DiggJoin DiggAbout
See the original image at arstechnica.com —

Hands-on with Chrome: Google's Browser Shines (Mostly)

arstechnica.com — oogle launched its first foray into the browser wars today with the official release of Chrome, a new open source web browser that aims to push forward Internet innovation and elevate user expectations. Although Chrome is still a bit light on features, it is surprisingly polished and has an assortment of highly promising capabilities.

made popular 126 days ago

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community.Take the Tour to learn more.

Related by Keyword BETA!

Google Chrome Browser To Support Customization

  • 746 diggs
  • Made popular 37 days ago
  • 79
  • www.informationweek.com

Browser Add-On Makes Flickr's Galleries Faster

  • 342 diggs
  • Made popular 2 days ago
  • 15
  • news.cnet.com

Mozilla's mobile browser gets closer to prime time

  • 719 diggs
  • Made popular 11 days ago
  • 52
  • news.cnet.com

How are these related stories? Tell us!

show profanity settings
expand all
  • barnis, on 09/03/2008, -11/+791) didn't support multiple resolutions between my external monitor and primary laptop display
    2) no ADBLOCK
    3) dragging tabs made them "lost" at times
    4) no foxclocks
    5) pop-up "blocker" was cute but a bit in-flexible

    ....

    6) but it WAS fast
    • Gizza, on 09/03/2008, -4/+197) No interface customisation. This is what I hate. Why can't I get rid of that stupid bookmark toolbar and have a bookmarks dropdown icon?
      • duthel, on 09/03/2008, -12/+1Because 76,4& use Firefox, earlier Netscape ONLY because of this bookmark toolbar. Me do..:-)
      • pyroguy56011, on 09/03/2008, -2/+9You can... right click the toolbar and uncheck "Always show bookmarks bar." Then it only appears in the New Tab page. As for a bookmarks dropdown icon, there already is one.
      • AndrewDB, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4Adblock is coming, the browser is open source FFS. Give them time to code it.

        The Booksmark complaint is moot as you CAN always have bookmarks visible:

        http://i34.tinypic.com/34j7hue.jpg
      • evil-doer, on 09/03/2008, -4/+3are you guys retarded? read what he said, he wants to get rid of the bookmark toolbar, but still have a bookmark dropdown button/menu. you cannot do this.
      • lostsymphonies1, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1It's a beta...why does nobody understand that. Think of all the other beta's for programs that have come out and compare those to Chrome...It's a very strong release and will only improve with time and development, as well as user feedback.
      • evildemonic, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2Where's the home button?
      • chikmag777, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3@evildemonicevildemonic
        It's hidden by default. Go to Options and check the box for "Show Home button on the toolbar."
    • neutronlaser, on 09/03/2008, -21/+3Adblock = stealing from publishers
      • theaceoffire, on 09/03/2008, -1/+6If you are annoying people enough that we have to search for tools to get rid of it, then be happy we are blocking it instead of boycotting you for wasted bandwidth.
      • NikoKun, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3No, it is not stealing from publishers. I'll break this to you in every possible logical way. You are simply wrong.

        Because the vast majority of users STILL see the ads, simply because they do not know how to block ads, or really care. And because almost all web browsers do not have any ad blocking features enabled by default. A user that wants that, has to go out of their way to get it.

        Aslo by contrast to your claim, if it comes onto my computer, as a website does when it loads, I have the right to alter that website for my PERSONAL viewing pleasure, all I want. And you cannot tell me otherwise... It is my computer, which I payed for, and the websites are freely accessible and allow me to download them, regardless in most cases.

        Also, I pay for my access to bandwidth, to see said websites... I should not be forced to waste that bandwidth, with useless ads which I would NEVER CLICK ON IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!
        This issue is even made worse, if ISPs start caping download limits... I will always refuse to waste my download limit, on useless ads!
        Get it through your thick skull, A user that blocks ads, WOULD NEVER CLICK ON THOSE ADS, even if they saw them!!! So that being known, no web publisher is losing any money, from adblockers!

