
Google Chrome 3.0 - nreece
http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2009/09/google-chrome-30.html
======
ScottWhigham
"You shouldn't read too much into Google Chrome's version numbers. Just
because you can now install Google Chrome 3.0, it doesn't mean that Google
wants to appear more mature than it already is."

* cough(bullshit) _

~~~
smokinn
Well, if you compare Chrome 3.0 vs Firefox 3.0 (or 3.5), what features does
Chrome not have? As far as I can tell it's only missing Firefox's extensions
so if you can live without Adblock, Firebug, etc you can trade the extensions
for Chrome's outright speed.

~~~
pohl
It's worth noting that WebKit's "Web Inspector" is present in Chrome, which is
roughly equivalent to Firebug...so you're not really having to live without
that, even.

------
adnymarc
And still no full release version for Mac / Linux. I find this particularly
interesting considering the Google "Operating System" is going to be a custom
interface on top of a Linux kernel.

~~~
dagw
I've been using the Linux version for several month now and honestly cannot
tell the difference between it and the windows version. Just as stable, just
as fast, and flash works without any problems. I'm guessing there is a good
reason why they're not comfortable releasing it yet, but as an end user I
haven't run across that reason.

~~~
spydez
Chrome for Mac is similar. Firefox is my main browser, but I give Chrome a
whirl once a week or so and have yet to notice any deficiencies.

~~~
swombat
Well, one obvious deficiency is the lack of integration with password
managers. That's deal-breaker for me.

~~~
slyn
Printing doesn't work on OS X or on Linux yet either.

~~~
kevbin
What is this "printing" of which you speak?

------
javery
Will browser companies skip version 6? In the same way hotels skip the 13th
floor?

~~~
adnymarc
Hopefully browser companies will be more rigorous about migrating their users
to newer versions so that we avoid the issues IE6 has presented by still
having a large install base even after two subsequent versions have been
released.

------
heycarsten
I realize there is probably no place for it in marketing banter, but it
bothers me that they don't give the WebKit project any visible credit.

~~~
psadauskas
I feel the same about Safari and Webkit towards KHTML.

~~~
gecko
Back when Safari first came out, there was a lot of credit given to KHTML, and
Apple quickly had public-facing Subversion repositories available with full
product history so that KHTML could adopt any changes they wanted. Since then,
WebKit and KHTML have gone radically different directions, to the point that
I'm not honestly sure the latter exists anymore.

Apple, I thought, did the right thing by providing a full hat-tip to KHTML at
the time of the fork. I also think their attitude towards KHTML since then has
been completely fair.

~~~
psadauskas
For quite a while, Apple were jerks about contributing there changes back. The
patches they submitted to KHTML were huge, undocumented, and full of OSX-
specific code. It tooks many months of griping by KHTML, GPL advocates and the
community before Apple opened up thier KHTML fork as a CVS repo, and some time
later, simply open-sourcing Webkit itself. But at the beginning, it was quite
a fight to get Apple to acknowledge Webkit's open-source roots.

The KDE project has now dropped KHTML and switched to Webkit.

~~~
cookiecaper
This is inaccurate, KDE still uses KHTML. I've certainly seen the point argued
back and forth amongst KDE developers, but all versions of KDE still use
KHTML, and I assume it's still maintained somewhat. KHTML and WebKit aren't
just interchangeable pieces of Konqueror, see
<http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/3998> .

thiago from #kde informs me that "the guy [who claimed that KHTML is gone] is
completely wrong", "[KHTML] is happily in use and cannot even be dropped yet".

I was also informed that "there are plans [to change to Webkit], but they're
slowgoing" and "nothing concrete has happened yet". If anyone has access to an
official announcement to this effect, I'd appreciate a link, because last I
knew there were just developers bickering back and forth about which to keep.

