But when using it with MS Silverlight, it took up all CPU resources on and AMD athlon system, which make the video laggy; compared to 40-60% cpu usage in Firefox3 or Maxthon (IE7).
When i am forced for any reason to use IE or firefox on another pc there is always a situation where i am missing some feature of Opera. Opera should definitely be included in browser reviews.
Opera does not get the attention the Opera browser deserves.
Use it with he metal blue skin , arrange the buttons as you personnaly feel best to use and it's great.
In performance test you forgot to test JavaScript. I have some intense JavaScript web applications and in some cases Chrome runs up to 10 times faster than FF3. AJAX is running faster to.
Overall in very impressed by this browser, if they make extensions like FireBug i will definitely switch to Chrome.
thats because the sheep will use anything google puts out
they could market a bag of dog crap and people would eat it up because it has the "google" name on it, google fanboys are almost as bad as apple fanboys
I'm not sure why many are lifting up Opera, and Firefox as great, and saying it's like the only browser I use, etc...
Such statements like this make me think these people don't really surf much, because if they did they'd notice a few things about these two browsers in particular.
Firefox is still a memory hog at times and then getting itself locked up and crashing when it starts going off really high, yep the memory leaks are still there in 3.
Opera also uses quite a bit of memory and there are many sites out there that just don't work well with Opera at all, and Opera doesn't play nice when the memory starts creeping up too.
Personally for small and light Kmeleon has been a pretty good browser and in regards to performance a much better browser then these two, it just lacks a bit of bells and whistles that people seem to be so drawn to.
I hope that Chrome gives the others a run, but with the history of Google cookie spying, it makes me hesitant to be a Chrome fan, Google has made geeks feel in the past like there is some sort of MS domination going on here...
Eh I’ve used Opera exclusively since I found in in 2001, back when you had to pay to remove the built in add
there are very very few sites that don’t work right in opera, 99% of those sites i find that don’t work are random news sites linked off of the anandtech forums, which i would not visit anyway
pretty much the only thing I use IE for anymore is windows updates and paying my bills online, because my bank wont let you use anything other then IE
I agree. I use opera since version 6.x and never looked back.
Only bad written websites with activex do not work but that does not bother me since these websites will always be un safe.
First of all, Chrome looks good. I like it's clean and simple design. With default design, I must add, while 1, so far it cannot be changed 2, other browsers can be heavily costumised (hence simplified). I'm usually using Opera, with a costume interface without search field and menu bar, consisting of 3 navigation buttons, the Trash button, and a button for the whole menu. And of course, URL and tab bar. That's all. I do have titlebar, but using a 70% sized skin, I have more space in Opera than in Chrome.
One thing is sure: Chrome IS fast (most of the time), and starts fast (although the latter one doesn't bother me, I don't start my browsers too often). JS also seems pretty fast. Not much to comment here.
It seems however, that poeople at Google sit down and looked at the other browsers to decide, what function to take from them as their "innovation". Let's see:
IE8b2:
- processes for each tab
- URL domain name highlighting
Safari:
- WebKit :)
- the way tabs can be rearranged
- speed and simplicity (UI and lack of settings)
- the way of autocomplete of URL-s, so that the first suggestion is used by default
Opera (more comment here):
- Speed Dial (Opera uses fixed sites, Chrome goes with most visited sites, I found Chrome' solution to be disturbing and somehow illogical, while it listed also about:memory for me)
- tabs over URL bar (I found it more logical than the opposite)
- "multi-level back" can be reached by clicking and holding mouse over Back button for a while
- downloads go to a new tab (can be reached with Ctrl + J) not a new window
- full history search
- undockable tabs
Other common functions
- inline find (this is actually not a copy from Opera, but it's the only browser comparable to Opera regarding speed, I especially liked the hits marked on the scrollbar)
- intelligent URL bar (QuickFind, Awesomebar, OmniBar, ... whatever) I guess Opera's and Firefox's solution is better than OmniBar, and it looks a bit ugly to me (or just don't feel right)
- adding new searchfields (Chrome tried to be simple, but it became a bit frustrating. Opera and Firefox is better in that field)
What I've missed:
- ad-block feature (hence understandable from a company making money from online advertising)
- RSS reader (I guess they will use their own online Google Reader thingy)
- very few costumisation possibility
- mouse gestures
- lack of commonly used context menu entries
Uuups, I've missed one of my points - about this article:
Although Opera has a small marketshare, it would be nice of you to - at least - mention it, for, as you can see - Chrome includes many cool features taken from Opera. You stealed from Opera it's rightful marketing opportunity (at the right of being an innovator).
The big reason google wants to control your browser is to make sure you can't bypass its advertising... they want you to use chrome because Firefox has Ad-Blockers... they want to track your browsing habits.
If they OWN the browser they get to do that way more and you can't stop them.
BTW, to those who don't believe it... Google already changes the license in just a few days after the "public outcry".
So, whats the big deal?
Frankly, I am disgusted by both the voracity of the license and the fact the license "changes" are "retroactive" and not requiring ANY notification.
If google can make sweeping license changes that to remove the bad language ie to paraphrase "they own all content we submit..." then they can also ADD new language later on... using the same "we have the right to make changes... so look here... and make sure each time you browse, that we did not just steal all your intellectual content."
Forget it.
In fact, I am so outraged by licensing stance that google chose, (NOTE per their own reps they use similar language for ALL their products)... that I have decided to switch my browser's home page to altavista.com
Google should DUMP the browser market... its quite clear that their intentions are not in my best interest.
Excellent article on Chrome, I like the browser it is quite fast. However, today I noticed my fans started blaring at work. Looked up task manager, and my CPU is at 70-90% capacity constant. Not sure what it is, I go to processes, and chrome is the culprit. I noticed I had two tabs on NFL.COM. I close those two, and everything is back to normal. I open IE7, go to NFL’s site again. At first the cpu usage spikes but then it drops down to normal. I open the sites again with Chrome, and the usage spikes but stays up.
Can anyone else try NFL.COM and see if it's giving them fits?
Aren't Opera and Chrome both using Webkit? I think Anand is trying to show the memory footprint of each different type of rendering engine.Therefor Opera isn't needed as it's base is the same as Chrome.
Chrome is pretty awesome. It fly's on my home desktop (Q6600, 4GB Ram). However on my desktop at work (Barton 3200, 1GB Ram) it becomes very slow when I have multiple tabs open (and processes). So, I'll stick to Firefox 3 at work.
I am a big fan of Opera, but even when putting aside any sense of fanboy-ism, Google Chrome seems to be nothing but an unoriginal lackluster version of what Opera has been offering for years. Firefox is always behind Opera's innovation and Google is even trailing behind that, yet Anand, and many reviewers out there, seem to essentially ignore Opera's browser innovation.
I get the feeling that if anybody other than Google released this, then people would probably just laugh it off.
I just wanted to make some points that weren't mentioned in the comments so far.
1. In the article it was mentioned that the look of Chrome is OS agnostic, I have to disagree. Chrome is very much in line with how a true Vista app should look. It makes fantastic use of the Aero interface, much more so than IE7 or IE8.
2. I think the ability to drag tabs into their own window is a fantastic idea and something I've been wanting for a while. It will come in quite handy when you have video running and want to do some reading on another website. This feature is bigger than any of the reviewers I've read have given it credit for. Many people actually seem to dismiss it as simply a glitzy feature, they're very wrong. I'd bet IE 8 will have this feature by the time it goes final.
3. It is also great that Chrome puts all it's tabs into different processes, however it wasn't mentioned that IE8 Beta 2 does this also, which was released about a week before chrome.
4. I think Chrome is going to become Google's platform, look for Google to, sooner or later, start basing a lot of their applications exclusivly around Chrome.
5. IE8 Beta 2. Where is the comparison? I've been using Firefox exclusivly since around 2005, just before it reached version 1.5. Firefox is great and has trumped Opera and IE in versatility. However I've been using IE8 Beta 2 for the past week (Beta 1 was crazy buggy!) and have been througly impressed. I think it is time for Anandtech to do a browser shootout article to give a base line on the current state of web browsers, it is really an exciting time for this technology!