        Web publishers DO have the option to prevent their page from loading if it detects ads being blocked. There are ways to do it successfully, if they desire. (although there are other ways to counter that as well... lol)
      • Tezdoll, on 09/03/2008, -3/+2what the hell, if you made decent products, word of mouth would be good enough. Since you insist on throwing your garbage in my face, your lucky i don't hunt you down. So, instead i will just block your ads and i will get to stay out of jail.
      • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 09/03/2008, -0/+5@neutronlaser

        I only use AdBlock on sites where the ads expand, have sound, move over the page, etc.
        Plain ads are quite OK with me.
      • jemka, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3Do you watch every single commercial while watching your favorite soap opera? Or do you turn the channel like everyone else? Don't be a hypocrite.
      • javaroast, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2Once they come out with Trollblock Plus I'll be entirely set. No Ads and no comments from guys like neutronlaser
      • neutronlaser, on 09/03/2008, -2/+1What if the terms of use of a web site insist that you view any advertising placed on it? Could you be sued for blocking them?
        FIRE LASERS
    • jetboyterp, on 09/03/2008, -0/+15No ad block...I wasn't used to that. Fast it is, but Firefox is fast enough. Chrome will have it's fanboys...but until it eeks out the glitches, I'm sticking with the Fox.
    • SSUK, on 09/03/2008, -1/+58) No RSS integration
      • EtherGnat, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Between things like Google Reader and dedicated RSS apps I don't care if it's integrated directly into the browser. To each their own, though. I imagine it will come, possibly integrating neatly with Google Reader.
    • jemka, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4http://www.abelhadigital.com/

      Blocks ads across multiple browsers.
    • Adam420, on 09/03/2008, -0/+19) iSketch runs too slow to play
    • Remmiz, on 09/03/2008, -8/+210) Home button. I mean come on.
      • jemka, on 09/03/2008, -0/+15Click the wrench in the upper right hand corner >> Options
        Click the "Basics" tab >> Locate the "Home Page" section.
        Check the box marked "Show Home button on the toolbar"

        I mean come on.
      • Azzzzy, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4You can enable it in options.
      • Remmiz, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1Why the hell would the homepage button be disabled by default?
      • mrBitch, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1Remmiz, why the hell can't you just say "thank you" ?
    • tacomafia, on 09/03/2008, -0/+411)Middle mouse button doesnt allow easy-scroll like in firefox.

      Seriously, if it had that I would be all over it.
      • sifuchar, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Mine does ... not sure why yours doesn't. I am using a Microsoft Mouse if that helps.
      • jemka, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1There are a few mouse related bugs that have been submitted. Soon you'll be all over it, just like she said.
      • BuLong, on 09/03/2008, -1/+0That's what SHE... oh, wait...
      • AndrewDB, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Mine allows easy scrolling.
    • dcmjzero, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Could you be more specific on #1. It works fine across my monitors.
    • Puttzy, on 09/03/2008, -6/+112) No ALT + F -> C to close tabs
      13) No Java Applet support
      • cJw314, on 09/03/2008, -1/+13What the hell kind of a asstard uses "ALT + F -> C to close tabs" when Ctrl-W is available?
      • mrBitch, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1asstard is as asstard does...
    • vuzman, on 09/03/2008, -1/+6B E T A

      look it up.
  • bsolidgold, on 09/03/2008, -0/+37The about:memory page is awesome! Chrome uses a considerable amount less memory than IE7 and Firefox.
    • greevar, on 09/03/2008, -7/+10That's because it does less than IE and a lot less than Firefox.
      • blackjack75, on 09/03/2008, -2/+5I wonder what IE does that justifies, say even a 10 mb memory increase.
    • MercFox1, on 09/03/2008, -0/+14WebKit's probably to blame for a good part of that; it's a solid rendering engine.
      • mrBitch, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1I am SO GLAD that Google chose WebKit -- well done Google!
  • samanathon, on 09/03/2008, -4/+82Just remember that this is the very first release - and it's very strong. Now imagine what the possibilities might be in a year or two....
    • MercFox1, on 09/03/2008, -2/+6Apparently they've been working on it for two years; as much fun as we make of Google for Gmail being in beta still, Chrome is far beyond what many would consider a beta stage.
  • pman201, on 09/03/2008, -8/+62Why are people dissing chrome so much? It's been out less than a day and is considerable better than IE and is close to on par with Firefox?
    • ToKnow, on 09/03/2008, -3/+11I agree. It's not about Adblock, RSS or the other "little" things that can be found in other browsers...Google can implement those anytime soon. They've come up with great improvements for tabs, memory and speed compared to other browsers, which I think is more important.
    • Tezdoll, on 09/03/2008, -16/+3So, this is what an idiot looks like?

