It's here. The Google Browser.

[drhowarddrfine]

Link (http://blogoscoped.com/)
The link to the actual browser project didn't work as of the time I'm posting this so the article is above.

[scragar]

link still doesn't have any content, which is a shame(there is a page there, if your willing to compare it's 404 page to say, the 404 you get for google.com/emohc (http://google.com/emohc)) :(

I'm gonna keep reloading it from time to time though, in a little while I may just wind up writing a perl script to check for me (easy enough to write, include the basic HTTP lib, set UserAgent to something that won't be as likely to just get blocked for being a bot, then have it check the status code to see if it's 404, if it's not display a message and exit, if it is, wait and loop again.)

[drhowarddrfine]

TechCrunch says: (http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/09/01/meet-chrome-googles-windows-killer/)
Expect to see millions of web devices, even desktop web devices, in the coming years that completely strip out the Windows layer and use the browser as the only operating system the user needs.
Now, for how long have I been saying "The web is the OS" only to get rocks thrown at me?
it also paves the way for a Microsoft-free computing experience.
Now, how many times have I said that was coming, too?

[scragar]

thin clients don't work out at the moment, the internet is too unpredicatable and slow in too many places for that to work.


I already have microsoft free computing, I only use windows when I have to, and then it's only for testing(which is rare, since I'm not a designer and don't have to worry about how it looks :P )
---------------------------------------
I wrote the perl script BTW, you'll need to install a few things(on windows you'll need to install perl first, then do a bit of messing about to get the libs working, you can work it out, your not stupid):
libwww-mechanize-perl
libgtk2-perl

the script is, by default, configured to check once every 30 minutes, but a quick edit can easily change this. When the page comes online it has one of a few ways of notifying you(it pops up a window to launch firefox(or whatever browser you tell it to), click the X to close, or the button in the middle to open your browser and close the box, with a little editing you can also get it to play an audio file or beep (on linux it's aplay file and beep no idea about windows)), once you close the pop-up window the ap stops running, I know mechanize isn't the best way to do this code, but I am anticipating upgrading it in future to be work on some sites that would otherwise require login's.

[rhsunderground]

On Tuesday, Google will release a free Web browser called Chrome that the company said would challenge Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, as well as the Firefox browser.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/technology/02google.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[scragar]

It's tuesday already, 2:40AM...

[Zookeeper]

There was a technical comic book accidentally released early by Google. Since it was there mistake mailing it early (and no stopping it from being post on various pages) Google went ahead and posted it early. It's fairly long (around 30 pages) but its a good read. This is probably a mute point considering Chrome is only a few hours from release.



http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/

[felgall]

If they don't release it soon it will be Wednesday - there are only a couple of hours of Tuesday left.

[NogDog]

If they don't release it soon it will be Wednesday - there are only a couple of hours of Tuesday left.
Yeah, but it the center of the universe, it's only 6:40am Tuesday morning. :p

[WebJoel]

TechCrunch says: (http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/09/01/meet-chrome-googles-windows-killer/)

Now, for how long have I been saying "The web is the OS" only to get rocks thrown at me?

Now, how many times have I said that was coming, too?<-- My Hero! :D (Good on ya for seeing the forest thru the trees, dr!) :D

[chazzy]

much the same way safari and the iphone's safari are related, it's likely that chrome and android's browser will have a common code base. [/hypothesizing]

[Stephen Philbin]

I wonder how long we'll have to wait for a non-Windows version? Hopefully it won't be too long.

[WebJoel]

I wonder how long we'll have to wait for a non-Windows version? Hopefully it won't be too long. Longer than I can hold my breath I bet! :mad:

[Ultimater]

Gah you guys beat me to making the thread.

http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/index.html

[drhowarddrfine]

So here I am on Chrome! How do I look?

Vroom Vroom Vroom!! Man this is fast! Auto importing of bookmarks and passwords and this thing leaped out of my hands and onto the 'net! Ya' gots ta get it guys!

