What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up—Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
288 Comments
- InspectorGadget, on 09/01/2008, -26/+371No.
- inactive, on 09/01/2008, -43/+261Dugg for not being about Palin!
- TexasShiv, on 09/02/2008, -2/+79Definitely excited to try it out
- stupidStan, on 09/02/2008, -2/+75No, and it is not trying to be.
"We owe a great debt to many open source projects, and we're committed to continuing on their path. We've used components from Apple's WebKit and Mozilla's Firefox, among others -- and in that spirit, we are making all of our code open source as well. We hope to collaborate with the entire community to help drive the web forward." (http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take- ...
It seems the masses are ignoring almost all of the information that is being released by Google and looking at this as simply another browser with a different skin. It is a lot more than that.
-The V8 JavaScript Engine
-Sandbox rendering for security purposes
-Multi-process instead of multi-thread
-Precise garbage collection (eliminate memory leaks)
-Browser task manager
-'Gears'
there is a ton of good info here:
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/
Do some research before you blindly bash software based on a screenshot. Whether or not you use this browser, it is going to be good for the internet. As a developer, I am looking forward to this a great deal. - kjaonline, on 09/01/2008, -16/+87firefox still owns
- sprash, on 09/02/2008, -7/+65The killer feature of Firefox are extensions. You can write extensions that lets Firefox do almost everything, even to look like Chrome if you would want that. That flexibility is what keeps me using Firefox over Safari and it will keep me using Firefox over Chrome.
- pezholio, on 09/02/2008, -0/+47Yup, apparently it's ideal for when you want to 'buy' a 'gift' for a 'family member'.
- LMControl, on 09/02/2008, -3/+49Does it have pr0n mode?
- JoeF8577, on 09/02/2008, -8/+54I, for one, won't switch from firefox just yet.
- dicer999, on 09/02/2008, -1/+41Well, I'll try it out. I do love my Firefox though.
- zeebo, on 09/02/2008, -2/+39Because you can't really 'buy' an open source project. Otherwise Microsoft would have bought Linux out years ago.
Also, contrary to the 'starting from scratch' comment in the article they're going to be using Webkit, so they're not going to be duplicating that much labor. I wonder if they'll be submitting their javascript engine to it, or if they're going to create their own branch. - stupidStan, on 09/02/2008, -4/+41probably a good idea since this browser isn't released yet...
- GliTCH82, on 09/02/2008, -0/+36Buried because in order to answer the question you need to have actually tried the damn thing first. Some of these tech blogs are just as bad as political punditry.
- TheSwashbuckler, on 09/02/2008, -0/+261. Firefox is an open source project controlled by a non-profit foundation. It's hard to buy a foundation.
2. To as large as an extent as possible, they already own Firefox as Google provides over 90% of Mozilla's funding. - rahba, on 09/02/2008, -0/+25It does actually, the comic mentions it. You make a tab that's "incognito" and no history is saved and any cookies used for the session are deleted.
- fraggle35, on 09/02/2008, -0/+24Chrome will be open source, so chances are that extensions or similar will happen.
- sump22, on 09/02/2008, -0/+20Like safari's "private browsing"? c'mon apple, just name the option for what it's for. :)
- GeneralFailure0, on 09/02/2008, -6/+26Google Chrome has a pregnant daughter!
- Theli, on 09/02/2008, -2/+20If Chrome had features that were missing from Firefox, Mozilla could easily just look at the source code of Chrome and implement these features in Firefox 4. I don't think Google would mind if they did (in fact, they may even be expecting it). It's all about making their online services work better on the desktop.
- SuperSunny, on 09/02/2008, -0/+17Nope, it's WebKit based.
- jriggs420, on 09/02/2008, -1/+18Ironic question mark?
- maninalift, on 09/02/2008, -1/+17Google say it's not their intention to own the browser market. Others may say that's a lie but I don't think so. They want to push forward the browser market and in particular those things that assist their core business.
It's an open source browser with an open source JS engine an open source rendering engine and open source java library (gears) each of which can be taken separately and included in some other project. If you think Google thinks that is the way to establish a monopoly they you are a fool. - Sabretou, on 09/02/2008, -7/+23I, for one, welcome our Google Overlords.
- Ant7, on 09/01/2008, -5/+21Second that
- BoneheadFarker, on 09/02/2008, -1/+16Firefox > Opera > Safari > Chrome > Konquerer > Beer > Kittens > The 1972 NY Mets > The hamsters from the Hamster Dance website > IE
- MiddleOfNowhere, on 09/02/2008, -0/+14With all due respect, but you guys think too small.
Think web applications. What makes it impossible to use them as real replacements for traditional desktop apps?
1) When you are offline, so are your apps and docs.
2) Speed.
3) Security.
So:
1: Chrome will support Google Gears out of the box. Work in Google Mail, Google Docs and Google Whatevermaybenext, go offline, go online again and have your apps automatically sync to the cloud. Same with other apps based on the Gears API.