      Its been out for a 1 day, been in development for 2 years and it still sucks...
      • scarwars, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4Firefox has been in development for over 5 years..
        and it still needs add-ons to be a good browser (hence making it slower as you use more and more add-ons)
    • cryonix, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2What they do with the core program is what counts. once that's all good; out comes the API and addons. Firefox wasn't always full of dozens of addons, but its core differences form IE is what set it apart.
    • zip000, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I've tried using it, and there are so far lots of little things that I just don't like about it.

      My biggest gripe so far is that it just doesn't seem very customizable. The UI is highly simplified, but there are more complicated things that I want to be able to do that I just can't see how to do.

      Other stuff:
      The bookmark import is frustrating. I have my bookmarks in an html file...why can't I just import that?
      I really prefer my RSS feeds the way that FF handles them...I hate using a separate reader or a separate page just for RSS...which is one of the big reasons why I don't use Opera.
      I want Adblock software...not just pop-up blockers.
      I like all my addons and greasemonkey scripts and the theme that I've been using for like 3-4 years now...

      Maybe I'm just stuck in my ways, but I just like the way FF handles most things better than the way that Chrome handles them...though I like the look of the UI and I like the speediness.
  • SealandRes1, on 09/03/2008, -4/+8Go to the digg homepage and middle click (or control+click) on the comments link of the stories listed and open chrome's task manager, you'll find that any tabs you open from the digg homepage that goes to some page in digg will NOT have its own process. Instead they are all grouped together in one process. However, if you middle click (or control+click) on a link that's not in digg, the new tab will have its own process.

    Oh, and the text in this reply box gets jumpy too as I am typing this reply, it's slightly annoying.
    • Gizza, on 09/03/2008, -3/+12"Oh, and the text in this reply box gets jumpy too as I am typing this reply, it's slightly annoying."

      That happens in all browsers.
  • doctordbx, on 09/03/2008, -20/+3Because the world needed another browser.

    Digg me down, but it's a cheap trick by Google IMHO.
    • CharlesSaint, on 09/03/2008, -2/+6"Dang browsers, get off meh internetz!!!" - doctordbx
    • oldhick, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I believe we do need some fresh ideas in the browser space. First, secure tabs are great. Second, its speed is unmatched. Third, can you rip the tabs out and organize them how you want.

      All great ideas in my opinion.
      • mrBitch, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1Actually, the tab rip organize bit is from Safari, as is Safari's WebKit rendering engine.

        Google's Chrome running under Windows is a great alternative to Safari under Windows (which sucks compared to Safari under OS X).
    • theaceoffire, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3Open Source, Super Fast, Awesome Ideas != cheap trick.
    • dcmjzero, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Because competition is bad? I fail to see your point.
  • prophetpimp, on 09/03/2008, -0/+25I always used FF and i use to use to safari for my porn because of private mode. Thank you Google for my new porn browsing browser.
  • adamkparker, on 09/03/2008, -15/+0If you miss Firebug, AdBlock, and Delicious there are alternatives for Chrome. http://digg.com/tech_news/Google_Chrome_Firefox_Pl ...
    • diggtochina, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1you asshat. linking to your own blog you ***** nut
    • whazdown, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Read three or so lines, poorly written. Room for improvement though, but you really need to work on it.
  • Sparkster185, on 09/03/2008, -2/+37oogle!
  • Archcoder, on 09/03/2008, -3/+14I'm typing about:% in my awesome bar AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!
    • pudds, on 09/03/2008, -0/+7Woah.