Download Link (http://www.google.com/chrome/)

[LeeU]

Ah, another browser. What are the odds these guys read the W3C "recommendations"?

[Ultimater]

So here I am on Chrome! How do I look?

Vroom Vroom Vroom!! Man this is fast! Auto importing of bookmarks and passwords and this thing leaped out of my hands and onto the 'net! Ya' gots ta get it guys!

Download Link (http://www.google.com/chrome/)

Woah... Google Chrome makes these forums load like five times faster than Firefox on my end.

[chazzy]

So here I am on Chrome! How do I look?

Vroom Vroom Vroom!! Man this is fast! Auto importing of bookmarks and passwords and this thing leaped out of my hands and onto the 'net! Ya' gots ta get it guys!

Download Link (http://www.google.com/chrome/)
I've already got bugs pending on the install process, auto importing, and password storage. I also beat you by about 90 minutes in installing, assuming you posted immediately after you installed it.

Ah, another browser. What are the odds these guys read the W3C "recommendations"?
didn't have to, they're using the same open source rendering kit (with some enhancements) as safari.

Woah... Google Chrome makes these forums load like five times faster than Firefox on my end.
I'm not sure if it's a vbulletin issue or what, but it doesn't let me do my in line modding anymore :-(

[drhowarddrfine]

Ah, another browser. What are the odds these guys read the W3C "recommendations"?
They use WebKit which is Safari's rendering engine. It passes Acid3 and is bleeding edge standards conformance.

[drhowarddrfine]

I've already got bugs pending on the install process, auto importing, and password storage.My bookmarks are something over 3.2Mb and it imported everything perfectly. I also beat you by about 90 minutes in installing, assuming you posted immediately after you installed it.

Yep. It came out while I was cutting the grass.

[NogDog]

Submitted a bug concerning page scrolling. I can scroll down OK using my notebook's touchpad, but it refuses to scroll up.

[drhowarddrfine]

Works for me. Using an old Compaq Presario 2500

[Ultimater]

Gah... no XUL support...

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<root xml:lang="en" xmlns:html='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<html:script type="text/javascript"><![CDATA[
alert("test");
]]></html:script>
</root>

[scragar]

bah, I don't like the idea of having to spoof windows just to try it out, although it will be intresting to see if it runs in wine...

Gonna try to install it under wine now, I'll post back on how it goes.


Don't bother trying it in wine, I get a fatal error after a few secs.

[Andrew Hucks]

GOOGLE IS TAKING OVER THE INTERNET! RUN!

;-) It's a decent browser, and it's open source. (+++)

[Mr. E. Cryptic]

Read the Small Print (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10030522-56.html?tag=txt)

It will be intersting to see if point three comes about. I know there's more than one or two people here how would love to see that.

I've only been using it for a few minutes, but first thoughts;

The minimalist design is working for me. (even this forum doesn't seem to be as cluttered :) )

Not sure about the default lack of prompts for downloads.

[daemonk]

ugh. Google is making a browser to compete with IE and Firefox. Great for web surfers. More work to make it compatible for me. I really hope they don't decide to deviate too much.

http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20080902/first-test-of-googles-new-browser/

[drhowarddrfine]

There's already a thread in the Coffee Lounge below. However, Chrome is based on WebKit which is what Safari uses. If you write to web standards, you'll have few problems.

[drhowarddrfine]

Gah... no XUL support...

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<root xml:lang="en" xmlns:html='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'>
<html:script type="text/javascript"><![CDATA[
alert("test");
]]></html:script>
</root>

XUL is Gecko.

[NogDog]

Read the Small Print (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10030522-56.html?tag=txt)

It will be intersting to see if point three comes about. I know there's more than one or two people here how would love to see that.