Great browser. It solved my problem with FF3 that would stop streaming video after awhile. I never use the menu or the Options so who cares. It seems to do better with ad-filled sites (like this one) and I have yet to see a page that doesn't render properly - at least after a refresh.
My company Portal never rendered right in either IE or FF, but now it does. I dig the Download bar. I really like the Task Manager. It does worry me that when you search from the OmniBar, it appends "Chrome" to to the query.
It did error when I tried to login here, but only in that it didn't return to the Login box. I'm also noticing some strange text things while I type this. Sometimes the text will disappear or I have to hit the INSERT button.
All in all it's a better experience than the others. I really like the Home Page since I don't have to look for the sites I go to on the Bookmark Bar.
The zoom feature is disappointing. The images don't get scaled and the page gets distorted. This is a show stopper for me as on 1900x1200 on 17" the zoom feature is a must on a lot of web sites.
I absolutely hate how tech sites give Google a free pass on their behaviors.
Taken from Joe Wilcox:
I've just got to excerpt from this document: "When you type URLs or queries in the address bar, the letters you type are sent to Google so the Suggest feature can automatically recommend terms or URLs you may be looking for."
Can you say keylogger? What else could "the letters you type" mean?
Now make sure you read this paragraph at least twice:
"Your copy of Google Chrome includes one or more unique application numbers. These numbers and information about your installation of the browser (e.g., version number, language) will be sent to Google when you first install and use it and when Google Chrome automatically checks for updates. If you choose to send usage statistics and crash reports to Google, the browser will send us this information along with a unique application number as well."
WTH? Application numbers? Well, well, browsing is a whole lot less anonymous with Chrome. Why is there no uproar? Microsoft got hammered by the news media in 2001 because Windows XP appeared to send user identifiable activation numbers during setup. Google is identifying your browser with a unique number. What would prevent that number from being associated with a Google ID for Gmail or related service?
With that said, I do use it, but as my third browser. I use IE8 and Opera as my main browsers. I use IE for checking email, banking, grad school, and light surfing. I use Opera for everything else. It is a fantastic browser. I was very excited about Firefox 3 because I haven't used it in years (because it sucked hard after 1.5). It works EXTREMELY poorly on Vista 64 bit. I have completely abandoned its use and it has been replaced by Chrome. If Google can show that it can clean up security issues in a timely manner, I intend to use it on occasion and leave it on my system.
quote: Chrome launches very quickly, bested only by IE7 in start time
Had you opened IE7 already since your last reboot? I opened IE7 for the first time after a reboot, and it took ~3 seconds (Wolfdale 3.0GHz, 4GB ram, Vista). Then I closed IE7, waited a minute, and opened IE7 again and it was nearly instant (<1.0s)
I've been coming to Anandtech for years now and I always expect a decent technical rundown of software like this. Just because a home has a nice garden and new paint doesn't mean that all is right with the plumbing.
Why didn't you guys notice that the browser is set to accept ALL cookies by default? Combine that with the DNS Pre-fetching (also on by default) and you have a dangerous combo. One wrong click and you'll have dozens of cookies installed on your machine from sites that you have never even visited (and how many will be a Google ad affiliate by chance?)
Sorry, but Google is possibly the WORST company on the entire internet to trust when it comes to privacy and this browser wasn't released out of the sheer goodness of their own heart with no strings attached.
My 2 cents.
By the way, the Chrome interface is quite nice. I like the simplicity :-)
While Firefox & IE run DHTML Lemmings fine - Chrome does not actually play the game. I've also run into the NVIDIA site glitch as well as a few other sites.
The TOS also bother me. Additionally, until I understand more about what it is doing with cache (specifically "Safe Browsing" under \Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Chrome\User Data) I'm not comfortable using it.
I'm probably just reiterating what everyone else has already said but I'm very disappointed that AT didn't test this new "Wonder Browser" vs. Opera. I switched from IE7 to Opera as a test run and within 10 minutes scrapped IE forever.
Some interesting concepts...but some things look like they just took them from the O.
So far my impressions are pretty good, but as Google stated their motto is "launch early and iterate", and I think they have a lot of iterations to go before Chrome will start wooing users away from the existing browsers. I agree with Ryan that the privacy statements in the terms of service worry me. I miss my mouse gestures from FF, my company webmail service still doesn't render properly in anything but IE, and Chrome tabs crashed on me several times on flash-heavy websites (though I could indeed kill that single tab without affecting the rest of the brower). It'll stay on my PC, but it will take a lot of changes to dethrone FF.
The impression people get when looking at that memory test is that everything other than Chrome is leaking gobs and gobs of memory, and that having and killing individual processes is the only smart way to avoid this. However, that's simply not the case- that memory is heap space that these browsers have available to use again. After closing those other windows out, try opening a bunch of websites again- Chrome's memory use will likely be higher than the rest, because it still pays the per-process penalties but the other browsers get to reuse that heap space.
I figure it this way: Google Browser gets better and saturates market: Google minimal OS pops up on ARM internet appliances with full Flash and Java support: people can spend $100 for a full-featured internet experience: Microsoft and Intel Sales dry up?
Think it is a bit far-fetched? Perhaps; but consider the way Intel is trying to enter the handheld markets (some might say without being completely honest about performance and energy consumption in the process), and look at Microsoft trying to make their browser mandatory on Windows, and therefore largely synonymous with the "the internet" in the mind of the general public (and pretty much succeeding, you need to be pretty savvy to get windows to install without IE, and even more savvy to get it to install without vestiges of the engine, which is unfortunately used in the basic file management of the OS)
Maybe this has been said before, but I don't feel like reading three pages of comments.
Where's the Opera love? It had some of these feature's, is very fast, scores highest on the Acid3 test, and was not even mentioned?
Furthermore, I am a bit weary of anything "Google" these day's thanks to their dubious privacy practices. I can't live without Gmail, and Google as a search engine, but if there was a decent alternative that didn't track you online activities/searches the same way google does I would use it for sure. Thanks to that I'm staying away from Google Chrome.
And of course because Firefox is better. =)
Long live Adblock Plus!
and what kind of argument is that, if that page shows:
"It is also possible to underestimate the usage share by using the number of requests, for example:
Many browsers and download managers spoof a different user agent string to the web server to prevent erroneous or malicious browser sniffing which could result in receiving broken or incompatible code, or being completely blocked, and thus increasing the statistics for other browsers (as an example, prior to version 9, the Opera web browser had "Identify as Internet Explorer" as the default user setting)"
Geez, I was hoping to get a comparison with opera yet here's another article that seems to ignore it. I mean from the testing I did today, the google browser seems fast and simple to use yet It was amazing how many things they did borrow from the opera.
I read it regardless but I wasn't impressed that such a powerful and useful browser was overlooked. To those who enjoy safari, to each its own but I just don't bother with that. Having said that google has made me rethink the advantages of webkit and safari underlying structure is based on that too so I can see the similarities but as ridiculous as the logo and name is, I'd definitely choose chrome over safari even at this beta stage - both react the same way but chrome seems faster and at boot up its instanteous. It's not a revolutionary step but time will tell if its even worth considering. FF has its advantages but for ease of use and speed opera, hands down. I just don't understand why ignore opera which has its foot in mobile and console platforms.
Hopefully Google will implement some kind of RSS reader which i found quite surprising to be missing (or at least i couldn't find the thing). Loving the all in one search bar but something sorely missing that I've enjoyed from FF3 and Opera is the URL searching 'word' strings making easier to find the address you're looking for.
single process seems like a nice concept and it seems to leave a smaller footprint so thats always a good thing? better power saving? I'll have to test this out further before I comment further.
