http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/fresh-take-on-browser.html

I'm geeked.

I've yet to use a single Google product that wasn't far superior to all or most of the competition.

We'll see how this measures up.

It'd be nice if there was a way to support Firefox extensions but I doubt that'll ever happen.

I'm really happy with the direction they took.

But lol @ them stunting HOARD throughout that cartoon

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

I dunno why nobody ever thought of sandboxing tabs.

Also, I hope their JS engine is as good as they say it is. It seems like all the major browsers are really hyping up their scripting engines. This shit is the new space race.

the comic does a good job of explaining, but its way to fucking long.... and ugly.

http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=frontcover

*****************************
Giving You True Lurker Hits Since 1999

gamertag: chinwhat

http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2008-09-02-n72.html

..|.,

If you still don't know what Jade Typhoon is, click here:
http://jadetyphoon.blogspot.com/ (WS)

but I'm sure you'll be able to make it look however you want eventually.

But I can't be.

------------------------------------------
Some people I know:
MCM Music: http://www.myspace.com/mcmmusic

.

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

I really don't see a need for another web browser in the first place. It has to be good enough to warrant the change to a new browser.

I don't have anything personal against Google but their ventures into computer software (excluding their web applications) have been lackluster.

Let's just say I'm withholding judgment until I see the browser in action. I think Google pulled the videos of the browser that were on youtube so I'll just wait until tomorrow to see what's really going on.

If it can manage memory usage well and is as fast as they claim it will be then I'll probably switch. I'm glad they chose webkit...

I'm cautiously optimistic.

------------------------------------------
Some people I know:
MCM Music: http://www.myspace.com/mcmmusic

>I really don't see a need for another web browser in the
>first place. It has to be good enough to warrant the change to
>a new browser.

Read the cartoon. They address a shitload of great reasons for a new browser.

>I don't have anything personal against Google but their
>ventures into computer software (excluding their web
>applications) have been lackluster.

To be fair, I don't use any of their desktop apps.

Although, there's a decent chance of bunch of those apps were actually bought and then amended. This one was built at Google from (more or less) scratch.

>If it can manage memory usage well and is as fast as they
>claim it will be then I'll probably switch. I'm glad they
>chose webkit...
>
>I'm cautiously optimistic.

^^^ Why not be excited about that?

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

>Read the cartoon. They address a shitload of great reasons
>for a new browser.

It's not that there aren't reasons to change but its a matter of accomplishing what needs to be done. I guess I just really want to see what their ideas accomplish in terms of actual real world numbers...

But all of that will (should) come tomorrow.

>>I don't have anything personal against Google but their
>>ventures into computer software (excluding their web
>>applications) have been lackluster.
>
>To be fair, I don't use any of their desktop apps.
>
>Although, there's a decent chance of bunch of those apps were
>actually bought and then amended. This one was built at
>Google from (more or less) scratch.

Yeah, that's true.

>>If it can manage memory usage well and is as fast as they
>>claim it will be then I'll probably switch. I'm glad they
>>chose webkit...
>>
>>I'm cautiously optimistic.
>

I'm not that excited yet because I haven't seen the fruit of their efforts. It's one thing to say "Hey, we've got this browser that beats out every other browser in terms of speed and functionality." And actually doing what you say. We see corporations say these kinds of things all of the time and most of the time they don't manage to deliver what they say. That's why I'm only cautiously optimistic and not super-excited.

------------------------------------------
Some people I know:
MCM Music: http://www.myspace.com/mcmmusic

>I'm not that excited yet because I haven't the fruit of their
>efforts. It's one thing to say "Hey, we've got this browser
>that beats out every other browser in terms of speed and
>functionality." And actually doing what you say. We see
>corporations say these kinds of things all of the time and
>most of the time they don't manage to deliver what they say.
>That's why I'm only cautiously optimistic and not
>super-excited.

Agree 99%, the only caveat being: Google (IMHO) has an amazingly good track record at greatly improving on existing technologies/ideas. So I'm more inclined to think it will be good.

I guess we'll see (to some extent) tomorrow.

.

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

Nah but cautious optimism is just a tad better than indifference... I wouldn't call it excitement.

I got excited about Android though... I'm less excited about Android now, however

Edit:
Actually nah I'm still excited about Android

------------------------------------------
Some people I know:
MCM Music: http://www.myspace.com/mcmmusic

>I don't have anything personal against Google but their
>ventures into computer software (excluding their web
>applications) have been lackluster.

