

New Google Chrome Beta - agotterer
http://chrome.blogspot.com/2009/03/google-chrome-has-new-beta_17.html

======
mpk
And .... still no linux build.

~~~
agotterer
or Mac :(

~~~
reconbot
A significant amount of work is going into both those builds but a lot more is
needed. As much as I love having a multiprocess browser the V8 JS engine is
the real heart of gold of chrome, and that is cross platform. Just nothing
uses it besides chrome as far as I know. I do know that the next Mozilla JS
engine feels to me at least (and if you benchmark different apps) just as
fast. So the next firefox will be on par with speed and it will be cross
platform. It will just have tabs that are not as cool.

~~~
unalone
Why won't it have cool tabs? Or do you mean in comparison to Chrome?

~~~
nuclear_eclipse
Well, FF 3.1 (or 3.5, whatever) will have an improved tabbing system,
including the ability to drag tabs out of the window to create new windows,
etc, but they will still lack the inherent feature that, IMO, makes Chrome a
real innovator: per-tab processes. That's really the single-biggest feature
that I would love to see in Firefox.

If not for a few must-have plugins that keep me coming back to Firefox, and of
course the lack of Linux support, I would have switched to Chrome the moment
it came out on that single feature alone.

~~~
blasdel
Firefox (and all other mozilla browsers) can't even have multiple processes
sharing the same profile _period_. It's ridiculously lame.

------
aliasaria
Is it just me or is Chrome just not as exciting as we'd hoped?

~~~
zmimon
Chrome is much more than I had hoped for. There are only 2 disappointments
with it for me:

* where are the plugins?

* where are the linux / mac builds.

In both cases the waiting has gone on too long to be credible any more.
However everything else about it has been wonderful and despite its low market
share it has really set a new benchmark for speed and responsiveness that all
the other vendors are paying attention to.

~~~
snprbob86
Extensions are coming: [http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-
documents/extensio...](http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-
documents/extensions)

Mac versions are in the works: <http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/mac.html>

"too long to be credible"? Seriously? A _handful_ of developers build Chrome
in an incredibly short period of time. They choose to built it for the largest
platform. They have rolled out dozens of revisions. The product is stable and
solid and beautiful. And you seriously are going trash them for taking their
time with lower priority features such as Mac support?

~~~
calambrac
The problem with this thinking is that the serious computer users, the early
adopters who are the ones that go out and tell the uncaring masses what to
use, are increasingly on Mac or Linux. My parents don't use FF because it's
better, they use it because I told them it was better and installed it for
them. I'm on a Mac, I can't use Chrome, so the odds of me telling them to now
switch away from FF (or of telling users who are still on IE to switch to
Chrome instead of FF) are pretty low.

~~~
snprbob86
The problem with your thinking is that you assume Google really cares about
how many Chrome users it has.

I'm sure that the Chrome team would be absolutely stoked to have a lot of
users, but strategically, it simply doesn't matter. The goal here is to
advance the state of the art in browsers. Performance, stability, and security
(in terms of process isolation) were and still are lacking in all other
browsers compared to Chrome. This is very much about pushing the state of the
web, not about gaining market share. Google Chrome delivers in this regards.

~~~
calambrac
I seriously doubt that Google doesn't care about market share for this thing
that they've invested in. Strategically, what good is advancing the state of
the art in browsers if people don't migrate to it?

Expanding on this a bit: we all know and love Google, but its a business, and
one that basically supports the existence of another browser by paying to be
the default search engine used in one of that browser's interface widgets.
It's not an insignificant amount, either
(<http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9804156-7.html>); there's no way they paid
that much to develop Chrome. Keep that money in house, make the shareholders
happy; keep Chrome open source, keep the hackers happy. Why _wouldn't_ they
want users to start adopting Chrome instead of FF?

------
acangiano
Is it just me or is Google Chrome not properly displaying feeds? This is
really annoying. For example, when I click on
<http://news.ycombinator.com/rss> I see a garbled rendition of the feed. Any
other browser I'ver tried displays a subscribe page with each feed entry
properly formatted.

~~~
truebosko
No, this happens to me too. I think it's cause it has no built in RSS reading
support yet

------
nanexcool
Anyone try this with Windows 7 Beta 64 bit? To make the regular version work
you have to add "--in-process-plugins" to the executable to make it work.

------
mixmax
So does it still constantly crash or is that fixed?

~~~
snprbob86
Google pushed dozens of patches transparently in the background. My
understanding is that you could have every different tab running a different
version if you kept them open over long periods of time.

The video-related crashes totally disappeared for me within the first month of
use. The Gmail related crashes disappeared shortly after that. I haven't seen
it crash since and I use it almost exclusively.

------
pibefision
We need a mac release...