History searching is clean and useful and speed dial-esque similar to opera is a fantastic use of new tab space :)
Dev tools is a great start, similar to what i saw on safari but safari's view source sucks compared to this but FF and opera still have it hands down on dev tools that come along with it.
I haven't tested their downloading capabilities but unlike the other browsers opera comes in built with torrent capabilities so I'll have to look further into it.
For a simple clean browser without the geeky factor, it'll probably entice quite a few casual users - Google after all... is google and that thing called search, well you'll be hard pressed to not see people intrigued by it when they come across their site.
Personally, I'm going to wait to try it out until I can get AdBlock and something similar to Foxmarks. And addon like ForecastFox would be nice too. :)
Unlike the boss, I'm a bit more leery of Chrome myself, both in the sense that I'm not entirely excited, and in the sense that there are some things that worry me.
I'm not excited in the sense that it is and it isn't a new browser; it's Safari's WebKit at the core. It's going to render a lot of stuff just like Safari and just as fast as Safari. I happen to like Safari (on the iPhone at least) so this isn't a bad thing, but it also means that Chrome is definitely evolutionary and not revolutionary in the end. For that matter I'm not entirely sure where to put things in a historical context, since normally new browsers are on new rendering engines. Firefox is probably the closest parallel, but even then it was a massive gutting of Mozilla.
As for the things that worry me:
1) I'd really like to see a good in-depth examination of the EULA and the code, to see what goes back to Google. Google is an ad firm that makes a damn good search engine (among other things) so I'd like to know what information is going where and what it's being used for, so that I'm not being abused in the process. I have no desire to start making Google my overlord.
2) Websites as applications scare me in general, this only furthers that, as Chrome's main purpose is to push performance and stability improvements in browsers to make them more suitable for web apps. Much of this goes with #1 since it involves relinquishing some control, but it's also a matter of bloat and overall system security. This model in essence turns the web browser in to an operating system; this is great for platform independence, but not so great for security. Operating systems are tricky beasts to write and maintain, they're quite often flawed as a result. The browser as an operating system brings many of these issues to the browser. My fear is that we end up with inherently sub-par applications that require a browser every bit as bloated and insecure as Windows is accused of being; it's a situation where there's much to lose and little to gain.
Ultimately "active" content should be handled by the OS, that's what it's there for.
With that said, there are plenty of interesting bits of Chrome that I'm looking forward to other browsers implementing. Record-free browsing, per-tab processes (since it looks like we're not getting rid of Flash any time soon, and Adobe can't seem to make it as stable as the browser it runs in), and faster Javascript performance are all nice things to have. And making all of this available under the BSD license is an excellent way to go, since whatever good things that may come out of Chrome can freely be taken and implemented in other browsers.
Should Chrome ever leave beta (it is Google after all...) it's going to be worth keeping an eye on.
what's wrong with all the tech sites just ignoring opera!? opera has most of those 'new features for ages and it works just fine.
so except for oneProcessPerTab (which has to be proven as useful) and incognito mode (already in dev) there is nothing new at all
get over opera there is a reason that no one uses it. FF can do all of operas features and more with addons. And opera is missing ALOT. It is ok but not top 3.
An other thing: considering the wide usage of Internet Explorer do you really think, that the size of user base matters? Anyway, based on functions, stability, security Opera has no reason to be shamed. Considering innovations, it clearly stands out from the group.
Maybe Opera is not a big deal (you think), but good enough for Firefox (both "officially" and add-on wise) and Chrome to shamelessly copy it. :P
Try having access to the same search engines via three different routes (right-click, search and url field) while keeping it dead simple adding additional engines.
Try getting even half of operas additional functions without using more memory.
While I don't know about putting the tabs on the side (there might be an extension for this, Firefox seems to have a bajillion of those), the three methods you enumerated for searching is available in Firefox (3.1 at least since I use a nightly build).
Minimalism is just what i want out of the internet, afterall, its the content on the internet that is all a browser should show, 900 bars here, 30+ icons there, stupid bars an borders everywhere. Bleh...
Anyway, there are a few things i'd like to mention, Chrome automatically imported everything from my FF3 (bookmarks, history, passwords and cookies) but not my IE (not that i mind, i imported everything from IE to FF3 when i transitioned anyway)
And as for the Downloads ? if you click the Spanner icon on the Omnibar, and choose Downloads, it shows a nice page showing all downloads and the standard Google search feature to search all of your downloads (kinda, ala FF3 albeit, not in a seperate popup (which always annoyed me)
Overall, Chrome is the browser i've always wanted, FF3 came very very close, but Chrome seems to be heading in the direction i wanted :-)
On the one hand you are sporting 8GB RAM machines, on the other hand you bitch around 50mb of RAM usage. It just doesn't blend.
Btw, instead of going for another browser to temporarily save RAM usage, I would kill one or two of those 51 processes that are not needed. I just did a quick check on my task manager and I have 23 processes running... that's 50% less.
Consider this a great topic for an article:
Windows processes: Which ones are unnecessary and how can I speed up my PC without losing comfort while gaining security?
It's a key factor in any program. More importantly this shows that when a page is closed the bloat is reduced, whereas in other browser's it stays pretty much the same. I think this is much more important obviously for laptops than desktops, and especially budget/tablet/ultralight laptops where you do not have the 8GB of ram.
But I'll completely agree with you that a detailed running processes article would be very helpful. I'm still using XP until I build my next system and would like something like Viper's XP page to give me a detailed explanation of all the junk running in the background I really don't need. Even better, go into a detailed explanation of how to create different profiles/log ins with different plans in mind. For instance, a gaming profile with the bare essentials to play (maybe even 2 separate profiles, one that does not require the internet for multiplayer support, and thus can not load all the antivirus/IPblocker software), a "secure" profile for bill paying and the like, an "idiot proof" profile that the average teenager/mom/old person can't destroy.
I'd pay money for a well-written detailed article on that!
The trouble with profiles is that no matter how many are made, someone is going to have problems. In short, if the person doesn't understand what their doing, they should learn more about it first or avoid it altogether. That's just an IT pipe dream though.
Several other sites have services covered so I don't see what more Anadtech could bring to the table. Maybe an introduction article, benchmarks on profiles and after shutting down some common unneeded processes, that would work.
And to stay on topic, Chrome is great/and or sucks.
A while back I saw a article on turning all the un-needed stuff off that the black viper site recommends. The machines with stuff turned off had nearly identical resource usage and actually performed worse. Since then I've never bothered with all the optimizations. The amount of time you save is way offset by the headache and time spent setting everything up.
There were several pages in the speed test that I have never been to. I went to those pages and they loaded faster then your tests are showing. I have been very impressed with the speed of this browser. So far I say good job Google.
It's a nice thing, no doubt, and I'm sure it will make its way through the competition very fast (by the way, as I'm writing this, a nasty bug prevents the lines from being displayed properly...:) It looks good and feels fast, but I simply can't swallow the absence of all the features that make Opera my browser of choice. It may be that they went too far in their minimalistic approach; inability to import settings from any other browser than IE for example, is downright stupid. Other users also pointed out pretty obvious and common features that Chrome is missing right now.
But then again, it may be that I'm just too paranoid; maybe the majority of users will never miss a feature in Chrome, and I guess google is aiming exactly at them. However, the users who like to customize everything exactly their way and need more control on what's going on are still better off with something like Opera, I guess.
Been about a year and a half, but one I remember is that I could not find where to make Opera not automatically shift to a new tab when opening. When I read news I usually scroll down the headlines and open any I want to read in new tabs, then open the tabs one by one and read. With Opera, each new tab opened and went there, then I immediately had to click back to the main tab to open whatever else I wanted, etc.
Plus, as mentioned, lack of Adblock is a deal-breaker.
Not sure if it is me, but after using FF3 since its release, I can atest to its speed in loading/rednering web page, almost always faster than IE7. While in the review, we are seeing that IE7 takes the crown for most of the test sites. Anyone any comments?
IE7 and FF2 both display in the center with a lot of grey space to the sides on my 24" monitor. The table that spills out the end in FF though was all present in IE.
