That comic strip, which is just a series of pages with a graphic on each, won't work without javascript enabled. If google have to over-engineer a simple thing like that I'm not keen on trusting them with something more involved....

Or am I misremembering?

... It can only be a good thing. They seem to have some nifty new ideas, and that can only help bring innovation to the browser market.

If they are smart, they will continue to donate to Mozilla to avoid future anti trust issues.

I just hope Chrome renders similarly to Firefox (i.e. standards compliant), so I don't have the pain of developing on another non standard browser like IE.

Excuse me I was looking for The Register's article slagging off Google's new web browser and ridiculing the hype. You know something that poured scorn on open source, made fun of the comic book and generally mocked all involved. All I seem to able to find is this oddly positive and optimistic article. Clearly I am in the wrong place. Can someone give me directions?

It's not surprising. They offer innovative software and services far closer to what users want than MS or Yahoo. It's easy to forget now, but gmail was a revelation when it first launched.

I read the comic strip and it's genuinely interesting - far more so than Firefox, both technically and in terms of its user model. I will definitely be trying Chrome.

As users we have to decide if we are comfortable trusting Google with so much of our data. That is the price we pay for access to their technology.

Surely that's a JavaScript engine!

I'm looking forward to my Nutrimatic Drink Dispenser.

Every time I read about Google My heart sinks a little more. It does truly seem as if they are bent in making the internet into their own image. I like Firefox as it is and the reason I use Linux is because I don't want anyone telling me what I can and cannot do with my machines. Still I gave up using Google as a search engine long ago and there is nothing that will persuade me to use the so called "cloud"

Our boxes are, apart from the stuff from Apple, called PCs. People should stop and remember that this stands for "Personal Computer". I for one wish them to remain that way and not be morphed into a dumb terminal controlled by the mega corporations wanting to part me from as much of my money as they can get away with. Yes. Google included.

"Do no evil, but look out for ways of ripping the poor saps off."

L and S looking for your wallet

Message from A. W. Ebuser:

While we, the userbase, tentatively welcome Google's innovation to accomodate the evolution of websites and their -interactive- content, we must issue some words of caution regarding needless reliance on scripts, applets and suchlike where simpler and more secure static pages will convey the content just as clearly. You must not allow yourselves to slip into the habit of using "pretty things" for their own sake.

For instance: It has come to my attention that some of your number are using JavaScript links where a tried and trusted <a href=...> would suffice. Furthermore, some are you are even coding pages of simple static content (specifically "content" not "content plus pretty widgets that we the users just ignore") that refuse to load (even a scriptless alternative) without JS enabled. For an prime example of this ridiculous nincompoopery from those who should certainly know better, see the Google Chrome comic strip. These practices are of great annoyance and inconvenience to those users, myself included, that are sensible enough to surf with the NoScript Mozilla plugin enabled.

Please refrain from this idiocy, as we are currently considering having repeat offenders shot on sight (of needless JS).

That is all.

it is open source. The code can be analysed and the user, can if they so wish, find out what it is doing beneath the chrome. Of course should one decide to employ this browser it will have to be reconfigured immediately after install to point away from Google servers and services, and the default search engine set to Scroogle. At least for those who want privacy and don't supply Google with all their emails, documents and search terms.

The Internet's access points will only be "Google-ised" if the ignorant masses allow it.

Ah, now there's the rub.

I fear that Google has the potential to be a much bigger threat than Microsoft ever was.

Google not only have a good deal of control of the data collection from the internet, they now seek to control the distribution of that data (see last weeks story on their submarine cables), they have made clear their aspirations in the mobile and OS markets and now they want a piece of the browser pie as well.

Maybe, when the EU/US regulators have stopped whipping Microsoft, they could wake up and smell the coffee.

Paris, cos she would enjoy a whipping by the EU.

Google has a great search engine and some neat apps which with this browser will be enhanced as time goes by. I am looking forward to this browser, it sounds great.

I just wish Google would stop their intrusion on our browsing habits in the way that they do, also do something about all the webspam, I can even see it on this website as I am typing this. The internet is for interesting material and not just advertising.

David

'Dean Hachamovitch, general manager of Internet Explorer, was more bullish.

"The browser landscape is highly competitive, but people will choose Internet Explorer 8 for the way it puts the services they want right at their fingertips, respects their personal choices about how they want to browse and, more than any other browsing technology, puts them in control of their personal data online," he said in a statement"

Do Microsoft really believe the shit they push out? People use IE because its forced upon them by Microsoft. Try as you might to get rid of it IE will suddenly pop up because something somewhere is making a call which ends up being handled by IE. Since when did MS ever respect anyone's "Personal Choices" and their "Personal Data"

Mines the one with the arms folded behind the back

This is just gui flim-flam! Back in the day browsers didn't have tabs, each window was it's own process. It's not exactly a revolution to go back to that, even if you wrap it in a fancy window.

It uses Webkit (http://webkit.org/) which is fully open source and based on KHTML. The current builds of Webkit of the most standards compliant renderers out there, passing the Acid 3 test 100%.

ex

It's over there --->, by a different author. Are you by any chance American? This isn't Fox news, there is no "stay on message", there are only people, writing.

"Called it Chrome? Didn't someone (hello Bill) use that name already?"

Yes it was RemObjects .Net Object Pascal, but on looking at their website, remobjects.com, its name has changed to Oxygene - if the name change ever made the news, I missed it.