I've only been using it for a few minutes, but first thoughts;

The minimalist design is working for me. (even this forum doesn't seem to be as cluttered :) )

Not sure about the default lack of prompts for downloads.
How about #2:
"By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any content which you submit, post or display on or through, the services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."
So as one of the commenters pointed out:
Does anyone see a conflict of interest between section 2 and, say, doing my banking online? Google would have the rights to reproduce and distribute a display of my banking information. What!?
While I'm sure Google will reassure us that they'd never do that, what if their automated software does something they didn't catch in testing or never anticipated? While I personally doubt it would happen, I can't say I'm 100% positive it wouldn't happen, which leaves me wondering whether I really want to use a browser so closely tied to one of the top players in internet marketing. :confused: If it is truly offered as fully open-source software, then it will be interesting to see what the independent software geeks have to say once they get their hands on the code and figure out what it's doing. If they don't have access to everything, I'll probably stick to Firefox for anything I want to keep private.

[drhowarddrfine]

Yes, I saw that but I don't think it's directly related to the browser. First, it talks of "the service", which Chrome is, but submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Googlehow would you be doing that TO Google while surfing the net?

I think the language must be related to other services that are, or will be, attached to Chrome or integrated later.

[ray326]

Well it's using both Webkit and Mozilla code but there's really very little to recommend it at this point. Mozilla is in the process of really speeding up their Javascript engine and Chrome is Windows-only, which means only a very small handful of people will try it. Probably about the same as have tried Safari. And I don't know any Win user that actually likes Safari.

[NogDog]

Yes, I saw that but I don't think it's directly related to the browser. First, it talks of "the service", which Chrome is, but how would you be doing that TO Google while surfing the net?

I think the language must be related to other services that are, or will be, attached to Chrome or integrated later.
I'm sure that it would be a horrible hit to their profit margins if they ever were found to be compromising personal data and people's privacy, and so will avoid it. But I would like to know more about how it will all interface with their marketing and advertising strategies. After all, they are not releasing this merely to add another web browser to our choice of tools, they expect to make money off of it.

I'm not saying I'm sure it's bad/evil/insecure in any way, or worse/better than any other browser out there. But that EULA provides them with a lot of rights, (and is much longer than the Firefox EULA (http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/legal/eula/firefox-en.html)), and so for me the onus is going to be on Google to reassure me that I'm not going to be sorry I'm running their browser before I consider ever fully embracing it.

[scragar]

I think they don't care about users input, they want to know how people use the internet so they can make more money from googleAds with the knowledge, which sounds reasonable.

They are losing money with youtube, but they make money with google Video, they are willing to lose money in 1 way as they can make more money in another.

[Reli4nt]

This thing is sexy.

[Ultimater]

They are losing money with youtube, but they make money with google Video
I hear youtube uses an equivalent bandwidth of the rest of the net combined :D

[scragar]

I hear youtube uses an equivalent bandwidth of the rest of the net combined :D
it did back in 2007, now I'm not so sure, video sites appear to have picked up, and youtube is slowly starting to lose it's appeal...

[SuzanneB]

Most worrying aspect ( which I raised in another thread ) is the private modes, which don't store cookies. This mode is in IE8 too, and is a very worrying development for those of us who happen to like using cookies!

Chrome is nice, actually, the only thing is, I don't see any particular reason to change to it. I only run it to test web site compatibility. It's overall response to html seems very similar to Firefox.

Still the vast majority of users visiting the web sites I have anything to do with are using IE6!

[Fang]

Cookies rely on JavaScript being available, your site should be functional without JavaScript.
I surf with cookies disabled, exceptions being this site and webmail.

[LeeU]

Well, if anyone's interested, we could use a review over at WebReference.com .... and we pay. Just contact me at lunderwood (at) jupitermedia.com.

[chazzy]

Hey, just wondering if anyone using Windows XP could test/verify a bug similar to #153 (which I submitted)?

http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=153

Basically, just switch between the windows xp UI and windows 2k UI and see if the title bar renders incorrectly. I'm thinking that it's just not catching the change even that windows throws.