Of course, all the ads are also present in IE, which is why I never use it.
That's my issue with Chrome. I know a lot of people think ABP is "stealing" the internet but for me, it's become an essential part of browsing. I think that's the only reason why I wouldn't use Chrome as a primary browser.
That said, I am quite impressed with the speed of the browser. It's at least as fast as Safari and used half the RAM that Firefox 3 does. It would be ideal for low powered systems such as netbooks with 512mb of RAM or less. It will be interesting to see how the Mac and Linux versions turn out.
Why not compare to IE8 rather than IE7? After all, Chrome is a 'beta' too.
Anyway, I like Chrome's minimal stuff-around-the-edges, but found the window appearance a bit jarring. For my usual Internet browsing, it performs well, though without any noticeable differences from Firefox or IE.
As your performance test showed, some sites seem to be much faster and some much slower. Slower until now are almost all German newssites. The popup-blocker worked better in Firefox and I am missing adblock ;)
As for the looking it is quite cool, I like the thin and sleek design. Everything seem to work properly without exceptions, just hope the security features hold what they've promised... until now no problems with design of the websites except www.spiegel.de and their ad.
Why was opera not included for comparison? I would like to see a really in-depth review on all the popular current browsers; konqueror, galeon, opera, firefox, safari, ie, chrome, seamonkey, camino and avant.
Even saying that Konqueror, Galeon, Seamonkey, and Avavnt are popular, current browsers undermines your credibility for suggesting that Opera is a popular, current browser. Which it is not.
I think they will be more mad about praising the first feature (tiled favourite websites on an empty tab) without mentioning, that google took this idea from Opera.
Actually, there isnt much in terms of usability google didnt pick up from one of the other browsers... so much for innovation. That might end up just being under the hood, if they can deliver... but for now, we're looking at a year of "beta" tag next to the name, I betcha.
Indeed, I am disappointed that my current (and still favorite) browser is not tested alognside the other ones. I'd love to know how it stacks up.
I also have a couple of issues with the review:
- RAM usage goes up after opening then closing 3 tabs. So " when you’re done with a tab - close it and you get all your memory back right away." seems inaccurate.
- No credit given to Opera for the "Home page" feature, which it premiered.
- Lack of mouse gestures (which I use all the time, and are my main "positive" reason for still using opera) not mentionned, just un the comments.
As far as Chrome is concerned, I cannot use it due to its license: I do NOT (and I know of nobody who does) own the rights to everything I display or input in my browser.
Yay, me too, why no love for Opera as it's my main browser now. Although it did crash quite a lot on my HP dv2608tu Vista but I love the interface, the trash button if only they can improve the stability. And it's boot much faster than Firefox 3.01.
Pretty much everything this review mentions as a "change introduced by Google" is simply copied from Opera. As were pretty much all browser features introduced in the past 8 or 10 years, come to think of it.
Hmmm. Tabbed browsing, etc. Why even bother listing all. I agree, Opera have been top-tier pioneers in browser innovation. I am using it too, now, and 99% of the time. Have been for years. Tried FF a few versions back, but got tired of foreverever updating extensions, just to make it work like Opera. Now if they made Opera pertable ... oh wait ... Joy!
I've tried it. And alredy unistalled it. Opera still kicks some serious ass! And the G guys copied almost all the good features from Opera for this Chrome thing. Like the "Most visited sites" that everyone is talking about: its Opera speed dial, for ages.
I mean, c'mon... And where is Opera in this "review"?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
105 Comments
Back to Article
Hanpei - Thursday, September 11, 2008 - link
It seems alright for entry level browsing.But when using it with MS Silverlight, it took up all CPU resources on and AMD athlon system, which make the video laggy; compared to 40-60% cpu usage in Firefox3 or Maxthon (IE7).
William Gaatjes - Monday, September 8, 2008 - link
When i am forced for any reason to use IE or firefox on another pc there is always a situation where i am missing some feature of Opera. Opera should definitely be included in browser reviews.Opera does not get the attention the Opera browser deserves.
Use it with he metal blue skin , arrange the buttons as you personnaly feel best to use and it's great.
portokala1234 - Monday, September 8, 2008 - link
In performance test you forgot to test JavaScript. I have some intense JavaScript web applications and in some cases Chrome runs up to 10 times faster than FF3. AJAX is running faster to.Overall in very impressed by this browser, if they make extensions like FireBug i will definitely switch to Chrome.
Sorry for my bad english im from Bulgaria.
portokala1234 - Monday, September 8, 2008 - link
http://code.google.com/chromium/">http://code.google.com/chromium/ if someone want to compile chrome for other OS.kebab77 - Wednesday, February 8, 2012 - link
These guys have run some benchmarks on a Galaxy S2 with ICS and Chrome browser:http://www.bestsmartphone.com/2012/02/07/chrome-be...
... seems quite a lot faster than other browsers at the more intensive benchmarks.
bigboxes - Sunday, September 7, 2008 - link
[URL=http://blogs.zdnet.com/Google/?p=1136">http://blogs.zdnet.com/Google/?p=1136]Google Chrome already beating Opera[/URL]Anubis - Monday, September 8, 2008 - link
thats because the sheep will use anything google puts outthey could market a bag of dog crap and people would eat it up because it has the "google" name on it, google fanboys are almost as bad as apple fanboys
DasFox - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link
I'm not sure why many are lifting up Opera, and Firefox as great, and saying it's like the only browser I use, etc...Such statements like this make me think these people don't really surf much, because if they did they'd notice a few things about these two browsers in particular.
Firefox is still a memory hog at times and then getting itself locked up and crashing when it starts going off really high, yep the memory leaks are still there in 3.
Opera also uses quite a bit of memory and there are many sites out there that just don't work well with Opera at all, and Opera doesn't play nice when the memory starts creeping up too.
Personally for small and light Kmeleon has been a pretty good browser and in regards to performance a much better browser then these two, it just lacks a bit of bells and whistles that people seem to be so drawn to.
I hope that Chrome gives the others a run, but with the history of Google cookie spying, it makes me hesitant to be a Chrome fan, Google has made geeks feel in the past like there is some sort of MS domination going on here...
Anubis - Monday, September 8, 2008 - link
Eh I’ve used Opera exclusively since I found in in 2001, back when you had to pay to remove the built in addthere are very very few sites that don’t work right in opera, 99% of those sites i find that don’t work are random news sites linked off of the anandtech forums, which i would not visit anyway
pretty much the only thing I use IE for anymore is windows updates and paying my bills online, because my bank wont let you use anything other then IE
William Gaatjes - Monday, September 8, 2008 - link
I agree. I use opera since version 6.x and never looked back.Only bad written websites with activex do not work but that does not bother me since these websites will always be un safe.
cousin333 - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
First of all, Chrome looks good. I like it's clean and simple design. With default design, I must add, while 1, so far it cannot be changed 2, other browsers can be heavily costumised (hence simplified). I'm usually using Opera, with a costume interface without search field and menu bar, consisting of 3 navigation buttons, the Trash button, and a button for the whole menu. And of course, URL and tab bar. That's all. I do have titlebar, but using a 70% sized skin, I have more space in Opera than in Chrome.One thing is sure: Chrome IS fast (most of the time), and starts fast (although the latter one doesn't bother me, I don't start my browsers too often). JS also seems pretty fast. Not much to comment here.