What have those been? Besides google desktop (which I use constantly and have no problems with) I'm struggling to think of many Google products that aren't web apps.

>Let's just say I'm withholding judgment until I see the
>browser in action.


Well of course, the post wasn't titled "G00GLE BROWSER ROX!".

>>I don't have anything personal against Google but their
>>ventures into computer software (excluding their web
>>applications) have been lackluster.
>
>What have those been? Besides google desktop (which I use
>constantly and have no problems with) I'm struggling to think
>of many Google products that aren't web apps.

Hello.com is actually a dope app that never took off. I actually thought they would incorporate into google talk, but never happened.
Picasa2 is also pretty decent.

..|.,

If you still don't know what Jade Typhoon is, click here:
http://jadetyphoon.blogspot.com/ (WS)

>>>I don't have anything personal against Google but their
>>>ventures into computer software (excluding their web
>>>applications) have been lackluster.
>>
>>What have those been? Besides google desktop (which I use
>>constantly and have no problems with) I'm struggling to
>think
>>of many Google products that aren't web apps.
>
>Hello.com is actually a dope app that never took off. I
>actually thought they would incorporate into google talk, but
>never happened.
>Picasa2 is also pretty decent.

Oh yeah, Picasa is GREAT. I forgot about that.

It can tell you much more in depth than I could about why you should care.

But I know you're just being your usual dick self anyway, and I guess I'm taking the bait.

...ur a fag

or whatever it's called.

In fact, every idea presented in that comic seemed VERY good to me, but I'm no programmer.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

http://twitter.com/sun_dalo
xbl: s/n

instead of having the tabs below the url bar, with one url bar for ALL the tabs...

The tabs are above the url bar and each tab has it's own.

http://www.opera.com/products/desktop/

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

but IMHO, Opera blows.

I'm using Opera, and I was reading his post and was like...dude?

but this should be good, even if it sucks, firefox will prolly jack anything that is good about it in the next release.

..|.,

If you still don't know what Jade Typhoon is, click here:
http://jadetyphoon.blogspot.com/ (WS)

> firefox will
>prolly jack anything that is good about it in the next
>release.

Even if it doesn't turn out to be good (though I'm thinking it will be quite good) it will put new ideas out there, and since it's open source, those ideas can be used by anyone else.

Somebody let me know when they make it for OS X.
««««««««««««««««««
I ain't been around the world
but I been around the block
I ain't seen everything
but I've seen enough to talk

But this first beta is Windows only.

The offspring :-D

PSN & XBL: LOQuent

read on.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

http://twitter.com/sun_dalo
xbl: s/n

and thought, "this ugly shit is clearly for windows." it's just not aesthetically pleasing. sorry.

http://shaunbockert.muxtape.com
http://www.audioscrobbler.com/user/whitenotion/

Well actually, I think I might know why. Google is trying to render MS irrelevant by making Chrome the start point and end point of your PC experience. Thats why Google Gears is baked in basically.

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

read the comic.

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

plus the site was slow when I was trying to click the pages.

please. never again with the fucking comic book

FREE CHAI VANG!

YOU'VE READ MY FILE NIGGA (c) Jack 'Mufuckin' Bauer



www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Exactly. I went from being really interested to being completely disinterested after about 1.5 pages of that comic.

Short and sweet for the luddites, ferchrissakes.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

especially when you consider that they could simply have shifted some resources to the Mozilla effort. The comic does nothing to explain why they need to build a brand new browser from scratch instead of building on one of the open source browsers thats already out.

Point by point...

You can already write disconnected web apps that tap into Google Gears today.

Browsers (such as IE 7 and 8) already run inside a secure sandbox

Browsers (such as IE8) already run tabs in seperate processes so that a crash in one tab doesn't bring down your browser.

Browsers (such as FireFox) have already invested in making javascript much faster than it is today.

Browsers (such as FireFox and IE8) already support runtimes that use dynamic garbage collection (not for Javascript, but for next-gen web applications built on Flash or Silverlight) and in any case FF is already heading in that direction.

Browsers (such as IE8 and to a lesser extent FF3) already provide teh features touted by their "omnibox" via the Smart addresss bar in IE and the Awseome bar in FF3.

The only thing that is even remotely new about this thing seems to be the position of the address bar...and that doesn't warrant creating a whole new browser.

But thats just my grumpy ass opinion.

Fuck Google.