[drhowarddrfine]

Javascript is stupid fast (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10030888-92.html)

[ray326]

Cookies rely on JavaScript being availableI'll have to take issue with that one, Fang, since cookies are a protocol thing. Obviously one can use the content of cookies through Javascript bindings but they can also have purely server driven requirements and never be touched by Javascript at all.

[WebJoel]

I'm Chromed, folks. :) It seems 'about as fast as SeaMonkey' or maybe a little faster... but here's the deal; I HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE!! About 2 or 3 years ago, I downloaded, installed and tried a similar 'browser' that used "multi-tabs" like this! This is not an original idea. :o But, -so far it seems like a good one.

I'll use Chrome for my day-to-day work but for things I want to be SECURE, until I hear definitively, I'll continue to use Firefox or SeaMonkey for 'banking' things like bank, PayPal, online shopping, etc... This has not earned my trust ...yet.

But nine enthusiastic thumbs up so far!

[drhowarddrfine]

About the EULA. Apparently Google uses canned versions of it so they say the language doesn't always fit the product. So they are changing the wording and making it retroactive.
ArsTechnica (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chrome-eula-controversy-our-bad-well-change-it.html)
Google Gives Back All Your Bases (http://osnews.com/story/20248/Google_Gives_Back_All_Your_Bases)
Google's Rebecca Ward, Senior Product Counsel for Google Chrome, now tells Ars Technica that the company tries to reuse these licenses as much as possible, "in order to keep things simple for our users." Ward admits that sometimes "this means that the legal terms for a specific product may include terms that don't apply well to the use of that product" and says that Google is "working quickly to remove language from Section 11 of the current Google Chrome terms of service. This change will apply retroactively to all users who have downloaded Google Chrome."

[Reli4nt]

Cookies rely on JavaScript being available.

They really don't.

I currently find Firefox indispensable as a web development tool but I am impressed with the ingenuity behind chrome. When I first saw how fast it was I thought to myself "they must be cheating somehow!"

[NogDog]

About the EULA. Apparently Google uses canned versions of it so they say the language doesn't always fit the product. So they are changing the wording and making it retroactive.
ArsTechnica (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chrome-eula-controversy-our-bad-well-change-it.html)
Google Gives Back All Your Bases (http://osnews.com/story/20248/Google_Gives_Back_All_Your_Bases)
I feel a little better now. :) Off to update my blog....

[Fang]

@ ray326 & Reli4nt: read the context of the cookie question; it was client side related.
Chrome has Gears which also allows data to be stored client side.

[dtm32236]

I use Firefox plugins all the time... so I'll probably stick to FF.

[Declan1991]

I pretty impressed by Chrome though. If I don't need functionality (but speed), I'll definitely use it.

On one of my computers I cannot install it, but hopefully that will work eventually.

[Jick]

I look forward to trying Chrome whenever they make it available on Linux. I use Ubuntu right now and I'm not going to bother installing Windows just to try Chrome. I can wait. But, hopefully it won't be too long.

[scragar]

My thoughts exactly Jick, right now I'm debating if it's worth installing windows XP onto a virtualbox for the sake of testing it, or if I should just wait for a native version.

I wonder if anyone has any real screen shots of it being used though, I don't know what it looks like, outside of the screen shots which all appear to have been planned months in advance to try and make it look better.

[NogDog]

My thoughts exactly Jick, right now I'm debating if it's worth installing windows XP onto a virtualbox for the sake of testing it, or if I should just wait for a native version.

I wonder if anyone has any real screen shots of it being used though, I don't know what it looks like, outside of the screen shots which all appear to have been planned months in advance to try and make it look better.
Here you go (rather highly compressed)....