"It has come to my attention that some of your number are using JavaScript links where a tried and trusted <a href=...> would suffice"

Thanks, exactly my thoughts

> Try as you might to get rid of it IE will suddenly pop up

Ubuntu, Firefox, Osx, Safari, iPhone...

IE is no longer a part of my online experience and i don't expect there to be a reason for me to want to switch back to microsoft products.

Google know too much about my surfing habits for me to feel comfortable sharing my browsing habits with them too.

"Maybe, when the EU/US regulators have stopped whipping Microsoft, they could wake up and smell the coffee."

Well, maybe if you were ***Paying*** for the service you might just have something to complain about. Since you ain't, Jog On.

Fluke

then two come along at the same time.

Has anyone noticed that the V8 javascript (engine) looks alot like VB?

Do you think the google board meet regularly and say "right how can we piss M$ off today" (another parody of their old "where do you want to go today")

If i were a betting man, before the 1.0 release of chrome, we will see the beta of something like chrome-light, which will rival Silverlight and Flash!!

While i welcome the google innovations and competition, i got to wonder where they are going with this. In 5 years time, the internet may equal google. They own the frontend, the backend and (an ever increasing amount of) everything in between.

Imagine if you will a giveaway bin outside every train station with a bootable 128meg flashdrive (10p each in bulk?) or free with the metro. Onto this is loaded a small linux OS (Gos??) with chrome. Bye Bye microsoft and then i for one would welcome our new google overlords.

In a separate story about IE8, someone made the comment that the amount of integration with management technologies (group policy on Windows, SMS etc) is one of the things that keeps IE entrenched in the enterprise, and therefore high on the browser numbers stats. Until Firefox, Safari, Opera, Chrome, whoever make it as easy for a big corporate to manage their browsers as IE does, they'll never make the switch. Home users care about all the other stuff, corporates WILL be swayed by how easy the browser is for them to control. The browser has to be easy to be controlled remotely 'out of the box'.. simply providing add-ons or bespoke builds will not be enough since corporate sysadmins won't trust the ongoing support of such solutions.

Without that, Firefox's approximate 20% market share is the best you're going to get!

...Not with a bang but with a whimper.

-dZ.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the way Google scan your interent use is very similar to what Phorm were proposing just a little bit more hidden. I've had techies shouting at me when I dare suggest Phorm is only small step from what's happens already but they're more than happy to Gmail away. This will probably be another arm to their core business, which is basically selling Adword adverts.

"Windows Chrome beta today".

Uh huh. And everyone else ... ? FireFox got started on non-Windows machines, in the main, and that initial traction is what will make Chrome a success.

If I remember right, Firefox doesn't use separate processes, IE does but only if you click on the IE icon to open a new window (opening a new window or tab from the file menu doesn't spawn a new process).

I enjoyed the comic strip, and was intruiged by its ideas, and agree that MS needs yet another boot up the arse to put proper coders on the IE project........

....but it'll take a LOT more than some fancy talk to get me away from Opera. And a lot more than that to ever trust Google with all my browsing data.

Am I the only one who is concerned by the words:

"...It's using the open source movement to prevent Microsoft, or anyone else, locking users in to a proprietary Internet access route that is not favourable to Google's interests..."

I don't really care about the MS bit, but the "not favourable to Google's interests" bit really has me concerned. Don't say the just because it's open source everyone will be able to know exactly what it's doing, because 99.9% of people who use browsers on any OS (maybe less on linux) have no idea how to look at the code, or read it or even keep up with security news that may tell them something is amiss.

Do no evil, my ass.

As per sabroni. Separate processes per tab = back to the Windows Taskbar. Chrome ain't all that.

Know what I want?

I want an OS with six things:

1) A Progs pulldown menu (so I can choose what progs to open and close)

2) A Docs pulldown menu with option to view in full window with simple browsing tree and preview panel (docs to open and close)

3) A link to the internet browser

4) A System Settings button (so I can fiddle when things aren't going the way I want)

5) Two taskbars: one for LAN stuff, one for WAN stuff, both with draggable prog tabs.

6) A totally blank desktop (folk who have stuff strewn over their desktop are either too ignorant or lazy/disorganised to find a home for stuff which is asking for trouble)

Windows + Firefox is so near yet so far.

1 = Windows Start button > Progs > ProgOfChoice

2 = Windows Start button > Docs > Explorer (circa Win 95 version)

3 = Windows Start button > Settings > RelevantDialogueBox

4 = Windows Start Button > Firefox/GoogleChrome

5 = Windows task bar / Firefox tabs

All that's missing is for MS to make manipulation of minimised progs more functional. Draggable, kill square on the taskbar, etc.

Although ever since MS decided to merge File Manage/Windows Explorer with IE, they've both got progressively worse and while there's a replacement for IE, I'm unaware of a replacement for the Windows Explorer side of things.

If MS had anything about them, they'll rethink IE and relaunch it as simply "Explorer" and have done with it. And then let you toggle between "Desktop/LAN Taskbar" and "Internet/Cloud Taskbar".

But they'd only knacker it up by putting in "shortcuts" that offer a million ways of doing one task, but perversely seem to make things actually take longer.

Know what I don't want?

1> All my stuff on "the cloud".

Chrome will just be an enhanced version of FF+Opera that embraces the Cloud more closely - a WAN/internet desktop if you will. All well and good, and I'll probably use it.