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

and the way it stores the search engine of websites you've visited so you can access them again directly from the address bar

and the way it lets you use 'private browsing'/'porn mode'/'read only mode' in just one tab at a time

and the homepage it builds automatically

not to mention, the proof is in the pudding when it comes to performance. most browsers still get pretty sluggish on fancy websites in my experience

--------------------
Why do you choose to mimic these wack MCs?
Why do you choose to listen to R&B?

"There are obviously many things which we do not understand, and may never be able to." Leela

*puts emceeing in a box*

>>and the way it stores the search engine of websites you've visited so you can access them again directly from the address bar<<

You just described IE8's Smart Address Bar and FF3's Awesome bar

>>and the way it lets you use 'private browsing'/'porn mode'/'read only mode' in just one tab at a time<<

IE8 already does this, not one tab at a time, but thats an implementaion detail more than anything

>>and the homepage it builds automatically<<

This is arguably an Opera feature they lifted and even then I'm not sure I'd want BlackGirlOnline showing up when someone tries to use my browser. Most people I know like their shit blank at start-up

>>most browsers still get pretty sluggish on fancy websites in my experience<<

What you really mean is poorly written websites. Modern browsers, IE8 and FF3 will inform you when some rogue javascript is taking too long and allow you to terminate it.

I mean, I'll play with it because for me as a dev, the Google Gears integration is the most interesting apsect of it, but other than that...meh.

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

--------------------
Why do you choose to mimic these wack MCs?
Why do you choose to listen to R&B?

"There are obviously many things which we do not understand, and may never be able to." Leela

*puts emceeing in a box*

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

IE8 (i don't use it) lets you search sites you've visited with their OWN search features?
i know firefox for ages has had htat thing where you can type say 'imdb Gattaca' or 'cnn Zodiac' if you've added those sites' search-engines to the list in settings/preferences

but the idea here is that Chrome does that automatically for every site you go to. firefox and ie8 do that?

and the tabbed private-browsing is kinda the whole point. especially for performance since only data for that one tab is being kept in RAM rather than cached on disc...

and the malware/phishing filter that's updated constantly - other browsers have that? even if they did, how would it be anywhere near as effective as Google's search technology? (the spam filter on GMail for instance is much better than anything else i've tried)

also, what about the task manager feature, that was pretty cool, no? other browsers got that already?



but Safari 4's out soon so who cares...

--------------------
Why do you choose to mimic these wack MCs?
Why do you choose to listen to R&B?

"There are obviously many things which we do not understand, and may never be able to." Leela

*puts emceeing in a box*

>>but the idea here is that Chrome does that automatically for every site you go to<<

No, no other browser does that, and this is gonna sound like a cop-out but, I'm fine with that. It's a slippery slope when you consider how this might evolve in the future. I don't know, but for now I'll take a wait and see approach.

>>and the tabbed private-browsing is kinda the whole point. especially for performance since only data for that one tab is being kept in RAM rather than cached on disc<<

I don't know what you're trying to say here unfortunately. I tried.

>>and the malware/phishing filter that's updated constantly - other browsers have that?<<

Arguably, this amounts to exactky the same experience you get on FF or IE. Either way you get a warning that you're on a site suspected of being a Phishing site. I haven't wrapped my head around why Googles approach of downloading the list to your local machine constantly is special.

>>also, what about the task manager feature, that was pretty cool, no? other browsers got that already?<<

What task manager feature?

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

>>>but the idea here is that Chrome does that automatically
>for every site you go to<<
>
>No, no other browser does that, and this is gonna sound like a
>cop-out but, I'm fine with that. It's a slippery slope when
>you consider how this might evolve in the future. I don't
>know, but for now I'll take a wait and see approach.

... what's not to like? it just works out what the search bar is on a website and remembers it

>
>>>and the tabbed private-browsing is kinda the whole point.
>especially for performance since only data for that one tab is
>being kept in RAM rather than cached on disc<<
>
>I don't know what you're trying to say here unfortunately. I
>tried.
>

on Safari (i think they had this feature first) if you switch on 'Private Browsing', no cookies are saved and nothing is cached on your hard disc (so you don't leave any traces). but if you press 'back' it still instantly brings up the previous page - because they're being stored in the RAM. when you switch private browsing off, all those pages are cleared from RAM, but if you don't switch it off, performance will start to get slower, especially if you were visiting sites with lots of images (ahem). sometimes i wonder why my browser is going slow then i realize it's because i've got like 5 windows, 13 tabs open and Private Browsing is enabled. if only 1 tab had been affected, this wouldn't have been a problem

