Chrome - Google's new browser

Consoles, Computers, iPads, and More
HD Discussion Elsewhere
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

Little Britain was great but is now past it. I'm liking Katie Brand at the moment and Alan Carr is always hilarious.
User avatar
IronMonkey
Royal Tramp
Posts: 1950
Joined: 08 Dec 2004, 16:49

Post by IronMonkey »

Er... Is this the sketch show thread or the Chrome thread?
TH-42PX80 | DMP-BD50 (MR BD & DVD) | SA-XR55 | SB-TP20 | XBox 360 Slim 250GB | XBox (XBMC, 160GB) | Zotac XBMC HTPC | Gaming PC | 8TB Media Server
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

Say something more useful than:

^^^

then ;).
Last edited by bradavon on 08 Sep 2008, 21:46, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
IronMonkey
Royal Tramp
Posts: 1950
Joined: 08 Dec 2004, 16:49

Post by IronMonkey »

I was referring to my previous post which you never replied to.

And its "than:", not "then:"
TH-42PX80 | DMP-BD50 (MR BD & DVD) | SA-XR55 | SB-TP20 | XBox 360 Slim 250GB | XBox (XBMC, 160GB) | Zotac XBMC HTPC | Gaming PC | 8TB Media Server
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

Next time take note of the time of the posts. We posted at the exact same time. I didn't not reply. I didn't know it existed ;). Consider it replied to:
IronMonkey wrote:I don't see your point. You can still export it as a "plain Jane" HTML file which any other browser will read, so how has Firefox 2 (or older) get an advantage?
I've already said why. It's now a manual process whereas before my backup software could take the "live" file and put it elsewhere. I could then open that file instantly. In FF2 it was already in HTML form.

Without any needing to manually export it first. One point to FF2 ;).
IronMonkey wrote:And its "than:", not "then:"
How observant.
User avatar
IronMonkey
Royal Tramp
Posts: 1950
Joined: 08 Dec 2004, 16:49

Post by IronMonkey »

I did take note of the time of the posts thank you. Thats why I just gave you a hint as to what was above your post.
TH-42PX80 | DMP-BD50 (MR BD & DVD) | SA-XR55 | SB-TP20 | XBox 360 Slim 250GB | XBox (XBMC, 160GB) | Zotac XBMC HTPC | Gaming PC | 8TB Media Server
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

Sorry. I failed cryptic at college :D.
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

I've been using Chrome for the past few weeks after being annoyed by IE8 too much, and it's been really great. The new release gets 100/100 on the acid3 test which is cool. The last version seemed faster to me though, despite the fact the new one is meant to be even faster.
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

Acid3?

For me without extensions it can never compete with Firefox, so moving on. I only use IE8 when a site doesn't load 100% in Firefox or works better with ActiveX. Why not just go back to IE7? I prefer IE8 to IE7 although it is slower.
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

bradavon wrote:Acid3?

For me without extensions it can never compete with Firefox, so moving on. I only use IE8 when a site doesn't load 100% in Firefox or works better with ActiveX. Why not just go back to IE7? I prefer IE8 to IE7 although it is slower.
The acid tests are to test how your browser adheres to web standards, click this and see how yours fares: http://acid3.acidtests.org/

I'm not going back to IE7 because it's obsolete, why do that when I've already said I'm enjoying using Chrome? lol

And Chrome is getting add-ons: http://www.trustedreviews.com/software/ ... pgrades/p1
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

gasteropod wrote:The acid tests are to test how your browser adheres to web standards, click this and see how yours fares: http://acid3.acidtests.org/
Have you tested IE8? Oh dear what a disaster for me. It scored 12, the page fell over and part of the code even appeared on screen. In compatibility mode (so to IE7 standards) it scored 6 and the page fell over even worse, with nasty blocks all over the page.

Firefox 3.0.10 scored 71 out of 100. The colours didn't render, just B&W. I'm surprised Firefox hasn't done better. I retested it in Safe Mode (to check if any extensions were interfering) and it scored the same.
gasteropod wrote:I'm not going back to IE7 because it's obsolete, why do that when I've already said I'm enjoying using Chrome? lol
True. I just meant if you like it. Have you tried Opera? That would be my next bet if Firefox failed for me. Chrome and IE are just too lacking in features (right now). I wouldn't use Opera overall as it too has no extensions support.
gasteropod wrote:And Chrome is getting add-ons: http://www.trustedreviews.com/software/ ... pgrades/p1
Great news. I'll definitely keep an eye on this one then. Hopefully over the next 6 months we'll see some of the big Firefox extensions being re-written for it, such as AdBlock Plus. I couldn't use a browser without that one, plus some others.
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

I've only ever had brief tries of Firefox and never with add-ons, so in a way it's like I don't know what I'm missing as far as the add-ons are concerned. I guess I started to see what they're like when I was using the thing on IE8 where you can right-click on some text and then search Wikipedia and Google for it (accelerators or something), but Chrome basically has Google built into it unsurprisingly so it's only the Wikipedia add-on that I'm technically missing.

