLOWN AWAY regularly, vs. ZERO BUGS in MS' dev. stack for websites

Again... "read 'em, & weep" (current/new news)... apk

Re:Is this the version with Print Preview? No.

[vgerclover]

Ghostscript.

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[thePuck77]

How is Opera nowadays? I'm using it on my phone due to the speed, and I used to use it like ten years ago, but I haven't heard much about it for a while. What would you say made you choose it?

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[SJHillman]

I switched to Opera shortly after Firefox stopped being called Firebird. I found Firefox getting too bloated and clumsy... it felt more like IE than IE did. Haven't looked back at Firefox since. Opera 11 onward has pretty much solved all of the problems with some websites being incompatible, it also supports extensions now and the mail client built in is one of the best free clients out there (especially since Thunderbird's bloat has begun to increase exponentially). There's a few sites out there that refuse to run on Opera... but you can change Site Preferences in about 2 clicks to identify as Firefox or IE. Handy for idiot-run sites like Netflix that claim Opera isn't supported when it actually runs better on Opera. Give it a try... I wouldn't recommend it for your average user who does zero customization/options changing, but for anyone with a little geek in them, it's great

Re:26% gave their soul's to the devil...

[thePuck77]

Thanks for your response, that's pretty helpful. Extensions are pretty much a must-have for me...I need something like Firebug for work.

Save a tree. -- or -- where does ink grow.

[bobs666]

perhaps you only need one or two pages out of a 10 or 50 page html document. Perhaps a preview would help you pick the pages you need.