      Warning for others: this will crash Chrome. I wonder why the separate process design didn't prevent me from losing my other tabs.
  • deaftly, on 09/03/2008, -3/+31All Hail Oogle
    • petebot, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2I love Oogle.
      • Tezdoll, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2You may have arrived at this comment due to a typo ~ oogle.com
  • Bloodwine, on 09/03/2008, -3/+10The more features they add the more it'll bloat and slow down. Remember old-school Firefox? Blazingly fast.
  • Dagreenman, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3im impressed considering it's a beta.once it goes through improvements, it'll be a great competitor to firefox.

    still miss adblock though.
    • Puttzy, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Dont buy into this beta crap. Gmail is still in beta. You can only fall into that canopy for so long until you have to be help accountable. Dont get me wrong, I love my Gmail but the beta tag has become such a hackneyed expression within the industry it ruins the original intent of the beta release
      • EtherGnat, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1"the beta tag has become such a hackneyed expression within the industry it ruins the original intent of the beta release"

        Agreed, but considering it's only been available for widespread testing for one day I think the label is appropriate in this case, regardless of how much development Google has done on it behind the scenes.
      • Puttzy, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1In this case I completely agree that this is beta. I'm not sure what the "time limit" should be, but after a few month?/years? you cant hide behind that any more.
  • punkosu, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2Chrome seems really fast on heavy javascript sites. Can't wait for TraceMonkey for Firefox! Clicky analytics has a usage details on Chrome across the 45,000 websites they track. Crazy to see it above 2% after one day! Seems to already be going back down, we'll see how much of this hype sticks around. http://getclicky.com/chrome
  • CaptShmo, on 09/03/2008, -2/+28dugg for ceiling cat reference
    • mentor972, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1That was a good one! Let's hear it for memes!!
  • fenderjazz, on 09/03/2008, -3/+8I was so impressed with its speed, but I'm still concerned about that little gem in the EULA that grants Google ownership of everything you ever pass through that browser.
    • chanop, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4You can download the Open Source version and compile it yourself ditching the EULA
      http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/
    • baldgye, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2even if you agree to the EULA the EULA can't do things to over ride the general laws etc etc.... and anyway Google are updating the EULA and apparently remove that part of it
  • badmephisto, on 09/03/2008, -8/+2stop complaining about AdBlock missing. I have not used AdBlock and I dont have any problems with ads. I learned to completely ignore them. Google will not implement Ad Blocking. Thats how they make their revenue in the first place!
    • UltimatrixmaN, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Adblock is the first thing I download when I install a fresh copy of Firefox. Just because you don't use it doesn't demean it's importance and usefulness. A multi-billion dollar corporation loses some money because I want a clutter-free experience, well, that's too bad.

      They should pay ME to look at their ads.
      If I wanted Ads, I'd watch Television.
      • GothAlice, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1I can only assume, then, that you're fully content with, say, your ISP modifying your browsing connection to insert 'helpful' "related-topic" pages if you mis-type a domain name? Or them inserting account information (like you're nearing your bandwidth limit, your account is overdrawn, etc.) at the top of every page you visit?

        Hey, if you like modifying your experience so much, why not let them?
      • EtherGnat, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1"They should pay ME to look at their ads."

        To be fair, they kind of do. They pay for all the wonderful free content on the Internet, so you don't have to. Does anybody really want to imagine a web where advertising did not exist? It would be pretty bleak and [Time up! Please insert $0.02 to continue reading this comment].
      • UltimatrixmaN, on 09/04/2008, -1/+0I thought it was the $50mo that provided my internet through my ISP.
      • EtherGnat, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1@UltimatrixmaN

        Seriously? The ISPs don't give web sites a dime. In fact some have tried to implement schemes to CHARGE web sites for access to their customers. For most web sites their primary (and in many cases sole) income is ads.