>>>and the malware/phishing filter that's updated constantly -
>other browsers have that?<<
>
>Arguably, this amounts to exactky the same experience you get
>on FF or IE. Either way you get a warning that you're on a
>site suspected of being a Phishing site. I haven't wrapped my
>head around why Googles approach of downloading the list to
>your local machine constantly is special.
>

well i'm not exactly sure how they would apply it to phishing sites, but given how their SPAM filter on gmail is virtually perfect and they're experts on probing huge numbers of websites it sounds encouraging to me. the idea is they'd catch a phishing site and blacklist it in a matter of minutes or hours rather than days and have your browser updated

>>>also, what about the task manager feature, that was pretty
>cool, no? other browsers got that already?<<
>
>What task manager feature?
>

it lets you monitor what processes are currently being run in the browser and how much memory and cpu they're taking up, much like the windows task manager. and then close things which you don't want

and then there's more cool features like, pop-ups have to stay within their tab unless you drag them out to enable them.
dragging tabs between windows?

--------------------
Why do you choose to mimic these wack MCs?
Why do you choose to listen to R&B?

"There are obviously many things which we do not understand, and may never be able to." Leela

*puts emceeing in a box*

I think the more web browser the merrier, cause they're all going to do things differently, and they're all gonna benefit from biting features off the other browsers, which is GOOD for consumers.

I just really don't understand why you're so upset about an innovative (yes innovative, a lot of the features aren't new, but improved and ALL IN 1 BROWSER) application coming out.

I swear, OKP's can hate on ANYTHING.

>especially when you consider that they could simply have
>shifted some resources to the Mozilla effort. The comic does
>nothing to explain why they need to build a brand new browser
>from scratch instead of building on one of the open source
>browsers thats already out.

First of all, they basically fund Mozilla's entire development effort already. They pay tens of millions a year to have their search engine be the firefox default.

>Point by point...
>
>You can already write disconnected web apps that tap into
>Google Gears today.

But with an adoption rate of about 0%, who gives a shit. Incorporating it into a browser by default starts to make this viable.

>Browsers (such as IE 7 and 8) already run inside a secure
>sandbox
>
>Browsers (such as IE8) already run tabs in seperate processes
>so that a crash in one tab doesn't bring down your browser.

ie8. Which doesn't exist yet really. And fuck Microsoft. Most of their users are still on ie6.

>Browsers (such as FireFox) have already invested in making
>javascript much faster than it is today.

You're probably drastically underestimating how much faster Javascript could execute, using the compilation and garbage collecting techniques they described.

>Browsers (such as FireFox and IE8) already support runtimes
>that use dynamic garbage collection (not for Javascript, but
>for next-gen web applications built on Flash or Silverlight)
>and in any case FF is already heading in that direction.

Every major web application you use (gmail, flickr, facebook, etc). Is heavy on JAVASCRIPT. Not flash, not silverlight, etc. Improving Javascript improves the web.

>Browsers (such as IE8 and to a lesser extent FF3) already
>provide teh features touted by their "omnibox" via the Smart
>addresss bar in IE and the Awseome bar in FF3.

Some, not all. Certainly not the tab completion for searching other sites. And no search suggestions.

>The only thing that is even remotely new about this thing
>seems to be the position of the address bar...and that doesn't
>warrant creating a whole new browser.
>
>But thats just my grumpy ass opinion.

LOL - So a completely new open source javascript engine isn't new? Really? The default home page isn't new? And besides that, you should really be looking at features that have been IMPROVED. You're not going to find a bunch of brand "new" browser features. What does ie8, which you keep comparing chrome to, do that's really "new"?

>Fuck Google.

smh.

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

>>You can already write disconnected web apps that tap into
>>Google Gears today.
>
>But with an adoption rate of about 0%, who gives a shit.
>Incorporating it into a browser by default starts to make this
>viable.

A-ha, now we're getting somewhere. This I actually agree with. They should have said, look, nobody gives a shit about Gears, so lets use this new browser as a Trojan Horse! It's brilliant in that it's all open source so nobody bats an eye-lid.

>>Browsers (such as IE 7 and 8) already run inside a secure
>>sandbox
>>
>>Browsers (such as IE8) already run tabs in seperate
>processes
>>so that a crash in one tab doesn't bring down your browser.
>
>ie8. Which doesn't exist yet really. And fuck Microsoft.
>Most of their users are still on ie6.

Well, seeing as I'm using it RIGHT NOW, it counts.