[scragar]

I actualy decided to boot into a windows XP vBox I didn't know I had, and downloaded/installed it, I understand where people comment on it's speed from, but it looks horrible(and it's not at all as well planned as firefox or opera, even if they have flaws).
First thing that hit me was the lack of a menu, which threw me, but I worked it out, it's the little spanner icon, I could live with that.
Next I noticed the horrible square window, what's with that? I havn't seen a square window in years, alert boxes in the browser are curved, windows in programs are curved, what's the deal?
Then I figured I'd test the speed, so to the URL bar I go, type in wikiedpia, hit enter and... wind up on a google search page for wikipedia... Hmn, that needs fixing(google has access to more info than anyone else, if firefox can take a search term to wikipedia and find the most relevant result to load the page(and a google search if it can't), then the google browser should, right?).
loading the wikipedia page worked fine, exactly as I expected, so I start opening a few random links into new tabs, I didn't notice any of this special stuff people talked about, the pages loaded a little quicker, but it wasn't anything special. So, I opened a new empty tab, and instantly noticed 2 things, no 1: the firefox awesome bar rip off and opera quick dial clone don't appear any different, I thought google said the browser would be better than this...
Oh, and number 2 is the first of 2 bugs I noticed, nice huh, the open new tab button disappeared, not nice, I assume there's a limit to tabs, but that's not the case, ctrl+t opens yet another tab, so what's the deal? fine I figure, I'll close a few tabs, I wasn't reading them anyway, ctrl+w a few times cuts them down to 3, where the new tab button appears and the whole tab bar shakes and shifts about for a sec(enough for me to notice, which is not cool).

Fine, time for a real test, so I booted up w3 schools so I could abuse their examples page, google boasts it's fast, we'll take a look, so I load a quick and simple javascript, I've done it plenty of times, it's a simple test of how the browser plays with floats, results are almost always the same, and almost always wrong, so it's not that I test, it's the time...
var start, end, i;
start = (new Date()).getTime();
for(var i = 0; i < 100;i+= 0.1)
document.write('i = '+i+"<br>\n");
end = (new Date()).getTime();
document.write('took '+(end-start)+' millisecs');
end result? let's compair, last 2 lines in say, firefox and chrome:
i = 99.9999999999986
took 31 millisecs
i = 99.9999999999986
took 167 millisecsyeah, same result, but a massive increase in time taken, apparantly firefox handles floats a lot better(I'm assuming google will be faster at some other things, but I didn't test them, people claim such a huge speed increase, why can't it handle floats better than firefox? Even IE6 comes in above it(IE7 tails behind, as usual though...)).

I closed off that tab, and the browser vanishes, WTF? if I wanted to close the browser I'd use the big red X at the top right of the screen, alt+F4, or ctrl+Q, I wouldn't close a tab, how does that strike them as good behaviour? so I open the browser, again.

This post is looking too long, so I'm gonna cut it short there, needless to say I'm not happy with chrome already, maybe they can fix it for the linux version, I'll take another look then, for now though, it's just not good enough to use, even when I have to use windows(although it wins over IE, that's not saying much though..)

[NogDog]

Yeah, I think that "close the browser if you close the only tab" thing has to go, or else make it an opt-in setting for anyone who would actually want that as a feature.

[Joseph Witchard]

Oh snap... another browser to test with...:p

I pray for a world where there will be one perfect, standard browser that everyone uses.

[scragar]

Oh snap... another browser to test with...:p

I pray for a world where there will be one perfect, standard browser that everyone uses.
it's safari with a skin change, don't bother treating it as anything different from a design/development view.