        I use AdBlock too, because I'm selfish, but you ought to thank god some people look at the ads and provide an income for web sites. The money you pay to your ISP is solely for your physical connection and any services the ISP provides (e-mail, web hosting, etc).
    • Puttzy, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1It is also part of why their EULA is as it is. You will soon get ads targeted more directly at YOU.
  • duthel, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1I can not find ' send this site' (by email) and honestly I miss my Addons like pdf, shareaholic. BUt I think Chrome is much much better then MSIE and some others. In fact I downloaded Chrome immediate and used it now 24 hours, but now I am back to Firefox
  • PEMDAS, on 09/03/2008, -6/+1Chrome Shines! I get what you did there with the title. Well played, wordsmith. Too bad the rest of the online community won't catch the play, as they'll just assume you only used that word because I'm never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down. Never gonna run around and desert you.
  • Darkaged, on 09/03/2008, -5/+17What about the fact that Google owns everything that you type or upload from within the browser?

    http://tapthehive.s483.sureserver.com/discuss/This ...
    • freezerburn666, on 09/03/2008, -1/+6so i write an application and send it to my friend in a zip file, they own that application, and all the code to create it?
      • Puttzy, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2That is how it may sound from reading the EULA!
      • Darkaged, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1This says yes:
        "In other words, by posting anything (via Chrome) to your blog(s), any forum, video site, myspace, itunes, or any other site that might happen to be supporting you, Google can use your work without paying you a dime." "It applies to everything you pass through Chrome. Google can take your submitted content and edit and reuse it all they want, as long as they do so in connection with Chrome."
  • mugupo, on 09/03/2008, -11/+0Installed in your own risk, Google has installed trojan on the software.
  • leladax, on 09/03/2008, -15/+4***** GOOGLE.

    They say in their Chrome Propaganda: "now all applications will run on a browser".

    ***** you. and I don't want YOU to control ALL applications on my computer.

    it is MINE. get your ***** hands OFF It.
    • Psukhe, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Yes, let's all run web-apps like *****.
      Great idea.
    • damienv5, on 09/03/2008, -2/+1So don't use it and no one will care.
  • Visceral, on 09/03/2008, -3/+8A solution for AbBlocking for now is http://www.privoxy.org/

    Took about 2 minutes to configure.

    1.) Install Privoxy
    2) Click on the Wrench icon in Chrome in the upper right corner
    3.) Choose options>Under The Hood>Change proxy settings
    4.) A windows box pops up, choose LAN settings (at least this is what it's called in Vista)
    5.) Check off "Proxy settings" and in the address setting add127.0.0.1 and in the port 8118
    6.) If you have the option, you can also check off "Bypass proxy for local settings"
    7.) Click "Ok", close chrome and restart it. I've had ZERO ads.

    Tada. Enjoy.
    • ortucis, on 09/03/2008, -9/+3Or you can.. you know, just use host file blocks on Windows. But of course, FF users (unlike us Opera users) are too l33t for that..
      • Visceral, on 09/03/2008, -10/+2I would have taken this seriously until you mentioned you're an opera user. Lol.

      • falstaff, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I use both. On computers using IE and no custom HOSTS file, half the internet is completely unusable. When I use non-ABP browsers on my home computer, with just the HOSTS file blocking ads, things are better, but it doesn't help when the ad images are hosted on the main server. Also, you either have to spend a huge amount of time manually updating the sites you visit most, or download a new file every few days and hope they catch your favorite sites.
        With ABP, you get automatically updated blacklists, and can add your own blocks with three clicks.
        So, yes. FF users are doing it the easy way.
      • admdrew, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Using the hosts file this way is relatively easy and simple, but I remember reading somewhere that this doesn't scale well, as Windows chokes on large amounts of entries in hosts. Totally unsure if that's the case, though.
      • ortucis, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1@adm
        Disable the DNS client service for that. I have like a 7 MB host file under Vista ultimate x64 (same I used on XP x86), it works fine without any slowdowns.
    • Rally603, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2The man is right. It works and it is glorious.
    • mrBitch, on 09/04/2008, -0/+1@Visceral RE : " 1.) Install Privoxy
      2) Click on the Wrench icon in Chrome in the upper right corner "

      Nice, I completely forgot about privoxy -- it's a good alternative for thos who don't like to mess around with their hosts file RE ad blocking.
  • scoreloot, on 09/03/2008, -7/+1Yet no Mac offering, excited to use it, but they chose to limit their availability.
    • petebot, on 09/03/2008, -0/+6Mac's coming, dude. relax.
    • GothAlice, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Quality control. They're working on the testing harness to ensure the same experience across all platforms. Download the source and compile it yourself if you're so eager. (I've managed to play around with V8 and it's pretty cool.) But don't expect a usable experience for a while.
  • Charun, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3Am I the only one who uses keywords for firefox bookmarks?

