[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Google's Chrome 2.0: First Impressions here

[joeb311]

It may be faster on start up than Firefox but it's a very boring browser, otherwise. I'll wait the extra fraction of a second for Firefox to load. But thanks for the effort, Google.

[bbneo2]

Waah. Waah.
It's only the fastest browser out there... bringing Google's searching technology to combine the URL and search box. The only feature that it lacks that I miss is print preview... which helps me to save paper when printing only what I need.
Firefox and Safari are great, too.

[macewan]

As a Mac and Ubuntu user it would have been nice if v. 1 for both platforms would have hit the streets before v. 2 on Win.

[stapenella]

I really wish Google would hurry up with the Linux version. My Firefox is slow as hell with my extensions, and I am waiting for Chrome to either support extensions or to replace the sort of features im looking for with internet versions.

My mom runs Windows, and I downloaded Chrome for her to use since it is supposedly the most secure browser out there due to its sandbox features. She has had no problems with Chrome.

Come out with the Linux version already!!

[bbneo2]

I would love to see a Linux version... I wonder if packaging it for the various Linux distributions is much of an issue for Google. I don't know what is holding the Linux version up, but on the same hardware, Linux is much more responsive with Firefox than Windows XP or Vista ever is.

I am a fedora user for the past 12 months.

[berkboy]

"But it’s also nearly useless--when in Full-screen mode, all of the browser controls disappear: no tabs, no toolbar, nothing."
Well duh!! Whaddaya think "fullscreen" means? Most full-screen options in dozens of apps (including Firefox, BTW) do just what Chrome does, and that's exactly what we want them to do...not waste space with button bars and menus. You want controls, stay in regular mode. This review seemed to be critical just for the sake of it. Not so useful.

[Car54]

Yet that is something I do like about Firefox, is that in full screen mode you can move your arrow/course to the top of your screen and you can access your menu, toolbar, and adress bar, and then move your arrow away and go back to full screen, whereas Chrome can't.

[Car54]

Yes I do like Chromes speed, but as also mentioned by others here, I do like my Firefox, and all the add ons that take up so much memory, and it's frequent, at least lately, crashes and crash reports lol. What about Chrome security wise, or are so few using it that it won't be attacked like IE and Firefox?


Yet, it is fast, no doubt about that: browser benchmark test taken at Futuremark

[DTNick]

Alas. If you're the curious sort, though, there are apparently some Chromium builds for Mac that are available: http://www.macrumors...-mac-available/

[ErnieTheDrunk]

I feel this article was well written but that is it. Having known the author and read a lot of his forum postings through he years, it would be my opinion that he is a very rabid Microsoft fan boy so I am not surprised he's critical of Google's browser.
While I'm sure he's right in some respects, just can not take his comments seriously.

[ricstars007]

dear google chrome,
im really enjoying this fast browser of yours. Please dont stop improving and innovating.
heres my wishlist.
1) smooooth scrolling picasa-like please.
2) option to copy link source of downloaded files.
3) to be able to add fixed search fields (not just auto based on browsing habits)
4) OPTION for add-ons, ADD-ONS,Add-ons (to be able to modify interface and add features)

[Car54]

I agree with you concerning the add ons, but would that eventually slow it down and make it "just another browser" and get lost behind IE and Firefox, where as right now it is lean and built for speed. It is kind of the rock and the hard place, as I would like to see more features, but at what cost?

[Grr8008]

I like it. It is basic but fast and secure. It also has one amazing interface.

[minxamo]

well, personally i don't care about add ins i'm only going to use once or twice, and how pretty my browser looks, i just want to use the browser to surf the web quickly, and google chrome comes out top in that respect.
just 1 question, about what you said about fullscreen mode... the only toolbars at the top of the browser are the address bar, and the tabs. But you complained that when you went into fullscreen mode, you lost the address bar and tabs?
although i do agree with you about deleting thumbnails

[MleB]

Fast. And boring.
And like IE8 and the default configuration of Firefox (thank goodness for Tab Mix Plus), the use of Tabs is counter-intuitive and near useless as each new site / new tab becomes a two click procedure.
Add to that the lack of ability to open groups of Bookmarks and lack of adblocker (yeah, I know - controversial. But I've even managed to do that on the IE8 in this machine)and Chrome may be fast but is a leap forward to the past.
I'll stick with my clunky Firefox (or even revisit Maxthon)rather than worry about the microseconds I'm saving waiting for a page to load.

[OldOnliner]

As usual in the Chrome fanboy universe commentary misses a few of its faults...

Chrome is lousy... beyond terrible and almost useless... when you want to print what you've found on the web. Even Firefox fails to match up with IE in this regard. Only IE 7 carries a fully competent, reasonably stable (sorry IE 8 isn't as stable) printing engine.

Pooh-pooh this failure all you want, but Chrome chokes just trying to print a Staples Coupon sent in email!

Chrome fast? What? Huh? NOT SO! Its rendering engine is slow... slow... slow... when you use parental controls, a proxy, or something as simple as a HOSTS file to block or control advertising. If the advertisers and redirects (doubleclick, etc) are blocked Chrome spins its virtual wheels. It has gotten better at showing page elements with each iteration and maybe v2. fixes it, but nobody's said a word about the problem.

Since I run Firefox with ONE add-on (dictionary/spell-check), I don't see any difference in speed. I do see Chrome having a MUCH lower memory footprint and none of the memory growth leakage of FF.

My conclusion is that Chrome remains a sleek browser, that's only good for basic browsing. It's like a browser for low-end, embedded, dedicated web viewing, but don't employ it if you need to print what you view or want fine tuned control over how pages are rendered.

Addendum: After testing v2.0 it seems the slow page rendering while ad-blocking with HOSTS file - so common in earlier versions - is fixed or appreciably sped up now. Printing is improved, but still not so hot.

Following testing with v2.0, this message was edited by: OldOnliner

[Grr8008]

You are wrong in few regards. Just because someone is behind something one hudred percent does not make them a fanboy. I like Chrome but I also use Firefox and IE. In fact, I am on my Xubuntu computer running Firefox and being perfectly happy. I don't pretend that it doesn't have faults but I overlook them when I am doing basic web browsing. When I run into them, such as the lack of a site rating add-on, I switch to a different browser. It is true that Chrome has faults but that doesn't make it unusable.

[binaryspiral]

Re: Mac version.

Being a member of the 95%ish market share of computers does give you some benefits. The primary one is that you're likely to get the latest greatest ideas developed for you.



Be happy with Safari and your BSD based operating system. For what its worth - I envy your OS, hardware, and bundled applications.

[TechieXP]

@ Least with IE full screen mode...you move to the top and the top and the bars drop down so you can type new addresses and open tabs...etc.