"I just hope Chrome renders similarly to Firefox (i.e. standards compliant), so I don't have the pain of developing on another non standard browser like IE."

If it's open source, I'm guessing if it doesn't comply with standards, it soon will!

Does anyone know exactly when today it's coming along? I'm right in the middle of some cross-browser testing on a new interface, weirdly enough.

Firefox is like IE in that respect - a new thread for each window (not tab). I hope Chrome can be run non-tabbed, or I definately won't be using it... nobody has yet managed to explain why they are so good.

... and I want a Moon Pony.

"Chrome(n): Showy features added to attract users but contributing little or nothing to the power of a system...Often used as a term of contempt." [The Jargon File]

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/C/chrome.html

A well chosen name then.

I see your point, but if there is anything truly nasty in the code then the 0.1% of users who are able to read code can shout about it and if nasty enough it will reach media that the remaining 99.9% of users have contact with.

As for closed source, what percentage of the user population is able to fully reverse closed source, and if they manage to find some nasties are they not open to prosecution for abusing the terms of the user licence?

I agree with your point regarding Google's interests, they are looking for further domination of the Internet. I believe their interests lie whole heartedly with the share holder and not the user.

You can detach tabs from the main browser window and either move them to another instance of the browser or leave them totally seperate. I like. I want. now.

For those expressing privacy concerns, if it does send data back to the google borg ship, being open source there will be a custom version that doesn't out in a matter of days is my guess.

Thanks Google for making a few leaps forward unlike IE8 which is lagging behind and doing nothing more than stealing it's ideas from others (mostly Firefox).

I'll be installing it as soon as I get my pointer on it!

I've already made it know that if I find 'Chrome' on our network, it will be terminated with extreme prejudice and I reserve the right to dish out the same fate to its unfortunate user with the help of a length of Clue-By-Four[tm]

As someone has already said, Google already knows about my searching habits and there's no way in hell it's going to gather data on my browsing habits, open source browser or no. Trust is a two-way street.

The only consolation I can see is that it might spur on some innovation in the Firefox and Exploder camps, although given what the last lot of 'innovation' led to, it's a very *small* consolation.

Do no evil, my arse.

Page 10, and the MS monkey coders...nice one Google!

In answer to the (implied) question "why are tabs so great?", two words:

Mouse Gestures.

Integrated with Opera, plugin available for FF, nothing as far as IE is concerned, and guess what? Tabs are a pain in the Yaris with Explorer.

"Until Firefox, Safari, Opera, Chrome, whoever make it as easy for a big corporate to manage their browsers as IE does, they'll never make the switch."

A very good point AC. I deploy Firefox in our office and its a struggle just keeping everyone's NoScript installed. Firefox's support for "global extensions" is a pathetic joke. Actually, the way all the "global" config is handled sucks, especially when you switch between different major versions. I, as an admin may run 1.5, 2.0 and 3 all on any given day, and Firefox's handling of this scenario is pretty bad. Unless you explicitly call a separate profile for each version it just dumps certain settings out of your personal profile whenever they match the defaults for the particular version you are running at the time. Then you go back to a version where you actually need those custom settings and you've been defaulted.

Plus, every time a new version comes out you are discouraged from upgrading because there is some extension that's not supported. I can't run FF3 now because the AllCookies extension isn't supported and I need that to dump session cookies for WGET.

Gotta give it a big :thumbup: for the spellcheck though, it certainly helped this post.

Page 13 of that comic has a map of Europe where Belgium, Holland and those other funny little countries have all apparently been assimilated into Germany.

From another company you'd assume it was a mistake, but from Google, it has to be a bit worrying.

10 superscript 100 = 1 googol

Just skim read through the 'comic' and saw the part about it having a privacy mode, in the same vein as IE8.

They used exactly the same example, the 'buying a present for a loved one'

I thought Google was at least brave enough to call it what it is, 'porn mode'

Paris - Because I'm sure she'll get plenty of presents bought for her in Privacy mode.

What is this browser market you speak of? Every market I've ever participated in sold something - all the browser people give their product away. Doesn't sound like much of a market to me.

It's somewhat foolish, and very quaint, this idea that by making a "better browser" it will somehow erode market share from existing corporate powerhouse(s). No one buys a Windows box because it comes bundled with free IE - they buy a Windows box because it's what Joe Public is familiar with and all he needs. MegaCorp buys Windows for all the reasons outlined in previous posts, and then some. Geeks may get riled up about how important technical differences are, but most people and business just don't care cause it ain't that important.

...until I get a go. The hype looks good, and the rationale makes sense. I know a number of people already using google docs for collaboration, and it seems safe to assume that this will work nicely with that.. I'm pretty browser-agnostic in the main; most of what I do works wherever, although some things I simply can't get Opera to do properly; I look forward to taking the new kid for a spin around the block, once the fanfare dies down and he makes his appearance...

If you use gmail, and googleapps then you see their ads, this is their market place.

By encouraging Chrome Google can ensure compatibility with their code making for a better experience, increased usage, more ads viewed and clicked on. That’s their marketplace.

For Microsoft – if people move to web apps then they won’t need desktop apps such as office.

As long as the experience of using web apps is less than the desktop Microsoft has a change. If the web apps become fully functional and internet connections are 100% reliable then web apps are more than good enough.

As above if Google can make web apps more like desktop apps then they win market share for their advertising.

On a persoanl note - I'll wait for the open source folks to rip it apart and make it less invasive. Other then that I like the ideas and it all makes sense except for giving one commercial company control of my online lfe.