    http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/smart-keyw ...
    Quick links to the search results for google, google maps, dictionary.com, wikipedia, etc. are really useful. That and adblock plus are the only things I really missed while trying chrome.
    • mrgermy, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I miss it too :-(
    • AndrewDB, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1You don't need it if you have your bookmarks organized.
    • FUR10N, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1when it imported my bookmarks it got all of my quick searches also, and they all work fine. it even got the shortcuts to them, so i can type "w einstein" and it searches wikipedia for that.
  • BlaqReaper, on 09/03/2008, -6/+9For those who have no clue what the EULA states:

    http://tapthehive.s483.sureserver.com/discuss/This ...

    As of now, nothing I post online really matters to me so I'm using Chrome...but I still can't believe Google would make such an underhanded move.
  • 5xSTUN, on 09/03/2008, -3/+4It runs great on my Mac. All the elves and unicorns in my office have switched to it.
  • leif777, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1I like it... can't wait for more goodies to come out for it
  • UtahApocalyse, on 09/03/2008, -6/+1Dugg using Chrome
  • deadasdisco, on 09/03/2008, -3/+1for some reason my scroll function on my laptop would only go down, not up. huh?
    and everyone says it's faster, and it may be faster than IE, but it was noticeably slower than firefox.
    back to firefox. you can't fix perfect.
    • The_Dude, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Mine did that. I went to mouse properties and for the wheel behavior I changed it from Enable Universal Scrolling to Use Microsoft Office 97 Scrolling Emulation Only and problem solved. I assume your laptop will have similar settings to fiddle with.

      Mine is faster than Firefox for sure.
  • diggtochina, on 09/03/2008, -3/+2I'm posting this from Chrome and Google can do whatever the ***** they feel like with it!
  • mwaleed86, on 09/03/2008, -8/+0Better than IE and firefox!....Simple and FAST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..


    Go OOOOOGLE
  • tdelamater, on 09/03/2008, -4/+1"If Google aggressively courts OEMs and gets them to preinstall Chrome on consumer desktops, then the company could start to gain some serious traction against Internet Explorer."

    Spot on.
  • FreakPeople, on 09/03/2008, -6/+0TOP 5 Killer Chrome applications

    http://digg.com/programming/TOP_Killer_Chrome_Appl ...
  • Elliottx, on 09/03/2008, -5/+3oogle FTW.
  • DaFunk, on 09/03/2008, -0/+4The lack of middle mouse button scrolling in Vista is driving me insane. It's nice that the page loads quicker, but since it takes me longer to scroll through it, there's little advantage with Chrome over other browsers.
    • mrgermy, on 09/03/2008, -2/+2Page Up / Page Down

      Hurry, Microsoft is patenting it and all.
      • DaFunk, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I realize that there are alternatives, but the time it takes to move your mouse over to the scroll bar, use the mouse scroller, or use a keyboard shortcut to scroll rather than simply press the middle mouse button and move the mouse up or down makes up for the faster loading times. (In my opinion.) I generally don't surf with one hand on the keyboard and another on the mouse, so moving the mouse pointer away from content in order to use the scroll bar, or trying to flick the scroll wheel up and down to navigate is annoying. I'll admit, I use the middle mouse button scroll a lot, so for some people I'm sure it's not a big deal. It does seem (to me) that it's a pretty standard feature on browsers and that's why I don't think it's easily overlooked.
      • mrgermy, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1No, I agree with you. The Page Up / Page Down thing was pretty much pure satire pointing back to Microsoft's new patent. Chrome is also missing the ability (at least for me) to where I can click the scroll wheel and scroll up and down by moving the mouse forward or back and yeah. . . .
    • LilRabbitFooFoo, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1I'm middle mouse scrolling Chrome pages in Vista 64 with no problem. I'm using a logitech mouse and drivers, FYI. YMMV
  • ToKnow, on 09/03/2008, -2/+3Ceiling Cat icon ftw!
  • zadadka, on 09/03/2008, -1/+7Hang on.
    Aren't we all being a bit silly here?