2: This V8 engine is supposed to be very fast. And just like the new JS engine in FF 3.1, this opens the door to a new class of applications. Think of a poor man's browser-based Photoshop/Final Cut/Logic ...
3: They claim they have nailed down several severe security problems. Let's see to that. But Google is not in the position to ***** this up, so I suppose they have done their homework.
-
So - this browser may not be the greatest thing since slide bread.
But it may bring us significantly closer to the old vision of the network as the computer/OS.
This is not about taking a few % of IE's market share.
This is about making both Windows and Office irrelevant.
It has been tried before, but it looks like this time it might actually fly. - mad05963, on 09/02/2008, -0/+14The day you can measure up to Linus Torvalds accomplishments we'll hear you out. Until then expect to be buried.
- TexasShiv, on 09/02/2008, -20/+34Buried for that same ***** comment on every article
- johnnysaucepn, on 09/02/2008, -1/+14Not really. Chrome's advantage is in the technical underpinnings, not the user interface. It's easier for Google to borrow FF and Opera's user interface and build it onto their engine, than for FF to do the opposite.
- edzilla, on 09/02/2008, -0/+13Still haven't figured out tags, have you?
- TehDoctor, on 09/02/2008, -1/+13Chrome does one thing interesting: running each tab a separate process. It would be nice if FF did this, as javascript wouldn't slow down every tab, just the one it's in. Nsplugin on 64 bit Linux makes Flash bearable, because when Flash craps out, it just crashed Nsplugin, not the whole broswer.
The only thing is that process creation takes forever on NT-based OS because they have no COW, so it might be noticeably slower. But on Unix-based OS you might see a decent performance increase.
But is it enough to displace the well-entrenched FF? No way. I admit that Opera has a lot of pros over Firefox, but it's not enough to make me switch. GChrome will most likely be a "try it for a few days" app. - diabolicedict, on 09/02/2008, -0/+12If Google's intent is to screw Firefox, Google would not have renewed the multi-million dollar deal with Mozilla.
- serif69, on 09/02/2008, -0/+12Mozilla said Google's family is off limits
- arkanebeats, on 09/02/2008, -0/+11Why? Last I checked competition actually promotes the adherence to the standards you speak of. What do you think IE7 would have looked like if Firefox hadn't come along?
- dieselpuker, on 09/02/2008, -1/+11Your sentence should end with a question mark " ? ".
- shankarganesh, on 09/02/2008, -3/+13sigh! another digg story; another "___ killer?!" title
- mad05963, on 09/02/2008, -0/+10Why would it be a disaster? It is an open source project, if people don't like it, if no one adopts its source code... then so what? At least they are pushing the technology forward and making it all available to everyone. besides any good ideas that pop up from this will be implemented into Firefox 4, it's all good my brother, no reason for the sky to fall.
- inactive, on 09/02/2008, -1/+10I wish I could get gifts for my family members like that, they're free – and then I get to beat them furiously.
- vilago, on 09/02/2008, -3/+12same could be said of microsoft and windows, but they're still here
- eobanb1, on 09/02/2008, -1/+10You fail at understanding the difference between Adobe and Apple.
- nvisn, on 09/02/2008, -1/+10Is their going to be a native x64 version?
- rrbaker, on 01/15/2009, -3/+12Oh my god. I swear, Opera users are like the Ron Paul supporters of the Internet.
- Sabretou, on 09/02/2008, -1/+10I see what you did there.
- chesterjosiah, on 09/02/2008, -0/+9Read the webcomic.
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/index.htm ... - ieee, on 09/02/2008, -1/+9Competition from Firefox forced Microsoft to improve Internet Explorer. The better performance of Safari beta for windows helped encourage the great work done in Firefox 3 in patching memory leeks and improving speed. Competition is a good thing. A bonus is that Google will be using and contributing to the open source WebKit so other browser makers can take advantage of their work.
If the rest of the google browser is also open source, that also takes care of the lack of trust people have for Google as someobody somewhere will be looking through the code, so Google can't hide any dirty tricks as far as privacy goes.
All in all this is a good development that will lead to better browsers all over the place. - MtheoryX, on 09/02/2008, -0/+8If not for Firefox, there wouldn't be an IE7 yet.
- Jonsend, on 09/02/2008, -2/+10Except it has the same steath mode. Have a look at the chrome comic on google books:
http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/ - MtheoryX, on 09/02/2008, -2/+10I agree. Firefox 3, although much faster and less memory-intensive, is still a dog compared to the nightly builds of webkit. If you don't believe me, just try it out for yourself:
http://webkit.org/ - stupidStan, on 09/02/2008, -0/+8Stop the mindless, un-educated banter please?!?!?
- inactive, on 09/02/2008, -0/+7But I will be in if it consume less memory than Firefox.. and releases a Linux version.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 307 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is