Google Chrome catch-all thread

I have no problem with people ad blocking GWJ if the ads bother them. None. But you're right, better a new thread to discuss that particular line of thought. Everything Else style.

I noticed that the playback of animated .gifs in our "Post a picture" thread suffers from extreme jerkiness and tearing. Probably due to their sandboxed renderers architecture or what have they.

I noticed that, as well.

Interesting that the stability of the thing seems to be rock solid. I went to a number of smaller, esoteric sites that both Firefox and Opera have problems with, and it was flawless and fast. The downloads window is pretty non-functional. I expect a modern browser to have something approaching a download manager, where I can reliably resume downloads even if they've been interrupted, see some info about them as they run, and start a download directly, by feeding in the file's url. I guess that's a plugin sort of thing.

Actually, it's probably a "next version" sort of thing. IIRC, Google prefers to release early and iterate quickly. Shoot them a mail (I plan to), a low-overhead download manager would be quite handy.

Quicktime movies (plug-in for both flash and QT automatically loaded, FF's pbbly) also are kinda jerky.

More customization will come in due time.

Rumor has it that Chrome was released early due to an unintended leak. Could be (I give it a 50-50 chance), though my GF is a non-believer. Is rumors are true, maybe Mac and Linux betas were not ready and they decided to go with what they had.

A feedback feature would've been nice, got a bunch of items to mention (most have been posted here).

I think we'll see the same FF plugin's coming soon to Chrome; same basic architecture (or so I understood from reading a couple of sites).

Funny thing; I also have most (reads all) of my bookmarks with Google's Toolbar Bookmarks, so Chrome didn't really import anything (except pwds, that was sweet). I tried installing Google Toolbar and wouldn't you know; it's not compatible. At least not yet. When trying to DL the Toolbar, it read that I needed a recent version of FF (going back to the basic Chrome architecture).

Loving this so far; I'll probably port at home. Will definitely port at work (work laptop sucks ass).

Spell check has a few bugs of its own (you cannot believe how long it took me to spell 'definitely' correctly).

---------------------ADDED--------------

I feared that ALL of Google's pet projects would be embedded; bookmarks, gmail, videos, reader, etc. Guess maybe they'll start with future iterations.

---------------------ADDED--------------

Also, I've gotten used to a bottom status bar. Hope they add that as an option later on.

I discovered that only about 60% of my bookmarks were transferred over from IE7. I have no idea what the causes of success/failures are.

I am not surprised that it is stable and works well with most pages. Considering the amount of data that Google has on web sites it should be easy for them to build a comprehensive test.

I not used adblock so I am not missing that part.

What I am wondering is what is the real difference in the IE8 private mode which seems to be a big problem for Google and the Chrome incognito mode. I believe the IE8 private mode will stop the collection of data by advertisers in addition to not saving any of the data on your PC and I am not sure Chrome stops the collection of data.

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

After using it more I have decided to come back to it in a couple of months. I like others are attacked to some great Firefox extensions that I have grown to love, ABP being one of them. It's like I came out of a cave and every site has animated ads now.

TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

I have to give it a pass right now too. Unfortunately it doesn't support tags for bookmarks. Ever since I started using foxmarks I can't live without my tags. Way better than folders full of duplicates.

These java speeds are pretty promising though:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10030888-92.html?part=rss

Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

Wait, are you saying that they technically could take my Xmas 2008 Presents List and publish it on a whim? That's complete BS.

Edwin wrote:

If the forums here were an app like gmail or google reader where they only updated the center, this browser would be awesome and make the site a lot more useful automatically.

Agreed. I tried it on my older desktop at home, and opening tabs for the threads in Everything Else that were updated overnight was enough to jam up the works pretty badly. GWJ just isn't built for the kind of resource management Chrome uses.

The animated .GIFs in the "Post a Picture" thread were a real let down.

Hobbes2099 wrote:

Also, I've gotten used to a bottom status bar. Hope they add that as an option later on.

Yeah, I'm a fan of being able to instantly see the URL of a link before clicking.

Still, I like that they're pushing browsers forward. Time to start work on GWJ 4.0!

Swat wrote:
Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

Wait, are you saying that they technically could take my Xmas 2008 Presents List and publish it on a whim? That's complete BS.

I don't really believe that they would, but, I'm pretty sure that TOS has been up for the Docs section since the beginning to cover themselves legally. I could be wrong.

wordsmythe wrote:
Hobbes2099 wrote:

Also, I've gotten used to a bottom status bar. Hope they add that as an option later on.

Yeah, I'm a fan of being able to instantly see the URL of a link before clicking.

It's down there fellas. Look closer. It pops up when you mouse over a link.

Swat wrote:
Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

Wait, are you saying that they technically could take my Xmas 2008 Presents List and publish it on a whim? That's complete BS.

This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services

It wouldn't be on a whim, it'd be for advertising Google Docs.

Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
Hobbes2099 wrote:

Also, I've gotten used to a bottom status bar. Hope they add that as an option later on.

Yeah, I'm a fan of being able to instantly see the URL of a link before clicking.

It's down there fellas. Look closer. It pops up when you mouse over a link.

Neat! I'll be sure to check it out when I get home.

Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

I think that it is part of how Google operates, to make content searchable it indexes and caches it. But Google has been sued for this before, so I think they are covering their @$$.

wordsmythe wrote:
Swat wrote:
Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

Wait, are you saying that they technically could take my Xmas 2008 Presents List and publish it on a whim? That's complete BS.

This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services

It wouldn't be on a whim, it'd be for advertising Google Docs.

Whim or not, that pretty much guarantees that any document you create can be viewed, scanned, filtered and taken without any knowledge on the end user's behalf, correct? I'm not trying to spark a debate on privacy issues, I would just like to know how many fingers Google has in my pie before I decide to bake it.

Certis wrote:

And can't scroll up on a laptop touch pad, bizarre. But hey, beta! Very promising start.

I am having the same issue with my wireless logitech mouse. Odd that I can happily scroll down - but not up. Doesn't seem like a big thing until it is gone.

Pass for now.

I had some weird problems last night with having FF and Chrome open at the same time... for some reason, Youtube videos (in FF) would play like utter crap while both were open. When I closed Chrome, they resumed working normally.

I also had some freezes and typing lag on Chrome (running by itself).

One interesting thing I discovered is that in addition to your bookmarks and passwords, Chrome also imports all of your "search engine" add-ons. Under options, you can choose the drop-box and select which of your searches you want to be the default. Kind of cool, although it's a lot more of a hassle than the instant drop-box on FF.

Not sure what I think about the integrated search/address bar either. Theoretically it works as advertised, but I just can't seem to wrap my head around it yet.

Swat wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
Swat wrote:
Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

Wait, are you saying that they technically could take my Xmas 2008 Presents List and publish it on a whim? That's complete BS.

This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services

It wouldn't be on a whim, it'd be for advertising Google Docs.

Whim or not, that pretty much guarantees that any document you create can be viewed, scanned, filtered and taken without any knowledge on the end user's behalf, correct? I'm not trying to spark a debate on privacy issues, I would just like to know how many fingers Google has in my pie before I decide to bake it.

I use the Docs but don't keep anything really sensitive up there. Google isn't trying to be shady about it. It's right there in the TOS and I heard a report about it on NPR a few months ago.

Granted, that does decrease the practical use of the program quite a bit, but, it is what it is.

I don't like the bookmark toolbar not having "Open All in Tabs" like FF. I don't want to right-click the group in order to open them all up. i also don't like the opening in group behavior (which is the same as FF 3). I want open and replace, like in FF 2.

Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
Swat wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
Swat wrote:
Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Any thoughts on Google's TOS? Particularly this section..

"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. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services and may be revoked for certain services as defined in the additional terms of those services."

Google docs has had that since the beginning, right? I thought once you put it up on their servers you were storing at your own risk.

Wait, are you saying that they technically could take my Xmas 2008 Presents List and publish it on a whim? That's complete BS.

This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the services

It wouldn't be on a whim, it'd be for advertising Google Docs.

Whim or not, that pretty much guarantees that any document you create can be viewed, scanned, filtered and taken without any knowledge on the end user's behalf, correct? I'm not trying to spark a debate on privacy issues, I would just like to know how many fingers Google has in my pie before I decide to bake it.

I use the Docs but don't keep anything really sensitive up there. Google isn't trying to be shady about it. It's right there in the TOS and I heard a report about it on NPR a few months ago.

Granted, that does decrease the practical use of the program quite a bit, but, it is what it is.

Yeah, I don't think they are trying to be shady, but it is good to know that anything more sensitive than a grocery list probably isn't in your best interest to store using their services. But that goes with pretty much anything digital you don't store on your own servers.

Have to stick with registered mail.

The only major problem I'm having with it right now is that Flash chokes it out, at least on my laptop. It's 3 years old but still no slouch and the same Flash pages work fine in Firefox. If I try to play a Flash video from GameTrailers, the CPU usage spikes to the high 90s, the video gets incredibly jerky and my system becomes unresponsive until it stops playing. I haven't tried this yet on my desktop which is more powerful. I imagine they'll work with Adobe to fix this over time (Flash 9 is already way too demanding on CPU.) Won't be using it full time but for a first beta, it is very impressive.

Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:

Have to stick with registered mail. ;)

Or the pony express.

MrDeVil909 wrote:
Chiggie Von Richthofen wrote:

Have to stick with registered mail. ;)

Or the pony express.

Careful with that, I hear folks try to intercept it with regularity.

Yeah, that TOS literally and directly means that any data you store on Google's servers isn't yours anymore.