It seems however, that poeople at Google sit down and looked at the other browsers to decide, what function to take from them as their "innovation". Let's see:
IE8b2:
- processes for each tab
- URL domain name highlighting
Firefox:
- download statusbar
- adding bookmarks
- password manager
Safari:
- WebKit :)
- the way tabs can be rearranged
- speed and simplicity (UI and lack of settings)
- the way of autocomplete of URL-s, so that the first suggestion is used by default
Opera (more comment here):
- Speed Dial (Opera uses fixed sites, Chrome goes with most visited sites, I found Chrome' solution to be disturbing and somehow illogical, while it listed also about:memory for me)
- tabs over URL bar (I found it more logical than the opposite)
- "multi-level back" can be reached by clicking and holding mouse over Back button for a while
- downloads go to a new tab (can be reached with Ctrl + J) not a new window
- full history search
- undockable tabs
Other common functions
- inline find (this is actually not a copy from Opera, but it's the only browser comparable to Opera regarding speed, I especially liked the hits marked on the scrollbar)
- intelligent URL bar (QuickFind, Awesomebar, OmniBar, ... whatever) I guess Opera's and Firefox's solution is better than OmniBar, and it looks a bit ugly to me (or just don't feel right)
- adding new searchfields (Chrome tried to be simple, but it became a bit frustrating. Opera and Firefox is better in that field)
What I've missed:
- ad-block feature (hence understandable from a company making money from online advertising)
- RSS reader (I guess they will use their own online Google Reader thingy)
- very few costumisation possibility
- mouse gestures
- lack of commonly used context menu entries
cousin333 - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
Uuups, I've missed one of my points - about this article:Although Opera has a small marketshare, it would be nice of you to - at least - mention it, for, as you can see - Chrome includes many cool features taken from Opera. You stealed from Opera it's rightful marketing opportunity (at the right of being an innovator).
jtleon - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
Yo,WTH!!!
NOT EVERYONE ON THE PLANET IS RUNNING XP OR VISTA - GEEZ I CAN'T EVEN DOWNLOAD CHROME - ON A WINDOWS 2000 MACHINE!
HKPMACK - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
Google is not creating a browser to do us any favors.Did you guys even look at the original license?
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/09/03/google-c...">http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2008/09/...chrome-a...
The big reason google wants to control your browser is to make sure you can't bypass its advertising... they want you to use chrome because Firefox has Ad-Blockers... they want to track your browsing habits.
If they OWN the browser they get to do that way more and you can't stop them.
BTW, to those who don't believe it... Google already changes the license in just a few days after the "public outcry".
So, whats the big deal?
Frankly, I am disgusted by both the voracity of the license and the fact the license "changes" are "retroactive" and not requiring ANY notification.
If google can make sweeping license changes that to remove the bad language ie to paraphrase "they own all content we submit..." then they can also ADD new language later on... using the same "we have the right to make changes... so look here... and make sure each time you browse, that we did not just steal all your intellectual content."
Forget it.
In fact, I am so outraged by licensing stance that google chose, (NOTE per their own reps they use similar language for ALL their products)... that I have decided to switch my browser's home page to altavista.com
Google should DUMP the browser market... its quite clear that their intentions are not in my best interest.
HKPMACK - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
Oh and here's some more on it...http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12856">http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12856
Again... they just "changed" their license without any notification.
And they can update it too, just like Microsoft wanted to do with their OS...
NO thanks Google.
deeznuts - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Excellent article on Chrome, I like the browser it is quite fast. However, today I noticed my fans started blaring at work. Looked up task manager, and my CPU is at 70-90% capacity constant. Not sure what it is, I go to processes, and chrome is the culprit. I noticed I had two tabs on NFL.COM. I close those two, and everything is back to normal. I open IE7, go to NFL’s site again. At first the cpu usage spikes but then it drops down to normal. I open the sites again with Chrome, and the usage spikes but stays up.Can anyone else try NFL.COM and see if it's giving them fits?
Mr Roboto - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Aren't Opera and Chrome both using Webkit? I think Anand is trying to show the memory footprint of each different type of rendering engine.Therefor Opera isn't needed as it's base is the same as Chrome.cousin333 - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
No, Opera always used it's own rendering engine. Today, it's named Presto.Yongsta - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Chrome is pretty awesome. It fly's on my home desktop (Q6600, 4GB Ram). However on my desktop at work (Barton 3200, 1GB Ram) it becomes very slow when I have multiple tabs open (and processes). So, I'll stick to Firefox 3 at work.ChronoReverse - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I notice that with somewhat heavy browsing, it'll often grind the system for a bit. Usually after opening and closing various tabs.It also doesn't help that flash runs really slow for some odd reason.
Griswold - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I dont think it was too much to ask for to mention that the tiled favs on an empty tab is an idea from norway (opera, in case you really didnt know).I think thats important, because its one of the best add-ons i'm using with firefox - oops, another browser that had it before chrome. :P
Babbles - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I am a big fan of Opera, but even when putting aside any sense of fanboy-ism, Google Chrome seems to be nothing but an unoriginal lackluster version of what Opera has been offering for years. Firefox is always behind Opera's innovation and Google is even trailing behind that, yet Anand, and many reviewers out there, seem to essentially ignore Opera's browser innovation.I get the feeling that if anybody other than Google released this, then people would probably just laugh it off.
daar - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I'm running a firewall on my comp, and even when Chrome is not open, it seems to try to connect to google every 20 minutes or so...why is this?Is there anyway to start by default in incognito mode?
Griswold - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
fire up msconfig and look for googleupdate.exe. Thats what is phoning home.Anubis - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
1) it likes to phone home2) no idea
3) still pissed about the Opera issue
mikefarinha - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I just wanted to make some points that weren't mentioned in the comments so far.1. In the article it was mentioned that the look of Chrome is OS agnostic, I have to disagree. Chrome is very much in line with how a true Vista app should look. It makes fantastic use of the Aero interface, much more so than IE7 or IE8.
2. I think the ability to drag tabs into their own window is a fantastic idea and something I've been wanting for a while. It will come in quite handy when you have video running and want to do some reading on another website. This feature is bigger than any of the reviewers I've read have given it credit for. Many people actually seem to dismiss it as simply a glitzy feature, they're very wrong. I'd bet IE 8 will have this feature by the time it goes final.
3. It is also great that Chrome puts all it's tabs into different processes, however it wasn't mentioned that IE8 Beta 2 does this also, which was released about a week before chrome.
4. I think Chrome is going to become Google's platform, look for Google to, sooner or later, start basing a lot of their applications exclusivly around Chrome.
5. IE8 Beta 2. Where is the comparison? I've been using Firefox exclusivly since around 2005, just before it reached version 1.5. Firefox is great and has trumped Opera and IE in versatility. However I've been using IE8 Beta 2 for the past week (Beta 1 was crazy buggy!) and have been througly impressed. I think it is time for Anandtech to do a browser shootout article to give a base line on the current state of web browsers, it is really an exciting time for this technology!
BaronMatrix - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Great browser. It solved my problem with FF3 that would stop streaming video after awhile. I never use the menu or the Options so who cares. It seems to do better with ad-filled sites (like this one) and I have yet to see a page that doesn't render properly - at least after a refresh.My company Portal never rendered right in either IE or FF, but now it does. I dig the Download bar. I really like the Task Manager. It does worry me that when you search from the OmniBar, it appends "Chrome" to to the query.
It did error when I tried to login here, but only in that it didn't return to the Login box. I'm also noticing some strange text things while I type this. Sometimes the text will disappear or I have to hit the INSERT button.
All in all it's a better experience than the others. I really like the Home Page since I don't have to look for the sites I go to on the Bookmark Bar.
humbi83 - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
The zoom feature is disappointing. The images don't get scaled and the page gets distorted. This is a show stopper for me as on 1900x1200 on 17" the zoom feature is a must on a lot of web sites.dickeywang - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I just hope that they can provide a Linux version that can render the web pages as fast as those browsers in Windows.jvaudio - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I absolutely hate how tech sites give Google a free pass on their behaviors.Taken from Joe Wilcox:
I've just got to excerpt from this document: "When you type URLs or queries in the address bar, the letters you type are sent to Google so the Suggest feature can automatically recommend terms or URLs you may be looking for."
Can you say keylogger? What else could "the letters you type" mean?