I like how in Chrome you can just type a search in the actual URL bar, and also it learns which site you want to go to really quickly, all I have to do is type the very first letter of any of my regular sites, and it comes up straight away. I'm sure there's an add-on for Firefox which does a similar thing, but in Chrome it's just there anyway, so I press 'B' and the Bullets 'n' Babes URL pops straight up and all I have to do is press enter. Or right-click on any selected text on a site and there's an option to search it in Google like the IE8 accelerator.
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

bradavon wrote:Have you tested IE8? Oh dear what a disaster for me. It scored 12, the page fell over and part of the code even appeared on screen. In compatibility mode (so to IE7 standards) it scored 6 and the page fell over even worse, with nasty blocks all over the page.
Haha, just tested it with IE8 again because I couldn't remember what I got last time, and it's got 20/100 eventually, after sticking at 12 for a bit like yours with some random box popping up, and yeah it's black and white so not good.

It's just a cool thing that Google have endeavoured to build a browser which passes web standards tests so that if it becomes a more dominant browser, site designers won't have to bother coding their sites incorrectly due to the way browsers like IE render everything in a convoluted way. Even using DVD Times with IE8 reveals a rendering error if you look at the stars in the reviews, they don't appear properly.
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

gasteropod wrote:I've only ever had brief tries of Firefox and never with add-ons, so in a way it's like I don't know what I'm missing as far as the add-ons are concerned.
Firefox still beats IE (but possibly not Opera) without Extensions (Add-ons is the general name for Extensions, Themes and Plugins). Features such as the Awesome Bar and Live Bookmarks are so useful.

I've never installed Chrome and won't bother until it supports a decent level of Extensions. IE also has Extensions (also called Extensions with Add-ons being the general name to also include Accelerators etc...) but the choice is greatly less plus you need to faff around installing them like a normal setup program. They're written in C I believe, which makes them much more complicated to write, so few bother.
gasteropod wrote:I guess I started to see what they're like when I was using the thing on IE8 where you can right-click on some text and then search Wikipedia and Google for it (accelerators or something), but Chrome basically has Google built into it unsurprisingly so it's only the Wikipedia add-on that I'm technically missing.
I also find the Dictionary, IMDB and Mapping ones. There is a Firefox extension called Kallout that gives Firefox Accelerators but they're a static list and cannot be altered. The list is huge but conversely this means it gives you ones you really don't need.

Instead I use the Dictionary.com extension which lets you add 3 other dictionaries but in fact these can easily be configured to work with any search engine. Here's the Wikipedia code for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$

Where $ is the search item.

For me Google Search (including News and Image Search) is second to none but in most other areas there are better alternatives. Microsoft's Windows Live Maps is better than Google Maps (especially on Windows Mobile). Gmail has some cool features but the interface is atrocious, plus I hate it's conversational aspect.
gasteropod wrote:I like how in Chrome you can just type a search in the actual URL bar
Firefox can be easily configured to do this, almost. I can type "google space whatever" and it will kick start Google. While not as good as just typing the word (the default Firefox/IE approach whereby it assumes a word is a website is dumb) it also means you can expand it. I can type "wiki space whatever" and Wikipedia is kicked in or IMDB, whatever has a search engine really.

The feature is called "Smart Keywords".
gasteropod wrote:and also it learns which site you want to go to really quickly, all I have to do is type the very first letter of any of my regular sites, and it comes up straight away. I'm sure there's an add-on for Firefox which does a similar thing, but in Chrome it's just there anyway, so I press 'B' and the Bullets 'n' Babes URL pops straight up and all I have to do is press enter.
Firefox has this out of the box. The Awesome bar searches:

1. History - Which is where Chrome I imagine references things
2. Bookmarks
3. Smart Tags
4. Normal tagging, so I can type "mobile" and all my bookmarks I've assigned the tag "mobile" appear.

The annoying aspect is you have to press the down arrow to select the first item. I agree it would be better if you could just type the word and press enter. Which incidentally is exactly how it also works on Vista/W7's Instant Search (on the Start Menu).

As well as Extensions Firefox also has some really powerful under-the-hood stuff too. Smart Keywords I've mentioned, there's also Live Bookmarks (bookmarks that drop down and alter in real-time based on the RSS feed), IE's RSS implementation is rubbish.

There's also Smart Tags, for things such as "Most Visited", "Recently Bookmarked". You can add any you like. Sadly Smart Tags are complicated to get your head around (I had to Google for a Guide) as there is no GUI to create them. I hope Firefox 3.5 expand this feature to make it easier to use.

Chrome of course also has the "Porn Mode", which IE8 also has and Firefox 3.5 is going to get. I can see this being very useful in a Web Cafe or Mate's house but otherwise I cannot see myself using it.
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

bradavon wrote:The annoying aspect is you have to press the down arrow to select the first item. I agree it would be better if you could just type the word and press enter. Which incidentally is exactly how it also works on Vista/W7's Instant Search (on the Start Menu).
Yeah that's why I like it so much on Chrome not having to select anything, it's really improved my internet browsing experience and it's such a simple thing.