[drhowarddrfine]

Next I noticed the horrible square window, what's with that? I havn't seen a square window in years, alert boxes in the browser are curved, windows in programs are curved, what's the deal?It's the minimalist design Google is known for.
Then I figured I'd test the speed, so to the URL bar I go, type in wikiedpia, hit enter and... wind up on a google search page for wikipedia... Hmn, that needs fixingIf you just type in the address bar, it treats it as a search. That's what it's supposed to do. If I type 'web developer forums' I don't want to go to webdeveloperforum.com.
noticed 2 things, no 1: the firefox awesome bar rip off and opera quick dial clone don't appear any different, I thought google said the browser would be better than this...Better than what?
Oh, and number 2 is the first of 2 bugs I noticed, nice huh, the open new tab button disappeared, not nice, I assume there's a limit to tabs, but that's not the case, ctrl+t opens yet another tab, so what's the deal?That it's version 0.2? But I haven't notice this problem myself. I accidentally opened 30 tabs without issue the first day but it handled it fine. (Clicked on some 'open all in tabs' button or something. I forget.)

people claim such a huge speed increase, why can't it handle floats better than firefox?Are you testing javascript speed or floats? Chrome's js speed tests are all over the blogosphere and run circles around everyone. (Did I post a link to the chart's in this thread?) Otherwise, google for it and you'll get several.

Firefox's new js engine, when it comes out, should be as fast if not slightly better. In any case, both run rings around IE8.
I'm not happy with chrome already, maybe they can fix it for the linux version3 of us in our group used it all day yesterday with no issues and rather enjoyed it. The only issue we had was with entering text in a text box and spellchecker kind of plays with the display of the text. I had about 12 tabs open at one time for a while, forgetting I wasn't in Firefox. It loads all pages incredibly faster as reported by everyone else on the 'net.

[scragar]

It's the minimalist design Google is known for.
I quite understand that, it just threw me when I first saw it.
If you just type in the address bar, it treats it as a search. That's what it's supposed to do. If I type 'web developer forums' I don't want to go to webdeveloperforum.com. I know what you mean, but I have firefox configured exactly for my needs, to google something I prefix it with a g and a space, but I don't use that behaviour often, since most of the time I know what I'm looking for and the first result behaviours of firefox does exactly what I need, it takes me to what I type in.
Better than what?well, how it acted, I had a few tabs open, I thought the firefox and opera rip off's were supposed to use your history, so how come it did nothing, do I need to build up a large history for it to work, or is it working random, or what?
That it's version 0.2? But I haven't notice this problem myself. I accidentally opened 30 tabs without issue the first day but it handled it fine. (Clicked on some 'open all in tabs' button or something. I forget.)
it handles the tabs fine, but it messes up the open new tab button, which would be annoying for those that use it.
Are you testing javascript speed or floats? Chrome's js speed tests are all over the blogosphere and run circles around everyone. (Did I post a link to the chart's in this thread?) Otherwise, google for it and you'll get several.google say their engine is a virtual machine, that means it should handle such things many times better than firefox(try it this way, compile a very similar loop into java and run that, you'll be lucky if it takes more than 15 millisecs, and java's pretty bulky).

Firefox's new js engine, when it comes out, should be as fast if not slightly better. In any case, both run rings around IE8.
I find that far too easy to believe.
3 of us in our group used it all day yesterday with no issues and rather enjoyed it. The only issue we had was with entering text in a text box and spellchecker kind of plays with the display of the text. I had about 12 tabs open at one time for a while, forgetting I wasn't in Firefox. It loads all pages incredibly faster as reported by everyone else on the 'net.
I wasn't using it, I was playing about with it to find what was so special about it(and finding nothing that was in any way unique), I understand how people could use it, but for me it's positives are completely overshadowed by it's negatives.

[Mr. E. Cryptic]

Yeah, I think that "close the browser if you close the only tab" thing has to go, or else make it an opt-in setting for anyone who would actually want that as a feature.

Similar problem with Opera on Mac. Doesn't close the browser per say, but does close the 'window' instead of presenting a blank (quick tabs) page. Extremely annoying.

All in all, I found chrome to be decent (used it for general browsing for a few hours), but nothing about it blew me away to the point where I'd start booting into my Vista partition more often just to walk 'round the web. I'll wait and see what it's like for Linux, when it comes out, but to be honest, I'm happy with Opera (sometimes FireFox), and I couldn't be arsed getting used to a new browser again.