Now make sure you read this paragraph at least twice:
"Your copy of Google Chrome includes one or more unique application numbers. These numbers and information about your installation of the browser (e.g., version number, language) will be sent to Google when you first install and use it and when Google Chrome automatically checks for updates. If you choose to send usage statistics and crash reports to Google, the browser will send us this information along with a unique application number as well."
WTH? Application numbers? Well, well, browsing is a whole lot less anonymous with Chrome. Why is there no uproar? Microsoft got hammered by the news media in 2001 because Windows XP appeared to send user identifiable activation numbers during setup. Google is identifying your browser with a unique number. What would prevent that number from being associated with a Google ID for Gmail or related service?
This is a good read on the details of how Google is the Ultimate Big Brother:
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/web_service...">http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/...r/chrome...
With that said, I do use it, but as my third browser. I use IE8 and Opera as my main browsers. I use IE for checking email, banking, grad school, and light surfing. I use Opera for everything else. It is a fantastic browser. I was very excited about Firefox 3 because I haven't used it in years (because it sucked hard after 1.5). It works EXTREMELY poorly on Vista 64 bit. I have completely abandoned its use and it has been replaced by Chrome. If Google can show that it can clean up security issues in a timely manner, I intend to use it on occasion and leave it on my system.
nerdynick - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Most innovative new browser features debut in Opera first, ie tabs,speed dial, mouse gestures, etc.
For that reason alone Opera should have been included.
aeternitas - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Very poor not to have included Opera.crimson117 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Had you opened IE7 already since your last reboot? I opened IE7 for the first time after a reboot, and it took ~3 seconds (Wolfdale 3.0GHz, 4GB ram, Vista). Then I closed IE7, waited a minute, and opened IE7 again and it was nearly instant (<1.0s)
Donkey2008 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I've been coming to Anandtech for years now and I always expect a decent technical rundown of software like this. Just because a home has a nice garden and new paint doesn't mean that all is right with the plumbing.Why didn't you guys notice that the browser is set to accept ALL cookies by default? Combine that with the DNS Pre-fetching (also on by default) and you have a dangerous combo. One wrong click and you'll have dozens of cookies installed on your machine from sites that you have never even visited (and how many will be a Google ad affiliate by chance?)
Sorry, but Google is possibly the WORST company on the entire internet to trust when it comes to privacy and this browser wasn't released out of the sheer goodness of their own heart with no strings attached.
My 2 cents.
By the way, the Chrome interface is quite nice. I like the simplicity :-)
crimson117 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
1. Google Chrome does not behave well with Vista set to use large fonts.2. Chrome plus large vista fonts = this text box (the one I'm typing this comment into) is behaving oddly.
3. Here are some opera memory numbers:
Just anandtech: 31.4MB
All 4: 92MB
Closed 3: 89.9MB
xoxor - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
While Firefox & IE run DHTML Lemmings fine - Chrome does not actually play the game. I've also run into the NVIDIA site glitch as well as a few other sites.The TOS also bother me. Additionally, until I understand more about what it is doing with cache (specifically "Safe Browsing" under \Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Chrome\User Data) I'm not comfortable using it.
roguerower - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I'm probably just reiterating what everyone else has already said but I'm very disappointed that AT didn't test this new "Wonder Browser" vs. Opera. I switched from IE7 to Opera as a test run and within 10 minutes scrapped IE forever.Some interesting concepts...but some things look like they just took them from the O.
Matt Campbell - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
So far my impressions are pretty good, but as Google stated their motto is "launch early and iterate", and I think they have a lot of iterations to go before Chrome will start wooing users away from the existing browsers. I agree with Ryan that the privacy statements in the terms of service worry me. I miss my mouse gestures from FF, my company webmail service still doesn't render properly in anything but IE, and Chrome tabs crashed on me several times on flash-heavy websites (though I could indeed kill that single tab without affecting the rest of the brower). It'll stay on my PC, but it will take a lot of changes to dethrone FF.jensend - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
The impression people get when looking at that memory test is that everything other than Chrome is leaking gobs and gobs of memory, and that having and killing individual processes is the only smart way to avoid this. However, that's simply not the case- that memory is heap space that these browsers have available to use again. After closing those other windows out, try opening a bunch of websites again- Chrome's memory use will likely be higher than the rest, because it still pays the per-process penalties but the other browsers get to reuse that heap space.nubie - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I figure it this way: Google Browser gets better and saturates market: Google minimal OS pops up on ARM internet appliances with full Flash and Java support: people can spend $100 for a full-featured internet experience: Microsoft and Intel Sales dry up?Think it is a bit far-fetched? Perhaps; but consider the way Intel is trying to enter the handheld markets (some might say without being completely honest about performance and energy consumption in the process), and look at Microsoft trying to make their browser mandatory on Windows, and therefore largely synonymous with the "the internet" in the mind of the general public (and pretty much succeeding, you need to be pretty savvy to get windows to install without IE, and even more savvy to get it to install without vestiges of the engine, which is unfortunately used in the basic file management of the OS)
kiroset - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Looks like they copied the popular Firefox extension - Download Statusbar - I think I prefer that implementationhttps://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/26">https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/26
MagicalMule - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Maybe this has been said before, but I don't feel like reading three pages of comments.Where's the Opera love? It had some of these feature's, is very fast, scores highest on the Acid3 test, and was not even mentioned?
Furthermore, I am a bit weary of anything "Google" these day's thanks to their dubious privacy practices. I can't live without Gmail, and Google as a search engine, but if there was a decent alternative that didn't track you online activities/searches the same way google does I would use it for sure. Thanks to that I'm staying away from Google Chrome.
And of course because Firefox is better. =)
Long live Adblock Plus!
Tegeril - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Opera holds 0.71% of the browser market share. It is essentially a non-player. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_br...">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_br...britz - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
and what kind of argument is that, if that page shows:"It is also possible to underestimate the usage share by using the number of requests, for example:
Many browsers and download managers spoof a different user agent string to the web server to prevent erroneous or malicious browser sniffing which could result in receiving broken or incompatible code, or being completely blocked, and thus increasing the statistics for other browsers (as an example, prior to version 9, the Opera web browser had "Identify as Internet Explorer" as the default user setting)"
Zensen - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Geez, I was hoping to get a comparison with opera yet here's another article that seems to ignore it. I mean from the testing I did today, the google browser seems fast and simple to use yet It was amazing how many things they did borrow from the opera.I read it regardless but I wasn't impressed that such a powerful and useful browser was overlooked. To those who enjoy safari, to each its own but I just don't bother with that. Having said that google has made me rethink the advantages of webkit and safari underlying structure is based on that too so I can see the similarities but as ridiculous as the logo and name is, I'd definitely choose chrome over safari even at this beta stage - both react the same way but chrome seems faster and at boot up its instanteous. It's not a revolutionary step but time will tell if its even worth considering. FF has its advantages but for ease of use and speed opera, hands down. I just don't understand why ignore opera which has its foot in mobile and console platforms.
Hopefully Google will implement some kind of RSS reader which i found quite surprising to be missing (or at least i couldn't find the thing). Loving the all in one search bar but something sorely missing that I've enjoyed from FF3 and Opera is the URL searching 'word' strings making easier to find the address you're looking for.
single process seems like a nice concept and it seems to leave a smaller footprint so thats always a good thing? better power saving? I'll have to test this out further before I comment further.
History searching is clean and useful and speed dial-esque similar to opera is a fantastic use of new tab space :)
Dev tools is a great start, similar to what i saw on safari but safari's view source sucks compared to this but FF and opera still have it hands down on dev tools that come along with it.
I haven't tested their downloading capabilities but unlike the other browsers opera comes in built with torrent capabilities so I'll have to look further into it.
For a simple clean browser without the geeky factor, it'll probably entice quite a few casual users - Google after all... is google and that thing called search, well you'll be hard pressed to not see people intrigued by it when they come across their site.
<3 Opera. Bring on innovation!
silhrt - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Currently, i can't even get it to work.Noone here at where i work can get it to work.
Does anyone have a link to where i can get in touch with them about why?