Google is one huge threat to all other companies - they are using technology properly and they understand the competitive edge it brings.

Personally I don't care how this pans out, it only takes one big player to use tech correctly and other companies are going to follow suit to even stay in the game.

The browser is very important for brand, the home page of the browser is the internet to most people - coincidentally that often turns out to be google.

But, if you can own the shell around, and pump information directly to that application then you have it - that is worth a lot and is the reason no one has really been able to charge for a browser - it is just too valuable to have people running your browser it is the ultimate loss leader, especially if you have things you want to deliver that is paid for.

"we must issue some words of caution regarding needless reliance on scripts, applets and suchlike where simpler and more secure static pages will convey the content just as clearly."

http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/

and don't be fooled by the juvenile humor the site's proprietor, Vince Flanders, sometimes favors. He's dead serious.

Why is there no "pulling wings off flies" icon? There are so many badly designed and executed websites out there that writing letters of complaint to webmasters has become a way of releasing minor pent-up sadistic urges: "other websites don't have this problem, what's wrong with yours?"

I'm sure I'll not be the only one to point this out - Joe Public gets Windows on his PC because thats all he's allowed to buy due to Microsoft's hold over the OEM's. Ditto for businesses.

Hopefully the current trend with laptots will see this finally see this start to be reversed.

As for the Google browser. Well, personally I don't see them as all that evil, but then I don't use a search engine that much tbh, and theirs has the least intrusive adds. I can certainly see the logic in wanting to ensure that Microsoft don't become the Internet gate keeper. However, I do find it amusing that it's the Microsoft fanbois who subscribe to the idea that any company that wishes to compete with Microsoft only wants to do so so it can become a bigger Monopoly than the beast of Redmond, rather than just ensure it's doesn't become the latest EEE roadkill...

When it's released I'll give it a go, if its better than Firefox, I'll move, if not, so long as it follows the standards, it'll be just another test platform.

Coat please. I'm not waiting any longer.

all those who closed their browser due to boredom?

"Chrome will use the idea of multiple concurrently executing processes where a process, a kind of mini-browser, runs its own app tab and a Chrome process manager. Halts in one process do not freeze the whole browser."

Does this mean that Google engineers never learned multi-threading? This sounds like a bad experience for those on 4-core and 8-core systems.

I trust Google less than Microsoft these days. I'll stick with my browser that wasn't built by a mega-corp looking to dominate the world.

Seconded! Well said.

I had a look at the strip and it's mainly all white, 20-30 something males, the occasional geek woman is shown, but no blacks, asians, hispanics, or indeed anyone other than white, male geeks. Ooh dear, I can almost hear the various race-relation groups thundering towards Google!

( This is a tongue in cheek observation, before I get flamed! )

Single or multiple processes aside, tabs are REDUNDANT in Microsoft Windows IMHO-- we ALREADY HAVE A TAB BAR generally referred to as the "taskbar." My workflow allows me with a *non-tabbed browser* in windows to combine browser tabs with any other applications as tabs and not bury things inside of an application's own tabs. I HOPE one can DISABLE tabbing in Chrome in favor of a separate window which then utilizes the taskbar tabs, otherwise I won't touch it with an 11-foot pole.

In addition, I move my taskbar to the left-hand side and widen it somewhat so that I get vertical tabs that I can control the real-estate of, not horizontal ones, as on a widescreen monitor that's a better use of space-- I want as much vertical space for the actual web page as I can get. Pages are often taller than they are wide, in case you haven't noticed...

Computers should be smart enough to conform to *my* workflow, not to force me to conform to its. Tabs, indeed. Creeping featurism at its finest...

So... I follow a link, don't open a new tab... can I go back? It dumped the entire previous process and started a new one, so how could it? Unless it DOES keep a relationship or a listing or something.

I'll give it a shot when it drops. Though my tweaked Firefox does everything I want better than any other browser I've tried.

Everything that takes a huge success has to implement something new.

Is multithread really that "huge new thing" that will make million of people to try their browser?

How many times you had problems with a website that kept crashing the entire broswer? I had not experienced it so many times to really be desperatly looking for a new web broswer.

and when a crashing happens the ability to restore the state before the crashing that we already have on firefox is not that annoying to justify this "new function" to make the new broswer a success.

I do expect a lot more new stuffs on the browser to turn my surfing experience more interesting making it faster, simpler and smart...

I bet the new sensation for the softwares is "smart" functions able to guess what we want based on our past actions.

They are re-implementing a process model on top of the OS process model, add their own security model, then wire these processes' output all up into the GUI? Next thing you know, they then can get rid of the OS, leaving just the browser window. Sounds nice and easy in a comic strip, but there is bound to be problems, because this well-trodden path goes through the valley of implementation pain. And to be useful, in Beta stay it cannot.

As far as I'm aware, thanks to the NoScript and CustomiseGoogle plugins for FireFox, Google doesn't get much from me other than the odd search term and my (dynamic) I.P. address.

CustomizeGoogle: Disables "Click Tracking", anonymises the Google cookie UID, disables cookies being sent to Google Analytics (Urchin)... and much, much more.

NoScript: Blocks all javascript (by domain, until I allow it) so, amongst others, thats no Google Analytics and no Google Ads.

Anyone notice the following on page 1 ...

"Trg: OMFG"

On page 3 ...

"HTTP://WWW.WTF??.COM"

On page 23 ...