[Sunny G]

Now, for how long have I been saying "The web is the OS" only to get rocks thrown at me?I throw bricks.

They use WebKit which is Safari's rendering engine. It passes Acid3 and is bleeding edge standards conformance.
I'm not seeing that. Chrome gets to 79 and quits. Safari 4 (beta) passes it entirely. Can anyone find a download link for Safari 4?

Hmmm...
I like Google Chrome. Fast. Simple. Good for new web users.
If my grandparents bought a computer, I'd tell them to use Google Chrome as the browser.

[LeeU]

Well, it may have some speed, but for the short time I used it, I really don't like it. I use bookmarks, which it doesn't have, I use my own home page (w/a menu), which I can't go directly to, and every link opens in the same tab, unless I hold down the CTRL button. There aren't many options to set. It may have a place for some who like to just go surf but I'll stick with Firefox. For me, it's much more conducive to developer work and useful all around.

[Sunny G]

...I'll stick with Firefox. For me, it's much more conducive to developer work and useful all around.I think that is everybody's verdict. This browser lacks the capacity to be used as a developer's tool, but can be a great for basic web use. Thank you, Google.

[drhowarddrfine]

I use bookmarks, which it doesn't haveYes it does. Didn't you import yours when you installed it?I use my own home page (w/a menu), which I can't go directly toWhy not?and every link opens in the same tabmiddle mouse click.There aren't many options to set.Version 0.2 It may have a place for some who like to just go surf but I'll stick with Firefox.Agree. It's not finished yet and Firefox is great. For me, it's much more conducive to developer work and useful all around.For now but add-ons are coming and other features.

[Joseph Witchard]

Sunny G's current post count:
666

Again with this!:p

How has chrome been welcomed by the web community at large? Are there any people out there that are thrilled with its release? (Besides Google, obviously.)

[drhowarddrfine]

While I work, I scan a lot (tons) of blogs and forums. Everyone loves it for its speed but complains of missing features while forgetting that it's version 0.2. You get the occasional person who says it set their house on fire and other stupid comments but it's very, very positive overall.

[Jick]

Just found this (http://www.myscienceisbetter.info/2008/09/install-google-chrome-on-linux-using-wine.html). Haven't tried it myself yet but, just thought I'd post it for anyone else who might be interested. ;)

If anyone tries it before me, let me know how it goes.

[scragar]

I just tried it, and it works with a few edits:
wget http://www.kegel.com/wine/winetricks
sh ./winetricks riched20 riched30 flash allfonts
wget http://gpdl.google.com/chrome/install/149.27/chrome_installer.exe
wine chrome_installer.exe
although it being able to download the files appears a little sporadic lately.

[Jick]

I just tried it, and it works with a few edits:
wget http://www.kegel.com/wine/winetricks
sh ./winetricks riched20 riched30 flash allfonts
wget http://gpdl.google.com/chrome/install/149.27/chrome_installer.exe
wine chrome_installer.exe
although it being able to download the files appears a little sporadic lately.How does it do on Linux? This seems like a bit of a hacky way to get it working so I wasn't sure how well it would work.

[scragar]

I don't see a difference from it on wine to in a virtual box, none worth mentioning anyway.

[Mr Initial Man]

You know what it reminds me of? A large popup window.

[Jick]

Just found this (http://www.codeweavers.com/services/ports/chromium/) while surfing around today. I installed it. Some noticeable bugs with it but you still get to see what it's like without having to do the hacks I posted about earlier. Thought I'd post it here for anyone who might be interested. It supposedly works on Linux and Mac (Intel-based only though).

[Sunny G]

http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/08sep/uf011906.gif (http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080906)

/* Salivating on Computer Screen */
Firefox, you are my one, true, woman ;)