I've never used Windows Live Maps so I'll check them out, when I went to Manchester for a few days last week I used Google maps to help me find my way around.
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

The interface on Windows Live Maps is better plus you can press "Bird's Eye" which links into Live Earth (nothing to install though) which makes finder what you're after so much better, having proper photos to navigate around. Here's the link:

http://maps.live.com/

Windows Live Maps hasn't got anything like Street View though but seeing as that only works in certain areas it's less useful to me plus being so zoomed in, actually makes it harder to find somewhere IMO.

I tend to use Google Maps for quick checks but Windows Live Maps when I want to search properly.
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

I've just tested them both for a venue I went to in Manchester called the Night & Day Cafe (went to see 4 Japanese acts, immense), and Google wins due to Street View, it's amazing how I've just virtually gone down the street that I went down last week haha and now I'm looking straight at the cafe, mental.
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

Street View is only in selected cities, Microsoft Virtual Earth has significantly greater coverage plus being further out it's easier to navigate. Street View isn't much use if unless you only visit big cities, such as Manchester.

That's not taking anything away from Street View but being much closer you get no perspective. Did you try the "Bird's Eye" option (Virtual Earth)? Google should add that too, they have their own Virtual Earth after all. Personally I found Street View dificult to navigate.

Plus Street View is only recent, prior to that Google had nothing over Live Maps, although agreed it is cool.

p.s - What Japanese acts?
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

De De Mouse, which was a little guy in a trilby hat playing what he described as 'fucking sexy Japanese dance music!', it was really pleasant stuff and you could see he was really enjoying it, but he wanted every to dance and no one was quite ready yet haha.
http://www.myspace.com/dedemouse

Then Riddim Saunter which were a very energetic band playing ska type music, dead fun to watch, they were jumping around all over the place and into the crowd, the drummer constantly had a mad grin on his face and there was a guy playing a trumpet or something, I regret not buying one of their CDs now.
http://www.myspace.com/riddimsaunter

Then a multi-instrumentalist called Tucker who plays all sorts of stuff on stage by using loops and stuff, rubbing his head against a petrol can to make a backing and stuff, and he ended up setting his keyboard on fire, jumping down into the crowd to dance like a maniac to his drum 'n' bass, then did a handstand off his keyboard and accidentally kicked a light down :D
http://www.myspace.com/tuckerelectone

(This pic isn't from the gig I went to)

Image

The final act was the one I was looking forward to most, a kind of dance/electro band called 80kidz, their album is sooo good and I had a jolly good dance to them haha. The girl on the keyboard was hot, and my mate thought the bassist was the 'most handsome guy I've ever seen' hahaha
http://www.myspace.com/80kidz


Then, because it was a Sunday night (and we'd been out all night the previous night after another gig), we just headed into Chinatown to a nice Cantonese restaurant and I ate like a monster because I was drunk, first time I've had squid!
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

Sorry Gas I did read your post.

There's an interesting point of view here, saying that ACID3 isn't the ratified standard but what it "could" be, ACID2 is the current standard and IE8 passes it:

http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12554-0. ... ID=1234921
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

Acid3's the one I use because it actually does itself and grades your browser, rather than your having to compare two images yourself.
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

I'm not really bothered. IE6 still renders most pages correctly, even if it wrote it's own rule book.
gasteropod
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 6868
Joined: 03 Nov 2004, 18:16

Post by gasteropod »

Why would you use IE6 rather than IE 7 or 8?
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Post by bradavon »

I wouldn't :?. I meant, any even old browsers still handle the web pretty much fine. In other words, I'm don't really care if they pass or fail.
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Re: Chrome - Google's new browser

Post by bradavon »

It looks like Google are adding Extensions to Chrome 4.0 (it's currently version 3.0). The Beta builds here, support it: http://www.filehippo.com/download_google_chrome/

There's a really decent website here: http://www.chromeextensions.org/
There's even a decent Adblocker: http://www.chromeextensions.org/appeara ... g/adblock/
Image

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I won't be switching any time soon but there's no denying Chrome has a really clean interface, has a lightweight memory footprint and is super fast. The most important extension by far in Firefox is Adblock Plus. It's great to see Chrome is getting it too. Extensions are the number one reason I'm sticking with Firefox but will be keeping an eye on Chrome. It's so ridiculously fast at loading pages!

Given how utter shite IE is I'm going to install Chrome on to my families PCs. Obviously version 3.0, they can get an Adblocker when version 4.0 is released.

I've never bothered before as IE comes with Windows but it's so rubbish, it's about time they switched (IE8 is even clunkier than IE7). They don't need the power of Firefox but do need a lightweight, efficient, fast browser. There's no need for Safari to exist on Windows (even if there's actually not much wrong with it) and Opera has a too high learning curve.

IMO:

1. Advanced users/Techies: Mozilla Firefox
2. Newbies/End-users: Google Chrome

IMO in order of best to worst:

1. Mozilla Firefox 3.5
2. Opera 10
3. Google Chrome 3 - But this could easily jump to number 1 or 2 when Extensions take off!
4. Safari 4
5. Internet Explorer 8 - It's crazy how clunky, slow (browsing and operation) and inefficient this is. Especially given how many people use it.
Post Reply