    Chrome is fast...that's just dandy...so I use it for browsing common sites, CNN, BBC, Digg, etc.
    Firefox has the AdBlock add-ins (I like NoScript too) etc....so you use that for browsing.....er....."special" sites.
    I also need to continue to use IE for the ActiveX components (TSWeb access to my company network, for example).

    Be realistic...quit expecting Chrome to being all things to all needs and you'll be fine.
    It's just another tool, not the New Messiah...
  • kokopelli2001, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2The Google Chrome EULA/TOS has serious copyright and privacy issues. The browser is also not open source, despite any claims that it is. Finally, the browser violates accepted industry standards for accessibility. Ain't gonna touch it with a 100 foot barge pole.

    Firefox and Opera are still the best browsers.
    • level1computer, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1BSD is considered open source by the Free Software Foundation. Unless you have a different definition than the rest of us...
  • BadAsh71, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Oddly enough, GMail hasn't been working too well in Google Chrome today. It worked fine last night. Makes me wonder if they are adding Chrome specific "hooks" into the GMail code. Still, it is quite odd that one of Google's flagship applications doesn't work in their new Browser.
  • mohrt, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2Next: Google Linux Distro.
    • Dubbsacc, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1gOS?
    • Viriatus2, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1it would be much better a brand new Google OS. Why the ***** is another Linux distribution needed?
  • hangman16, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1Google releasing Chrome is a good thing, with more browsers out there there will be more incentive for stricter adherence to web standards by both the people who develop the browsers and those who publish web content.
  • freezerburn666, on 09/03/2008, -2/+3been using chrome all day uber fast what can i say
  • LemonHerb, on 09/03/2008, -0/+2I can't browse without mouse gestures anymore, does it have that yet?
  • trollick, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2about:%
    • LilRabbitFooFoo, on 09/03/2008, -0/+1crashes Chrome on Vista 64 every time 8))))
  • WaveRunningNakd, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1someone explain to me why we need another browser? we have too many already.
  • weside, on 09/03/2008, -4/+5From the EULA:
    11.1 ...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...
    11.4 You confirm and warrant to Google that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the above license.


    In other words, by posting anything (via Chrome) to your blog(s), any forum, video site, myspace, itunes, or any other site that might happen to be supporting you, Google can use your work without paying you a dime. This doesn't just apply to blogger, youtube, gmail etc, and if you think it does, re-read section 1.1 and 11. It applies to everything you pass through Chrome. Google can take your submitted content and edit and reuse it all they want, as long as they do so in connection with Chrome.

    For the record, Microsoft tried this years ago with MSN messenger, where MS got an irrevocable perpetual license to all IP that passed through MSN messenger, and the net basically revolted. AOL did this too with AIM.

    There are some people who have claimed that this is standard legal jargon for every piece of software. Not only is that simply not true, no clause even close to that is in the Firefox terms of service.

    The above comes from: http://tapthehive.s483.sureserver.com/discuss/This ...

    I won't be using it. I'll stick with Firefox.
    • FishThePirate, on 09/03/2008, -0/+0Seconded. Google is slowly mutating into something entirely different than the company we fell in love with in the beginning. Their stated goal is to "organize the world's information." which sounds nice, but it also appears they want to OWN and CONTROL all the worlds information as well. Thanks, but no thanks.
    • friendofasquid, on 09/04/2008, -0/+0Google has removed this from the EULA effective retroactively: http://gizmodo.com/5045050/google-updating-chrome- ...
  • Kazimieras, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1http://feeds.ziffdavisenterprise.com/~r/RSS/eweeks ...
    Nice browser and all, and like each of them it has its own unique things it does best. Apparently it too is vulnerable... just like the rest of them.
  • Equinox1, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3Dugg for "Filed under: Ceiling Cat"
  • noPCtoday, on 09/03/2008, -3/+2I think Chrome can even handle 3D renderings using Javascript. I just tried a 3D chess, looks amazing: http://www.nihilogic.dk/labs/chess/
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.