MorphiusFaydal - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Personally, I'm going to wait to try it out until I can get AdBlock and something similar to Foxmarks. And addon like ForecastFox would be nice too. :)Ryan Smith - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Unlike the boss, I'm a bit more leery of Chrome myself, both in the sense that I'm not entirely excited, and in the sense that there are some things that worry me.I'm not excited in the sense that it is and it isn't a new browser; it's Safari's WebKit at the core. It's going to render a lot of stuff just like Safari and just as fast as Safari. I happen to like Safari (on the iPhone at least) so this isn't a bad thing, but it also means that Chrome is definitely evolutionary and not revolutionary in the end. For that matter I'm not entirely sure where to put things in a historical context, since normally new browsers are on new rendering engines. Firefox is probably the closest parallel, but even then it was a massive gutting of Mozilla.
As for the things that worry me:
1) I'd really like to see a good in-depth examination of the EULA and the code, to see what goes back to Google. Google is an ad firm that makes a damn good search engine (among other things) so I'd like to know what information is going where and what it's being used for, so that I'm not being abused in the process. I have no desire to start making Google my overlord.
2) Websites as applications scare me in general, this only furthers that, as Chrome's main purpose is to push performance and stability improvements in browsers to make them more suitable for web apps. Much of this goes with #1 since it involves relinquishing some control, but it's also a matter of bloat and overall system security. This model in essence turns the web browser in to an operating system; this is great for platform independence, but not so great for security. Operating systems are tricky beasts to write and maintain, they're quite often flawed as a result. The browser as an operating system brings many of these issues to the browser. My fear is that we end up with inherently sub-par applications that require a browser every bit as bloated and insecure as Windows is accused of being; it's a situation where there's much to lose and little to gain.
Ultimately "active" content should be handled by the OS, that's what it's there for.
With that said, there are plenty of interesting bits of Chrome that I'm looking forward to other browsers implementing. Record-free browsing, per-tab processes (since it looks like we're not getting rid of Flash any time soon, and Adobe can't seem to make it as stable as the browser it runs in), and faster Javascript performance are all nice things to have. And making all of this available under the BSD license is an excellent way to go, since whatever good things that may come out of Chrome can freely be taken and implemented in other browsers.
Should Chrome ever leave beta (it is Google after all...) it's going to be worth keeping an eye on.
scottrick49 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
opera has an 83 on the acid3 testcousin333 - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
Yes (85 with latest weekly). And Chrome has 78 as the screenshot says here. But in the article, it's 74/100..geeknerdwoman - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
what's wrong with all the tech sites just ignoring opera!? opera has most of those 'new features for ages and it works just fine.so except for oneProcessPerTab (which has to be proven as useful) and incognito mode (already in dev) there is nothing new at all
flame
firefox sucks by the way
/flame
KeypoX - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
get over opera there is a reason that no one uses it. FF can do all of operas features and more with addons. And opera is missing ALOT. It is ok but not top 3.cousin333 - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
An other thing: considering the wide usage of Internet Explorer do you really think, that the size of user base matters? Anyway, based on functions, stability, security Opera has no reason to be shamed. Considering innovations, it clearly stands out from the group.Maybe Opera is not a big deal (you think), but good enough for Firefox (both "officially" and add-on wise) and Chrome to shamelessly copy it. :P
cousin333 - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
"FF can do all of operas features"At least, I had a good laugh...
FF addons ARE powerful. After you spent half of your life searching for them. Praying for them to cooperate :)
idomagic - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Try placing the tabs vertically in FF.Try having access to the same search engines via three different routes (right-click, search and url field) while keeping it dead simple adding additional engines.
Try getting even half of operas additional functions without using more memory.
ChronoReverse - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
While I don't know about putting the tabs on the side (there might be an extension for this, Firefox seems to have a bajillion of those), the three methods you enumerated for searching is available in Firefox (3.1 at least since I use a nightly build).LinearCannoN - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Minimalism is just what i want out of the internet, afterall, its the content on the internet that is all a browser should show, 900 bars here, 30+ icons there, stupid bars an borders everywhere. Bleh...Anyway, there are a few things i'd like to mention, Chrome automatically imported everything from my FF3 (bookmarks, history, passwords and cookies) but not my IE (not that i mind, i imported everything from IE to FF3 when i transitioned anyway)
And as for the Downloads ? if you click the Spanner icon on the Omnibar, and choose Downloads, it shows a nice page showing all downloads and the standard Google search feature to search all of your downloads (kinda, ala FF3 albeit, not in a seperate popup (which always annoyed me)
Overall, Chrome is the browser i've always wanted, FF3 came very very close, but Chrome seems to be heading in the direction i wanted :-)
ChronoReverse - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
You do realize you can customize Firefox to remove most of the toolbars and such right?I do like the way the UI in Chrome uses the space of the title bar though. It gives ever more room for the webpages.
Finally - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
On the one hand you are sporting 8GB RAM machines, on the other hand you bitch around 50mb of RAM usage. It just doesn't blend.Btw, instead of going for another browser to temporarily save RAM usage, I would kill one or two of those 51 processes that are not needed. I just did a quick check on my task manager and I have 23 processes running... that's 50% less.
Consider this a great topic for an article:
Windows processes: Which ones are unnecessary and how can I speed up my PC without losing comfort while gaining security?
<-- THAT would be an interesting article!
7Enigma - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
It's a key factor in any program. More importantly this shows that when a page is closed the bloat is reduced, whereas in other browser's it stays pretty much the same. I think this is much more important obviously for laptops than desktops, and especially budget/tablet/ultralight laptops where you do not have the 8GB of ram.But I'll completely agree with you that a detailed running processes article would be very helpful. I'm still using XP until I build my next system and would like something like Viper's XP page to give me a detailed explanation of all the junk running in the background I really don't need. Even better, go into a detailed explanation of how to create different profiles/log ins with different plans in mind. For instance, a gaming profile with the bare essentials to play (maybe even 2 separate profiles, one that does not require the internet for multiplayer support, and thus can not load all the antivirus/IPblocker software), a "secure" profile for bill paying and the like, an "idiot proof" profile that the average teenager/mom/old person can't destroy.
I'd pay money for a well-written detailed article on that!
Jynx980 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I have been using Wintasks by Uniblue/liutilities to check out processes. It works pretty well and sure beats googling up unknown processes and ones I have forgotten about. I think it is now part of "SpeedUpMyPC 2009" (http://www.liutilities.com/products/speedupmypc/)">http://www.liutilities.com/products/speedupmypc/) I can't seem to get the links button to work.There's also The Elder Geek guide (http://www.theeldergeek.com/services_guide.htm)">http://www.theeldergeek.com/services_guide.htm).
I guess the Black Viper site is back. I have no idea what happened to him but he's back anyways. He also used to have different profiles. Maybe this page will help (http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/xpprofiles.htm)">http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/xpprofiles.htm)
The trouble with profiles is that no matter how many are made, someone is going to have problems. In short, if the person doesn't understand what their doing, they should learn more about it first or avoid it altogether. That's just an IT pipe dream though.
Several other sites have services covered so I don't see what more Anadtech could bring to the table. Maybe an introduction article, benchmarks on profiles and after shutting down some common unneeded processes, that would work.
And to stay on topic, Chrome is great/and or sucks.