"HOT! HOT! GIRLS!"

Page 33 ...

Dog Poop!

...

Kudos to Scott McCloud .. nice comic rendering 8-)

www.google.com/chrome

Google chrome is live. http://www.google.com/chrome

I notice that Chrome captures the search box of sites you visit (comic p20). Doesn't that allow them to effectively become referring websites and claim referral click fees?

Good: Google are the ONLY people out there who can seriously challenge the MSIE hegemony. Excellent news.

Bad: When will we start seeing proprietary Google Office / Productivity extensions? 6 months? 12?

... and it looks good!

It's certainly fast.

Crisp interface.

Let me see, a vague commitment to the Mac and Linux platform isn't a good launch for Google Chrome really (Google are hugely notorious for releasing on Windows first and then waiting many months before bothering with other platforms).

What's even worse, if you want to try Google Chrome on a non-Windows platform (e.g. via emulation/virtualisation such as VMWare, WINE etc.), then good luck, because whoever decided to *block* (yes, BLOCK) non-Windows users from downloading the Windows version of Google Chrome ought to be hung, drawn and quartered! User Agent Switcher on Firefox got me a little further, but even that stopped me at "Accept and Install" on the EULA page. What the freak are Google playing at?!

It's pretty nippy, but it throws a hissy fit on some forums,

I miss my mouse gestures though, a lot.

www.google.com/chrome

Bad:

Fugly, lack of options (right-click reload, please?), lack of GUI options, Javascript issues, no auto mouse-gestures included, bookmarks hidden away, dns pre-fetch auto-enabled, middle-click open in new tab, but no auto-display - WTF? Looks decidedly as if it was not designed for desktops.

Interestingly good:

Inspect element, Task manager.

If they can fix the bad and retain the good, then it could be a contender.

It's superficially quite nice. Font rendering seems a little weird though, a bit blocky when the background's grey...

Oh yeah, and Oh My God It's Full of Ads! (looking at you, El Reg). Sorry but that's a deal-breaker for me. Back to Firefox+ABP+Filterset.G, ta...

Google is advertising Chrome (BETA) on its main page!

What was that about Larry Page not wanting a privacy link on that "beautiful clean home page"? (I know, there is one now)

Shit, how could they add an ugly download link for Chrome on the beautiful clean home page?? I almost can't find the search box anymore in all the clutter...

Of course theyre going to release for Windows first, its on 90% of the computers out there.

Oh wait...

Mine's the one without the banners.

On first impression it is **very** fast and smooth compared to any of the other browsers I've tried recently (Firefox 2 & 3, Safari, Opera and I'm still have to use IE at work).

The clincher for me is that one of my e-mail addresses is with Yahoo and their site is normally an absolute nightmare, hanging for 30 second plus on the most minor transaction. Chrome (on the same computer, modem, connection as all the above) doesn't even break a sweat.

Pretty nippy, and slick too. I'll keep playing and see how it performs. I do like the shortcut / minimal chrome thing...

Something that tickled me: When I launched an "incognito" session it warned me to look out for, among other things, "Surveillance by secret agents" and "People standing behind you"

Cute.

So is this why Google Code un-blacklisted the Mozilla Public Licence a little while back?!

I've been using it all evening and it knocks the pants offa Firefox for general browsing speed, and Java-heavy stuff (Web-based remote desktop) was pretty impressive....

Isn't chrome the user interface component of Mozilla (e.g. all those chrome:// urls)?

This seems like a terrible name choice to me.

.... I kinda like it... It's bloody quick!

So far - thumbs up... There's a lot of Google hate out there since they became all "evil" or "successful"... But - fair's fair - they've still got some bloody clever people workin' for 'em....

This is posted using Chrome; but I had to boot into Vista for the first time for two months to try it.

First impressions are good; it imported all my bookmarks and settings, including setting the speel chucker to British English. It is fast and opens all sites OK. They look the same as in Firefox. Mmm... "Firefox" is shown as a spelling mistake! Still, not bad for a beta.

I can't wait for the Linux version to really test it.

"Maybe, when the EU/US regulators have stopped whipping Microsoft"

Yeah, that wet lettuce leaf the regulators have been using to whip M$ with is really bringing them to their knees.

Hopefully google's browser will beat the firefox record, just to show that you don't have to rely on religious fanatics to download your product but curiosity about actual technical aspects can make people care.

Internet Explorer is not free. It is bundled with the OS and a certain percentage of that cost is attributable to IE.

For more on the upcoming antitrust law suit (Google v Microsoft) you will have to poke around.

I'm running it now and its a LOT more crash resistant than Safari, FireFox, IE or Opera. Its also extremely fast.

I'm hooked.

It's a nice browser, but the user seems to have no way choose to block content - such as adverts. Plus I miss my mouse gestures too.

So, I'll probably stick with Opera for now.

Thanks anyway Google.

I do use Gmail - but all that mail is forwarded to my Exchange server and converted into text... the only people that send email there are ex-girlfriends and my Asian buddies that keep trying to sell me penis enlargement devices/pills - sometimes the ex's are nice to hear/feel from. Otherwise Gmail is useless as a business tool.

I'm not sure what GoogleApps is either but if it's from Google I'm assuming it's web based and they hold absolute power over you because they own the infrastructure, the accessibility, and your (and your businesses) detailed information? Sounds like a scam if I've ever heard one.

It's a setup file that downloads the actual installer.