>>Browsers (such as FireFox) have already invested in making
>>javascript much faster than it is today.
>
>You're probably drastically underestimating how much faster
>Javascript could execute, using the compilation and garbage
>collecting techniques they described.
>

Not really, no. Actually, if Javascript died I'd be the happiest person on the planet. Trust me, that new compiler and GC will end up supporting languages such as Python and Ruby, which is the thing to get excited about. And even then, Google would still be playing catch up in that regard. Fugga wack ass javascript.

>>Browsers (such as FireFox and IE8) already support runtimes
>>that use dynamic garbage collection (not for Javascript, but
>>for next-gen web applications built on Flash or Silverlight)
>>and in any case FF is already heading in that direction.
>
>Every major web application you use (gmail, flickr, facebook,
>etc). Is heavy on JAVASCRIPT. Not flash, not silverlight,
>etc. Improving Javascript improves the web.
>

Thats because there haven't been any real alternatives to dynamic applications on the web, arguably until now. Javascript is and will always be an ugly hack in my opinion. But thats a post for another day.

>>Browsers (such as IE8 and to a lesser extent FF3) already
>>provide teh features touted by their "omnibox" via the Smart
>>addresss bar in IE and the Awseome bar in FF3.
>
>Some, not all. Certainly not the tab completion for searching
>other sites. And no search suggestions.
>

A-ha, clue number two...so who provides those search suggestions by default? See, I'm not even mad at that, but Google should be aware that people see through their bullshit.

>>The only thing that is even remotely new about this thing
>>seems to be the position of the address bar...and that
>doesn't
>>warrant creating a whole new browser.
>>
>>But thats just my grumpy ass opinion.
>
>LOL - So a completely new open source javascript engine isn't
>new? Really?

Not in the sense that nobody's done it before, no. See TraceMonkey for example. Writing a new one from scratch isn't new, it's just new for Google.

>>The default home page isn't new?

No. See Operas Speed Dial for damn near the same fucking thing http://www.opera.com/products/desktop/

And besides
>that, you should really be looking at features that have been
>IMPROVED. You're not going to find a bunch of brand "new"
>browser features. What does ie8, which you keep comparing
>chrome to, do that's really "new"?

Nothing. But my original retort was to the question of WHY do we need a new browser when they could have piggy backed off Mozilla's work instead. I still haven't seen or read a plausible answer to that question yet.

But I have a hunch it has something to do with making sure more of your web traffic passes through their servers...or something. Just a hunch.

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

When it made sense.

It makes all the sense in the world to create your own browser, if you're Google.

"piggybacking" off the Mozilla framework means that decisions about the core of their browser technology will be made by another company, the Mozilla Foundation. For a company like Google, that's just crazy.

Javascript started as a hack, but has since been standardized (as ECMAScript) and is actually a very powerful and flexible language. I'll admit that web "developers" do all sorts of horrible things with Javascript, but the language itself is actually kinda nice in many ways.

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

This is good for everyone. Competition in technology benefits US.

Plus, as I keep stating, Google usually makes quality product.

your history.

Google Ads basically rely on this, so google had to come up with some shit quick. im not expecting good reviews

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/09/browswer-wars.html

I assume they've been working on this for a while

************************
You must not know bout me, you must not know bout me, to the left, to the left (C) "Killa" Camron

-

one of those rare occassions when being a mac user is bad

does anyone know if there's browser's that have this feature though:

when you're browsing message boards, you usually have multiple pages you want to look through, like The Lesson page 1, The Lesson page 2 etc

can't someone make a shortcut that automatically adjusts the url to take you to the next page?

instead of having to scroll way down and click on the tiny links to the next/previous page

--------------------
Why do you choose to mimic these wack MCs?
Why do you choose to listen to R&B?

"There are obviously many things which we do not understand, and may never be able to." Leela

*puts emceeing in a box*

you do realize that firefox already remembers what you type in
the url bar for each tab

e.g. I have 3 tabs open and can type f, o, & h in the url bar for
each tab... scroll through those tabs, open new tabs... and f, o, & h
will still be there

_____

shann.email/inbox.pls.

i'm not sure what they're getting at. Safari keeps the url bar AND the control states separate for each tab. i think they may have implied Chrome lets you drag tabs from window to window

or maybe it's just a UI decision

--------------------
Why do you choose to mimic these wack MCs?
Why do you choose to listen to R&B?

"There are obviously many things which we do not understand, and may never be able to." Leela

*puts emceeing in a box*

I mean, I tried explaining this to my dad this morning and it's hard to explain what's new without losing him on the Webkit stuff.