In that case, aren't the plugins mostly in the wrong? IE, Opera and Safari would probably all have the same leak if a plugin could be pointed at as the culprit.
Chrome has add-ons too now, and every time you install one it warns you that it *might* make your system more vulnerable. Basically, same story as all other modern browsers supporting plugins (with the exception that Chrome uses seperate processes and yet has only a very small percentage of users, making it not so important to people with the wrong intentions).
Rather than hate, a misunderstanding on the patent has been widely spread and is now being believed by a lot of people to be true, causing any possible hate.
I'm glad the article got red-marked or however you call it, but plenty of people won't notice that or won't believe the people who are saying what the article is making you believe isn't actually true.
...but it doesn't work. Video doesn't play and the link to the MP4 version of any video is broken. Is this the Slashdot effect? The site itself does work, just not the video...
And yes, I have chromium-codecs-ffmpeg-nonfree installed.
I've seen uselessly (and sometimes usefully) flashy websites made in JavaScript a bit more, lately. By which I mean flashy effects when mousing over things, or going through one of those rotation-picture-viewer things. JavaScript can definitely replace Flash when it comes to flashiness, especially because it's getting faster in modern browsers.
I found that rather than being unstable, it sometimes doesn't completely render some pages. Chrome for Linux/Mac has been fairly stable for a few months now, even the nightly builds.
They did sandbox JS to the best of their efforts, though, especially since each tab is a process on its own that can't access the other ones (by conventional means, anyway). Me, I'd miss JS as tons of sites now make good use for it (like AJAX pages) and there are other practical uses coming for it (interactive SVG, that browser 3D thing Google is making).
If there's a need, I'm sure an automatic JS blocker extension will be written eventually for Chrome.
Slashdot Mirror
Overclocking my system only gives me the minimum desired performance - what now?!
In that case, aren't the plugins mostly in the wrong? IE, Opera and Safari would probably all have the same leak if a plugin could be pointed at as the culprit.
It's all relative - he was using one result per page for Firefox searches and 200 results per page for IE searches.
Chrome has add-ons too now, and every time you install one it warns you that it *might* make your system more vulnerable. Basically, same story as all other modern browsers supporting plugins (with the exception that Chrome uses seperate processes and yet has only a very small percentage of users, making it not so important to people with the wrong intentions).
Or are you using lynx or something?
Yeah, but on Windows you can do:
format c:
without complaints.
Well, maybe like 10 years ago.
You're missing the poi--
Wait, you're a troll. Nevermind then. Hope you'll contribute something more interesting next time.
Rather than hate, a misunderstanding on the patent has been widely spread and is now being believed by a lot of people to be true, causing any possible hate.
I'm glad the article got red-marked or however you call it, but plenty of people won't notice that or won't believe the people who are saying what the article is making you believe isn't actually true.
Because FireEye doesn't want to get in legal trouble?
Unfortunately, the reply from FireEye is that it would be illegal, even if there are "good" intentions behind it, so they won't be doing it.
But that's not 1/3rd, it's just an approximation!
...One database per registered user.
...but it doesn't work. Video doesn't play and the link to the MP4 version of any video is broken. Is this the Slashdot effect? The site itself does work, just not the video...
And yes, I have chromium-codecs-ffmpeg-nonfree installed.
With the exception of games
Interactive SVG.
I've seen uselessly (and sometimes usefully) flashy websites made in JavaScript a bit more, lately. By which I mean flashy effects when mousing over things, or going through one of those rotation-picture-viewer things. JavaScript can definitely replace Flash when it comes to flashiness, especially because it's getting faster in modern browsers.
So Doom IV will be released December 2099 and Doom V will be released right before the end of humanity as we know it. Big deal.
id is B(L)ACK!
Not in my experience... Everything takes longer to run and applications crash a bit more frequently.
http://www.chromeextensions.org/appearance-functioning/adblock/
A few months later:
Mac
Hey look, I got Chrome now, too! And surprise, it's a little bit better than the Windows version.
PC
W-W-W-Whaaaaaat?!
I found that rather than being unstable, it sometimes doesn't completely render some pages. Chrome for Linux/Mac has been fairly stable for a few months now, even the nightly builds.
They did sandbox JS to the best of their efforts, though, especially since each tab is a process on its own that can't access the other ones (by conventional means, anyway). Me, I'd miss JS as tons of sites now make good use for it (like AJAX pages) and there are other practical uses coming for it (interactive SVG, that browser 3D thing Google is making).
If there's a need, I'm sure an automatic JS blocker extension will be written eventually for Chrome.
Ad blockers exist now, as well as several other extensions. See http://chromeextensions.org/.
Chrome remembers (unimportant) passwords too...
I didn't realize there was such a thing as a Google fanboy.
This feature seems to be available in Chromium (though it's greyed out in my current chrome-daily beta...)