"What's even worse, if you want to try Google Chrome on a non-Windows platform (e.g. via emulation/virtualisation such as VMWare, WINE etc.), then good luck, because whoever decided to *block* (yes, BLOCK) non-Windows users from downloading the Windows version of Google Chrome ought to be hung, drawn and quartered!"

S'funny, my XP crash-test-dummy setup in VirtualBox within Ubuntu works perfectly for downloading it. I suggest that either VMware [spits] sucks, or You Are Not Doing It Right.

Anyway, seems allright. Might throw it on the XP box at work where I can get a better feel for it. The google lot have hit a nail on the head with the seperate processes per tab thing tho, nothing pisses me off more than one of my thirty tabs deciding to kill my entire browser.

Hopefully that will stay for the *nix variant, or someone will implement it in a *nix browser, because that would be a fucking godsend for the sometimes horrifically flaky Flash support on *nix platforms. Youtube, and other Flash based media browsers, I'm looking at *you*.

Steven R

Tried it, wasn't happy that it only imported my bookmarks from IE and not Opera or Firefox. Whilst I agree it is fast, its very minimal. Certainly not my cup of tea at all.

Unfortunately I have aquired a taste for Opera. Yes, the best kept secret on the web. Long may it stay that way too... So feel free to slag it off. I will be happy for not to download it. I think its great you love Firefox, or that IE dings your bell, I am over the moon for you. :)

Well at least it's fast! http://tinyurl.com/ChromeBench Ok, so not 100% scientific as done under virtualisation, but still 18x faster than FF2!

Gates cos Google's the new whatever and Microsoft's the new something else. Tired now. Too much faux benchmarking.

I don't 'browse', I target. I don't socialise, I research. I don't chat, I post.

What I want is as minimalist a browsing experience as possible, and anything that provides web designers with new and exciting ways to clutter up web pages with attention-seeking gimicks and toys is a bad thing in my book.

But that's just me. I remember Mosaic and the days when advertising banners were first introduced.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who treat the web like Blackpool pleasure beach, spending their time aimlessly wandering around looking for fun but pointless distractions to waste their time on. Google Chrome is another step in the development of the web as a form of general entertainment, rather than the earlier network of hobbyists it once was.

Bad for me, as I get caught up in the congestion, but who am I to tell people how to enjoy the internet? Mind you, it sounds like a great way to add time wasting fun into your boring workplace.

What, you don't like the idea of closing a browser session (or crashing), and then going back to the exact same open pages when you restart the browser?

I mean, IE7 provided nothing to like, but Opera's always done it right, and Firefox is catching on.

If you have edited your hosts file to "home" ad servers then Chrome takes ages to load any page containing a "homed" URL - which is of course most of the internet.

Generally it is obvious it was released early - there are a lot of things missing. It isn't a Firefox challenger by any stretch of the imagination.

Unfortunately,

This "chrome browser" isn't supported by my bank's online banking system, therefore it isn't something I'll be using for anything serious. That's the only problem with having a new browser appear. If critical websites don't support it, how is it useful? Also, how do you print, view, edit, look at your History, or anything else without a tool bar for these functions. Those who don't need these functions won't mind. The rest of us will be using Firefox. As a matter of fact, if "Chrome" is meant to kill Firefox, then I won't be using or supporting that effort, as Firefox is my preferred browser of choice.

Sorry in advance for the loooong post. I have grievances. :)

I agree and I'm a little irritated now. Google, by creating their own frickin' web browser now, has made it quite definitively obvious that if they can't take over the Internet (and believe me they can't no matter how many billions of $$$ they have), but they're at least going to shape their little corner of the Internet into their image. Remind you of anyone? AOL MAYBE? As soon as somebody creates a search engine that can hold a candle to Google (instead of lighting its farts) I'm there. And I'm not signing up for bloody gOL (Google Online of course) either.

Kind of off topic here, but I've noticed 2008 has been the Year of the Marketer in the IT world. They come round every few years. Everybody from Google to MS to Amazon has their latest and greatest fad tech (Google Chrome, cloud computing, etc.) that'll kill the old kit dead in its tracks and forge a Brave New World of IT. Heh, yeah, sure. Remember Tablet PCs? They were the "tech killer" in the last Year of the Marketer. Please raise your hand if you actually own a tablet PC. That's what I thought.

Mark my words: Google Internet will be used by a niche of PC and WWW users, but it ain't killin' nothin'. Cloud computing, if it doesn't drift away (ha!) will only be used by people who...have their heads in the clouds (couldn't resist). MS will release another crappy version of Windows that we'll only upgrade to because XP won't run the newest apps anymore. IE8 will suck just like the 7 versions before it. Hard disks will get bigger and RAM will get faster and processors will get whizzier just like they've always done.

As wise old King Solomon once said: "There is nothing new under the sun."

I installed it and could not load any pages in it 'Aw, snap!'

Uninstalled and tried to reinstall. Got an installation error. GoogleUpdate.exe locked up in Task Manager.

Killed process. Wiped folder where it's settings reside. Installed some Windows updates and rebooted. Reinstalled Chrome. Yaaay! It connects and loads it's default webpage. Then promptly crashes (No crash tabs for me the entire thing dies). Try again It crashes again. Try again and it loads and does not crash. But by this time I got bored and went back to FF3.

