http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aktLRiWXf
qg
Google Chrome
Posted: 4 years ago
oh wow the webkit/khtml rendering engine
that's pretty exciting I'm excited
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm not celebrating.
Sluggish interface performance meant that I went back to Firefox in 0.2 seconds.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
Shit's ridiculous. I gave it another chance, and it just freezed all the time when I had a youtube video playing in the background. Eventually it had a whinge saying the flash plugin had become unresponsive and had to be disabled.
God damn browser is disabled is what's what.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
I am gonna wait a while before I give it a shot, I really like the idea of it, but I think they are gonna have to make big optimizations on performance if they really want people to be able to run tons of apps simultaneously.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
I have zero reason to try this browser, what addons do you guys need that slows down your browser and webpage viewing. I looked at all the little video things about it on the main site for it, looks like a huge copy of firefox. No thanks.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
I heard it's got a ridin' dirty silent mode so that you can browse porn without leaving history and cookies behind.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
I heard its got a kosher app that filters out any pictures of pork, shellfish, and shiksas.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
Tellysavalas said:I heard it's got a ridin' dirty silent mode so that you can browse porn without leaving history and cookies behind.
The Incognito mode with the little dude in the trench coat in the top left corner is pretty hilarious
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
(Edited 4 years ago by DangerousDan)
Xtap said:Shit's ridiculous. I gave it another chance, and it just freezed all the time when I had a youtube video playing in the background. Eventually it had a whinge saying the flash plugin had become unresponsive and had to be disabled.
God damn browser is disabled is what's what.you can't blame chrome for how shit the flash plugin is but the browser is still quite a way off being usable as a primary browser thats for sure (i guess thats why its version 0.2).
and draghun most of the innovativness of chrome is in the way the code was built, although it may look like a 'copy' of firefox you can bet your ass that some time in the future all the new browsers will transition over to the architecture of chrome because it makes a lot more sense to build your brower that way.
Mareg said:I am gonna wait a while before I give it a shot, I really like the idea of it, but I think they are gonna have to make big optimizations on performance if they really want people to be able to run tons of apps simultaneously.the js engine that they developed for chrome outperforms any other js engine that was previously available. here are the stats from sunspider 0.9 (a browser-neutral javascript benchmarking tool):
* Firefox 3: 3733 ms
* Safari 4: 3406 ms (aka. WebKit nightly)
* Firefox nightly: 2609 ms
* Chrome: 1814 ms
Thats just over twice as fast as the build of firefox that you're running right now is.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
(Edited 4 years ago by Xtap)
DangerousDan said:you can't blame chrome for how shit the flash plugin is
I most certainly can and will.
What pisses me off are some people who are using the damn thing for literally two minutes and are all HEY THIS IOS THA BEST UININSTALLING FAIRFAX RITE NOW.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
i can see the potential in it but unless you are joe schmoe fare fax tree is way better atm.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
yeah but ddan the way they are advertising this is that they are getting away from the linear process other browsers use to run apps. So even if its twice as fast, you may be running 5x more processes as a single time.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
DangerousDan said:Xtap said:Shit's ridiculous. I gave it another chance, and it just freezed all the time when I had a youtube video playing in the background. Eventually it had a whinge saying the flash plugin had become unresponsive and had to be disabled.
God damn browser is disabled is what's what.you can't blame chrome for how shit the flash plugin is but the browser is still quite a way off being usable as a primary browser thats for sure (i guess thats why its version 0.2).
and draghun most of the innovativness of chrome is in the way the code was built, although it may look like a 'copy' of firefox you can bet your ass that some time in the future all the new browsers will transition over to the architecture of chrome because it makes a lot more sense to build your brower that way.
Mareg said:I am gonna wait a while before I give it a shot, I really like the idea of it, but I think they are gonna have to make big optimizations on performance if they really want people to be able to run tons of apps simultaneously.the js engine that they developed for chrome outperforms any other js engine that was previously available. here are the stats from sunspider 0.9 (a browser-neutral javascript benchmarking tool):
* Firefox 3: 3733 ms
* Safari 4: 3406 ms (aka. WebKit nightly)
* Firefox nightly: 2609 ms
* Chrome: 1814 ms
Thats just over twice as fast as the build of firefox that you're running right now is.
What do those times even mean? My browser is going to load shit .1 second faster?
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
If I don't notice things loading now, I don't think I'm going to notice half of nothing.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
What i wanna know is when google chrome will do an auto 'next page' type function for google images so when i search for HUGE BLACK PUSSY i can jerk off without having to stop and press PAGE 2 etc.
Quote
Posted: 4 years ago
you can just whip up something real quick in greasemonkey for this situatin in firefox.
Quote
DangerousDan
"Tastes like hooker spit"
(Rank 15)
any of you guys tried it? new broswer by google based on the webkit/khtml rendering engoine. seems pretty snappy so far to me. could be a possible replacement for firefox depending on the addon support.
Quote