Alyx - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
A while back I saw a article on turning all the un-needed stuff off that the black viper site recommends. The machines with stuff turned off had nearly identical resource usage and actually performed worse. Since then I've never bothered with all the optimizations. The amount of time you save is way offset by the headache and time spent setting everything up.nortexoid - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
So far Chrome's been pretty buggy for me. It locks up with flash animations (especially when coming out of fullscreen mode) mostly.It has some nice features. In fact one of them, it's autohiding status bar, led me to that very extension for FF3! Yes, I'm still in love with FF3.
dryloch - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
There were several pages in the speed test that I have never been to. I went to those pages and they loaded faster then your tests are showing. I have been very impressed with the speed of this browser. So far I say good job Google.npp - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
It's a nice thing, no doubt, and I'm sure it will make its way through the competition very fast (by the way, as I'm writing this, a nasty bug prevents the lines from being displayed properly...:) It looks good and feels fast, but I simply can't swallow the absence of all the features that make Opera my browser of choice. It may be that they went too far in their minimalistic approach; inability to import settings from any other browser than IE for example, is downright stupid. Other users also pointed out pretty obvious and common features that Chrome is missing right now.But then again, it may be that I'm just too paranoid; maybe the majority of users will never miss a feature in Chrome, and I guess google is aiming exactly at them. However, the users who like to customize everything exactly their way and need more control on what's going on are still better off with something like Opera, I guess.
strikeback03 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Funny, it was the things I couldn't set Opera to do that caused me to not bother reinstalling in my most recent OS upgrade.idomagic - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Please do give an example.strikeback03 - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Been about a year and a half, but one I remember is that I could not find where to make Opera not automatically shift to a new tab when opening. When I read news I usually scroll down the headlines and open any I want to read in new tabs, then open the tabs one by one and read. With Opera, each new tab opened and went there, then I immediately had to click back to the main tab to open whatever else I wanted, etc.Plus, as mentioned, lack of Adblock is a deal-breaker.
cousin333 - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
You didn't look hard enough... Did you tried to open links by clicking with scrollwheel? ;)There is an AdBlock in Opera, called Content block... You can access it by using the pages' context menu.
Tegeril - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
You can import from Firefox.GarionGoh - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Not sure if it is me, but after using FF3 since its release, I can atest to its speed in loading/rednering web page, almost always faster than IE7. While in the review, we are seeing that IE7 takes the crown for most of the test sites. Anyone any comments?zebrax2 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
they probably tested it without any add-onsSylvanas - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I am loving Chrome, very fast and best of all it's simple to use, nice UI.ubiloo - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I see the author of the article is looking for new features, etc.I think that Aurora (in Mozilla Concept series) is really displaying some... Check here:
http://labs.mozilla.com/2008/08/introducing-the-co...">http://labs.mozilla.com/2008/08/introdu...concept-...
imaheadcase - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Since no other web browser does except IE. Maybe it does?I love viewing this site with 4 inches width on each side wasted in FF3. Such a classy design anandtech.../sarcasm
strikeback03 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
IE7 and FF2 both display in the center with a lot of grey space to the sides on my 24" monitor. The table that spills out the end in FF though was all present in IE.Of course, all the ads are also present in IE, which is why I never use it.
theslug - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Anandtech seems to display fine for me with Firefox 3.imaheadcase - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Try looking at AT on a 24 inch monitor. The site does not scale accordingly. The forums do, just not main site.strikeback03 - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Define "scale correctly". It is centered, probably 1024 pixels wide, and I would imagine that is exactly what they programmed it to do.haplo602 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
what about ad blocks ? popup blocker ? session management ? page manuipulation (zoom etc.) ???mmntech - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
That's my issue with Chrome. I know a lot of people think ABP is "stealing" the internet but for me, it's become an essential part of browsing. I think that's the only reason why I wouldn't use Chrome as a primary browser.That said, I am quite impressed with the speed of the browser. It's at least as fast as Safari and used half the RAM that Firefox 3 does. It would be ideal for low powered systems such as netbooks with 512mb of RAM or less. It will be interesting to see how the Mac and Linux versions turn out.
granulated - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
....and something along the lines of "Stylish" is ESSENTIAL to me.I'll have another look at it in a few months and see if they've added some customisation options.
evildorf - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Why not compare to IE8 rather than IE7? After all, Chrome is a 'beta' too.Anyway, I like Chrome's minimal stuff-around-the-edges, but found the window appearance a bit jarring. For my usual Internet browsing, it performs well, though without any noticeable differences from Firefox or IE.
Christoph Katzer - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
As your performance test showed, some sites seem to be much faster and some much slower. Slower until now are almost all German newssites. The popup-blocker worked better in Firefox and I am missing adblock ;)As for the looking it is quite cool, I like the thin and sleek design. Everything seem to work properly without exceptions, just hope the security features hold what they've promised... until now no problems with design of the websites except www.spiegel.de and their ad.
Visual - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
the table on page 4 doesn't fit - the long url http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=red&am...">http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=red&am... in the first column makes it stretch too much, and the other columns disappear under the dailytech articles on the right.phatboye - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Why was opera not included for comparison? I would like to see a really in-depth review on all the popular current browsers; konqueror, galeon, opera, firefox, safari, ie, chrome, seamonkey, camino and avant.Tegeril - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Even saying that Konqueror, Galeon, Seamonkey, and Avavnt are popular, current browsers undermines your credibility for suggesting that Opera is a popular, current browser. Which it is not.Griswold - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Well doh, numbnuts. Opera still IS a popular browser.Baked - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
The O fanboys will not be pleased.SonicIce - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
It's all about the O.Griswold - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
I think they will be more mad about praising the first feature (tiled favourite websites on an empty tab) without mentioning, that google took this idea from Opera.Actually, there isnt much in terms of usability google didnt pick up from one of the other browsers... so much for innovation. That might end up just being under the hood, if they can deliver... but for now, we're looking at a year of "beta" tag next to the name, I betcha.
StormyParis - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Indeed, I am disappointed that my current (and still favorite) browser is not tested alognside the other ones. I'd love to know how it stacks up.I also have a couple of issues with the review:
- RAM usage goes up after opening then closing 3 tabs. So " when you’re done with a tab - close it and you get all your memory back right away." seems inaccurate.
- No credit given to Opera for the "Home page" feature, which it premiered.
- Lack of mouse gestures (which I use all the time, and are my main "positive" reason for still using opera) not mentionned, just un the comments.
As far as Chrome is concerned, I cannot use it due to its license: I do NOT (and I know of nobody who does) own the rights to everything I display or input in my browser.
Anubis - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
yes we are very angry :(but seriously it should have been tested in this as well
DanD85 - Thursday, September 4, 2008 - link
Yay, me too, why no love for Opera as it's my main browser now. Although it did crash quite a lot on my HP dv2608tu Vista but I love the interface, the trash button if only they can improve the stability. And it's boot much faster than Firefox 3.01.SilverMirage - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I'm usin' Opera as we speak. I wish google would try adding mouse gestures. They aren't hard to learn and they are amazingly useful!It seems like many browsers are stealing Opera-like ideas...
npoe1 - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
I think that Opera is the best browser by far.Justin Case - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Pretty much everything this review mentions as a "change introduced by Google" is simply copied from Opera. As were pretty much all browser features introduced in the past 8 or 10 years, come to think of it.exploderator - Friday, September 5, 2008 - link
Hmmm. Tabbed browsing, etc. Why even bother listing all. I agree, Opera have been top-tier pioneers in browser innovation. I am using it too, now, and 99% of the time. Have been for years. Tried FF a few versions back, but got tired of foreverever updating extensions, just to make it work like Opera. Now if they made Opera pertable ... oh wait ... Joy!R4F43LZiN - Saturday, September 6, 2008 - link
I've tried it. And alredy unistalled it. Opera still kicks some serious ass! And the G guys copied almost all the good features from Opera for this Chrome thing. Like the "Most visited sites" that everyone is talking about: its Opera speed dial, for ages.I mean, c'mon... And where is Opera in this "review"?
devolutionist - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
yes, not pleased at all. but we're used to getting no love.Reikon - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Especially when they borrowed several features from Opera.- Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
There are definitely elements from Opera and only Opera in this browser. I am surprised this is not based on Gecko.alin - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link
Here's one :DBy the way. Good browser. So far :p
ehnejafcrrjj - Saturday, August 29, 2020 - link
82201 97927 45860 97677http://bitly.com/1ntFjX
12440 94694 87329 64290
http://bitly.com/1ntFjX - Вратарь Галактики смотреть онлайн 86208 88837 71283 61638