Internet Explorer has been absolutely free for a very long time. In fact, it's at the core of the argument about the Microsoft 'monopoly'. Lots of other browsers were trying to sell themselves for years (Netscape Navigator, Opera) but MS believed that access to information wasn't as important is the information accessed - so they decided to give away IE for free. If you are in doubt you can go here:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/downloads/ie/getitnow.mspx

and get it for yourself (for absolutely free). MS decided to forgo some short term profit and take a longer term view - and they were right (financially) in doing so. It's so strange to me how some (geek) people get so bent out of shape about it. You wouldn't whine if you were in their shoes. (U.S. size shoes obviously)

Just woke up to downoad and install Chrome, had some problems with the installer initiating but I undone some MS updates and it's installed fine.

Wow, it's fast, displays all my usual pages fine, installs plugins fine. Looks clean and crisp, no menu bar at the top hooray!

Well done Google, now get the webspam off the Net and stop spying on me and holding my personal info and we are there.

David

does anyone else notice a similarity between the 'sad tab' in the cartoon, and the Mac classic 'sad Mac' icon for a non-working Mac? What does this tell us about the antecedents of the development team?

Wanted to be the first one :-)

Anyway, being a former software developer I kind of liked some of the points raised in the cartoon, especially the process separation stuff. I use Seamonkey (shoot me) and it has so many times hung at me due to faulty DNS resolution or Javascript loops.

I do hope, however, that the installer is a just beta far from the real thing. First, I hate bootstrap installers that download the actual program in my back. I want to download stuff by myself. Second, absolutely no questions asked and the .exe is installed right into my profile ! Hey Google, ever heard of C:\Program Files ??? how about letting me choose where I want to put that stuff anyway ?

Tux, because I want to see a Linux version right away.

Installed, disliked, uninstalled.

The uninstallation leaves GoogleUpdate.exe behind, grrrr (presumably a bandwidth robber). Bizarrely, or maybe suspicously, googleupdate.exe is installed in c:\doc&sets\<userwhoinstalled>\localsettings\appdata\google (or something like that) and doesn't appear in the installed programmes list, so you easily uninstall it if you don't want it. Grrrr.

In fact, I'm noticing that loads of software these days are leaving bits of themselves behind, installed and run at startup, even if you 'uninstall' the application. Grrrr. No wonder PCs go stale.

You must have a stuffed installation of Windows cos it loaded fine on my normally troublesome Vista machine.

Very quick, very nice. Posting this from it right now. I think it may become my new browser of choice :)

Now just the matter of a Mac version. Oh - and If this is what Android is like, I want to know if I can reformat my iPhone :)

I only bother to use Gmail, Calendar, Blogger, Docs, Youtube, and News, so this is a no-brainer for my Internet use,

as long as it can look up El Reg, and other basic sites, i'll stick with it, i mean, i feel ya, Firefox, but you better take Google's advice and converge,

Chrome is a surprise to me, and an obvious choice for my needs...

I'm a really cynical guy, but I think it's actually pretty impressive. I've tried it on some of my more complex layouts and it seems to be standards compliant. My AJAX/jQuery stuff runs *seriously* fast in it, and I love some of the functionality, and how easy it is to use.

My only concern is that it's from Google. How much of what I'm doing is being sent home? And how open-source is it? I might wait to see what comes up once people start digging under the hood before I use it at home, but for my work PC (which is a wee bit less powerful) this may well be a winner.

[quote]

"Google has a great search engine and some neat apps. ... I am looking forward to this browser, it sounds great. I just wish Google would stop their intrusion on our browsing habits in the way that they do, ... The internet is for interesting material and not just advertising."

[endquote]

Hah - how do you think Google pay for all this "free" stuff you are getting? It's all paid for by advertising - indeed if you use Google products you are actually propping up the advertising business model that you don't like. Don't want adverts, use Firefox...

Just spent a little time cruising around the menus and some of the developer tools built straight into the browser are fantastic! The Firebug clone is brilliant. (Though some of it does look suspiciously like the little-known Araneae editor. I wonder if Mr McIntyre has noticed that.) The Javascript debugger does what it says on the tin, the task manager is actually a useful piece of kit.

I might use this for my development today and see how it goes. So far, in terms of out-of-the-box functionality and speed, it's looking like a potential Firefox beater for me. Just the privacy issues to worry about.

I like it, as a web developer and an end user, remember it's still a beta but have been using it for the past hour and it's nice and clean!!

....if it runs adblock.

not very likely though is it.

I am writing this from Chrome now... It is very fast (in comparison to FF3), it is very nice to use and it is neat. I like it... But as others noted: The dealbreaker is the missing AdBlocker ;-)

This is fast, REALLY fast

The simplicity and the lack of 'chrome' is fantastic, it really is an invisible browser that just displays the web, displays it well and displays it fast

Of course we've become used to extensions, and there are a few I'm missing, tabscope for one

I can't believe people aren't going to give it a chance

I was with Firefox since 0.9, and it has progressed loads now it's up to v3.0.1

IE has also progressed loads now it's up to v7 (8 in beta) (This isn't a post for me to MS bash for the sake of it)

Opera has progressed loads now it's up to v9.5

I am running v0.2 Chrome and there is obviously plenty to do before it even gets it's v1.0 release

The built in task manager in the developer menu, the ability to turn a page into a desktop application, the fantastic UI leaving all the screen real estate to the page your viewing, and the speed!

