Chrome for Linux

[Ahso!]

I installed it today. Not bad! Pretty fast and feature rich.

I like it. Firefox is still my favorite though.

[spot]

I'm pleased Chrome's finally been ported, the more diversity in implementations of web rendering the better. We're finally moving from a position where having to use a specific browser to access a site is a possible demand. There are a few notorious places in the UK which have shot themselves in the foot sticking with a one-browser policy, the Royal Mail being top of the list.

I tried placing an order at Marks and Spencer not long back using Lynx and got as far as the checkout before it messed up. I've no idea why designers won't demand their constructs are robust enough to cope.

[Ahso!]

Chrome is very clean looking, I must admit, but then my rendering comes in in 1080p, but there appears to be a difference between FF and chrome.

Two things I don't like;

1- theres no search engine on it, which seems odd considering its a Google app

2- Since my monitor is a 47" and has very high resolution, rather than set the font size for all browsing I have to zoom in each time I visit a new page. I like that I can zoom in or out as much as I like by clicking or keyboard function but its a pain to have to do it each time I navigate someplace else.

Oh - Some of the extensions seem a little flimsy.

[CARLA]

I used CHROME for a while gave it up became sluggish and took forever to open a page. I found that odd as google is google should zip right along. I was running a 32bit Windows XP machine at the time. In all fairness I should try it on my Windows 7 64bit machine and see how it works.



Actually my browser of choice now is IE8 sleek fast and has some great features I must say the best one Windows has put out todate.

[spot]

CARLA;1289127 wrote: Actually my browser of choice now is IE8 sleek fast and has some great features I must say the best one Windows has put out todate.The words you're looking for is "Microsoft have finally, fifteen years late, caught up in the Browser world and not before time either". I have nothing against IE8, it's an impressive piece of software. For their own commercial reasons they don't make a version that runs on anyone's operating system except their own which means I rarely get to use it. I've already spent more on software to last one lifetime, I've no intention of ever doing it again.

[CARLA]

:yh_rotfl You nailed it Spot I thought I might be dead and gone before they got it right.





[QUOTE]The words you're looking for is "Microsoft have finally, fifteen years late, caught up in the Browser world and not before time either". I have nothing against IE8, it's an impressive piece of software. For their own commercial reasons they don't make a version that runs on anyone's operating system except their own which means I rarely get to use it. I've already spent more on software to last one lifetime, I've no intention of ever doing it again.[/QUOTE]

[yaaarrrgg]

I've used Chrome a little ... I like it a lot so far but I still feel more at home in firefox. Crome still doesn't have as many plugins but it's got a lot of potential I think.

I personally wouldn't recommend any of the I.E. browsers. The only reason Microsoft got into the browser market was because they saw Netscape as a threat and wanted to kill it. At that time they realized that if web apps ever took off, Windows would be reduced to a poorly-debugged device driver. Where they screwed up, is that to circumvent the anti-trust legislation they built the browser so that it was intimately entwined with the lower levels of the OS (and then they argued that it couldn't be separated without hobbling Windows). The long story short is that it gives hackers a nice little window into the OS. After they killed Netscape, they let I.E. stagnate and ignored web standards until they were force to dust off the cobwebs once again. The more of the market share it captures, the worse it will become again.

If you don't believe me compare the unpatched security holes:

I.E.

Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.x - Advisories by Product - Secunia Advisories - Vulnerability Information - Secunia.com

Firefox:

Mozilla Firefox 3.5.x - Advisories by Product - Secunia Advisories - Vulnerability Information - Secunia.com

Chrome:

Google Chrome 4.x - Advisories by Product - Secunia Advisories - Vulnerability Information - Secunia.com

Generally open source does a better job with security. For one you have more eyes reviewing it. Closed source vendors often don't patch their software, don't care to make work for themselves and find bugs in their own code, or even know there are security problems but choose "not telling the public about the security problems" as a cheap solution.

[Ahso!]

yaaarrrgg;1289310 wrote: I've used Chrome a little ... I like it a lot so far but I still feel more at home in firefox. Crome still doesn't have as many plugins but it's got a lot of potential I think.

I personally wouldn't recommend any of the I.E. browsers. The only reason Microsoft got into the browser market was because they saw Netscape as a threat and wanted to kill it. At that time they realized that if web apps ever took off, Windows would be reduced to a poorly-debugged device driver. Where they screwed up, is that to circumvent the anti-patent legislation they built the browser so that it was intimately entwined with the lower levels of the OS (and then they argued that it couldn't be separated without hobbling Windows). The long story short is that it gives hackers a nice little window into the OS. After they killed Netscape, they let I.E. stagnate and ignored web standards until they were force to dust off the cobwebs once again. The more of the market share it captures, the worse it will become again.

If you don't believe me compare the unpatched security holes:

I.E.

Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.x - Advisories by Product - Secunia Advisories - Vulnerability Information - Secunia.com

Firefox:

Mozilla Firefox 3.5.x - Advisories by Product - Secunia Advisories - Vulnerability Information - Secunia.com

Chrome:

Google Chrome 4.x - Advisories by Product - Secunia Advisories - Vulnerability Information - Secunia.com

Generally open source does a better job with security. For one you have more eyes reviewing it. Closed source vendors often don't patch their software, don't care to make work for themselves and find bugs in their own code, or even know there are security problems but choose "not telling the public about the security problems" as a cheap solution.Sounds a lot like every other american industry. I'm thinking automotive presently. Remember Ford denying any problems with the explorer even though they were rolling over all over the place. They then lobbied congress to prevent a forced change in the design of the chassis because doing so would be too expensive and cost jobs. Congress even bought it as I remember. The number of jobs lost would have been larger than lives lost in the long run I guess.

Thanks for the info and good to see you.

[FUBAR]

I run chrome on a desktop and find it picks up spyware all the time. Run a check after using either firefox or chrome and only chrome always has something stuck too it. Seems it doesn't protect itself as well as firefox....

[Tuxr99]

spot;1289132 wrote: I've already spent more on software to last one lifetime, I've no intention of ever doing it again.


I hear ya. Never again will I give MS another penny.

But anyway, I tried chrome in Ubuntu, and found it to be the fastest browser I've ever used. I'd still be using it except for the fact that it didn't remember my speed dial settings next time I fired it up. That's is a big no-no. But hey, it's only beta for us linux users, so I'll give it some more time and check it out down the road.