Also, I assume that with WebKit SFX would become the KDE browser's JavaScript
engine instead of KJS, and that would be nice. KJS is much slower in my
experience.

~~~
psadauskas
I stand corrected on the last point. Someone needs to tell Ars and update
Wikipedia:

 _In July 2007, the Ars Technica website published an article announcing that
the KDE team would move from KHTML to WebKit.[13]_

( From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebKit#cite_ref-arsunfork_12-0> )

------
cmalabs
"Chrome includes video codecs that allow you to embed videos without using
slow and unreliable plug-ins like Adobe Flash."

Compared to quicktime/media player and the slew of plugins from the previous
generation, flash is much much more reliable.

~~~
dchest
Compared to QuickTime _on Windows_. On Mac it's not so slow and doesn't load
CPU that much (compared to Flash/Mac).

~~~
nestlequ1k
Bullshit. Load a hour long quicktime video from blip tv using safari. It will
hang your browser every time. This is on a latest gen Macbook Pro

------
brown9-2
I like Chrome, and the new version does a feel a tad quicker, but goddammit
already how much longer until extensions are in the official releases?

~~~
tumult
They were recently enabled by default in the Chromium builds. Lots of features
are still missing (all of the interface/toolbar stuff only works in Windows
right now, for example, and installed extensions are purged with every restart
of the browser on OS X/Linux). The extension API is lightweight and fantastic
though, so I'm with you in hoping that they get make it into Chrome sooner
rather than later.

------
netsp
Does anyone find that chrome is just unnecessary? It seems like google got to
the game just when all the other browsers hot a point when they are all good.

Not long ago, FF seemed like a real edge. Now I just use it cuz I'm used to it
and it has extensions that I am used to. Safari is also good and even the new
IE is good. I wouldn't mind using either of them or using chrome. The pace of
improvement seems to be strong and even.

I have no beef with an extra competitor, but I am surprised to say I have a
browser and its good.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
I think we can fairly credit Chrome with dramatically raising the bar for
javascript performance across the competing browser engines. The V8 virtual
machine for Chrome compiles JS to machine code rather than interpreting it or
running in bytecode. Mozilla has since responded with the TraceMonkey
optimization for its javascript engine; WebKit developed SquirrelFish Extreme;
and so on.

~~~
netsp
SUre. extra competition. An extra place for innovation to happen. All good.
But it doesn't seem to amount to using the browser does it?

------
truebosko
Awesome! Extensions being enabled by default in the dev channel is great news.
I've been semi-following the documentation for it all and it's been improving
at a nice steady pace (just like the browser :-))

Also, as mentioned from others it runs just fine on Linux for several months
now so go ahead and try it! You'll realize quickly how you don't need all
those Firefox extensions.

~~~
AndrewDucker
Not all of them. But if you think I'm surfing without AdBlock then you have
another think coming...

~~~
truebosko
You can get Adsweep for Chrome which works pretty well.

<http://www.adsweep.org/>

It's discontinued, but it works.

------
seshagiric
I don't know if anyone noticed, the page has an ad link for IE 8.0 at the very
top before the article begins. That looked funny.

------
jdbeast00
hopefully the back button will work more consistently now

------
thejay
still waiting to try the official mac version...

------
c00p3r
It is time for next-gen "no flash" browser games and "no java" web-apps.

~~~
sp332
Hell yeah! <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=825830>

------
_ck_
You know what's still missing and I'm surprised...

there's no way to see raw headers sent/received in the dev tools!

~~~
brodie
Is the Resources panel not adequate? Granted, it does format the headers, but
it does show the HTTP method, the request headers, and the response headers
for the page and each resource.

~~~
_ck_
D'oh! You are absolutely right. Somehow I've missed that little sub-menu all
this time.

------
fjabre
Chrome + Firefox = one browser to rule them all.!

~~~
fjabre
lol. To guys with 'good' karma: not LTR fans I take it?

It's worth noting that together these browsers will take significant market
share from IE and Safari, especially when Chrome is released for mac later
this year. Even more interesting is FF strong ties and history with Google.