All make it worth giving it a good try

When I was trying to get my friends to convert to FF, I told them to try it for 2 weeks and don't go back to IE untll after the 2 weeks are up and then see what you think, all of them moaned about having to do this or that for a few days, but by the end of the 2 week when they fired IE up they hated it and said they'd never use it again

If you apply my 2 week challenge to chrome, I guarantee when you use Firefox after a fortnight it will seem old, slow and cluncky in comparison

I just hope in future beta version they will develop a system to extend it

But for now it does what it says on the tin, it browses the web, and it browses it fast & well!

So, I have my reservations and doubts about Google as a company - rather more so than MS, actually - MS just wants my money, I fear Google wants my soul. And Chrome is missing an adblocker - that's close to essential for me.

BUT - it works. Fast. And doesn't need to be switched to Full Screen to avoid hogging screen real estate - which means it displays several of my favourite sites correctly straight off. And it's fast, and it works. Fast.

I'm impressed, which is pretty good for a cynic. When the adblocker appears, I'll probably use it.

"Hah - how do you think Google pay for all this "free" stuff you are getting? It's all paid for by advertising - indeed if you use Google products you are actually propping up the advertising business model that you don't like. Don't want adverts, use Firefox..."

Your petty jealousy is showing mate. Stay with that house brick if you want. It's as dead as a Dodo when Google pull the plug to it's finance.

...Google is slithering into every niche in the web it can find.

I don't really trust them. I don't like the 'Fcuk you - we OWN you' corporate attitude revealed by so many of their statements.

A Google browser?

Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.

Looks like a pretty good browser; very VERY fast as has been mentioned, got all my settings and stuff from firefox easily (including all my saved passes, slightly disturbing!) and I have yet to find a site it doesn't work with correctly, hell, its nice not to have to install flash on a fresh browser.

I haven't tried it yet, but it also looks like it will suit my EEE 701 and its tiny screen too :)

BUT, much like whenever I try any new browser, I miss mouse gestures so so much!

oh, and you can't add anything to the spell checker, so firefox will have to retain its red wriggly underline

Is it me or have Google acquired the late 1970's game "Simon" to use as their logo?

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_(game)

coat.....mine's the one with the coloured flashing lights on the back..

Google funded firefox has turned into a nightmare for Google. They left their foot on the accelerator too long and hopefully for us end users FF is out of anyones control now. The ease of writing and delivering addons for developers and the ease of finding and installing addons for users makes FF a real user orientated thing.

Combine that with addons that manipulate and control the web pages before representation on the screen, eg CustomiseGoogle that do interesting/useful things like automatically extending the google search page as you page down without requiring click on Next page, FF is truely dedicated to the interest of the masses instead of its maker.

For Microsoft the web browser was the next level up threat that commoditises their operating system. For Google the addin is the next level up threat that will commoditise the browser. Their best bet is to portray addins as wild untrustworthy things that one must fear. I think you can see this approach in their cartoon.

Their choice of the name Chrome is an evil attempt to destroy the guts of Firefox which is also called Chrome.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that "locking people into open source" is akin to "locking people into Google." Google is no more benovelent than Microsoft; they've taken "open source" and made it their own for-profit venture. So, they're really no better than anyone else--they've stood on the shoulders of all those before them, and taken the next step.

I find it interesting that the "each tab is its own process" is being looked at as a novel idea. Everyone calls Microsoft a "me, too" company, introducing tabs and sharing the process memory between all tabs with IE7. They obviously should have waited a few more years and called their old "separate window in a separate memory space" process revolutionary. Everything old is new again. This poo apparently *can't* stink because it comes from Google. The self-proclaimed "Do no evil" company has just polished another turd.

As for the comment from Steve:

-- "Thanks Google for making a few leaps forward unlike IE8 which is lagging behind and doing nothing more than stealing it's ideas from others (mostly Firefox)."

You just need to turn to Page 2 of the delightful Google and read the bottom two right panes, "Finally Google Chrome is a fully open source browser. We want others to adopt ideas from us -- just as we've adopted good ideas from others."

So, Google calls it "adopting" and it's OK; anyone else does it and it's stealing?

The only things preventing Google from having as much purported evil as Microsoft are (in this order): longevity in the marketplace (Microsoft's got a good 30 years) and money (Google's market cap at $146bn is about $100bn behind Microsoft).

Given enough of both, Google will be every bit as protectionist and evil. Google's in business to make money, not to benevolently employ thousands of programmers to turn out goodwill software. They have shareholders to appease, which means that the dollar is king.

There are plenty of other companies that base their products on open-source that are nearing this level of evil as well. Open source doesn't mean "better" anymore--it just means you only have to put the finishing touches on someone else's work before you call it your own and start charging for it.

In the end, all companies are out to make a buck at the expense of the consumer. While they may start with lofty ideas of free (as in beer and as in speech), free doesn't pay the bills. Adverts, popups, licensing and subscription fees, and marketing apparently do.

Welcome to Google being just like everyone else.

Mine's the one with a cynical view embroidered on it.

"Page 13 of that comic has a map of Europe where Belgium, Holland and those other funny little countries have all apparently been assimilated into Germany."

You mean those funny little countries (Hungary, Czech, Austria etc - formerly known as Austria-Hungary K.u.K. :)), almost all bigger than Holland or Belgium? :p

Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but the brain finds it really hard to look away from the geographical facts... ;)

Quote: "Google is no more benovelent than Microsoft..."

Aint that the truth: amen to that.

I trust Google even less than I trust Microsoft.