First Look At Chrome 10 206
jbrodkin writes "Boosted JavaScript performance, Adobe Flash sandboxing, password encryption and an overhauled settings interface are among the new features in Google Chrome 10. JavaScript pages should now load 12% faster than in previous versions, and Chrome 10 beats IE9 by at least 50% in a JavaScript benchmark."
I'll wait for Chrome 11... (Score:5, Funny)
...because it's 1 version more.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No need to wait. The beta Chrome 11 is out.
In fact, why stop there?
Chrome 12 is available now: http://www.conceivablytech.com/6141/products/google-chrome-12-surfaces
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Cool story, bro. I'll wait a little bit until I get these same features in Chromium [wikipedia.org]. Won't take long.
It is good this way. You don't care about your privacy then you help Google advertise so you help fund the people doing most of the coding. The rest of us thank you for that. You do care about your privacy then you find yourself in a tiny minority that can be treated l
Re: (Score:3)
I give them my information precisely because they are courteous enough to give me the choice to say no. That's why they get my business. Their willingness to go without means I trust them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Google 10! It spies on you 17% faster!
You are Google's product - not Chrome.
The sell your arse with every click. And you provide them with a means.
A corporation with 600 USD stock, "giving" you a choice? My God! Are the halls of Google clogged with the footsteps of saints?
Such charity.
Re: (Score:2)
calm down jerry
Re: (Score:2)
Easy for you to say. You didn't wake up in a Sunnydale.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
My assumptions was that it's not about JavaScript loading times, but overall JavaScript performance. As a web developer I see that as a Very Good Thing. HTML/CC/JavaScript are currently the ultimate in cross-platform interfaces, and so for devices to be able to run such interfaces a little faster will always be appreciated. As HTML and JavaScript capabilities become more potent, it reduces the need for plugins such as Flash and SilverLight.
As usual the memory issue is probably to do with your browser keepin
Re: (Score:2)
This is being written on my main machine, which only has a 1.6Ghz single core Atom processor and 1GB of RAM.
Which phone is that? :D
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, my phone only has a 1Ghz processor and 512MB RAM.. and a 5 inch display ;)
Re: (Score:3)
Question: What EXACTLY is the point of this ever faster JavaScript race for anyway?
Its pretty simple actually. More and more applications are becoming web applications. For Google this is especially important. The more appealing the platform (browser) they can create for developers and users, the more web applications are likely to exist. For Google this directly translates into either revenue or data to be mined, which in turn means revenue.
Try the about:memory trick in Chrome/Chromium to run tests yourself. With just 5 /. pages open and NO ADS we are talking over 200Mb of memory! For 5 pages of just text?
The problem with that analysis is that its completely wrong. It gives an extremely poor impression of what is really going on. The simple fact is, it
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll avoid Chrome so long as it insists on hourly checking for updates - even when Chrome isn't running.
Google told me that the only way to uninstall this update thing was to remove all Google applications, and I was happy to oblige.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, since Google says "versions don't matter anymore" and they're planning on releasing every six weeks, they'll be on version 18 by the end of the year.
Version 10 (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious now. If you don't mind my asking, which, if any, free email service do you use? What are the specific features or problems you face that makes you dislike gmail?
Re: (Score:3)
I heard about Safe-mail here on /. and I've been using it for more than a year and enjoying it.
https://safe-mail.net/ [safe-mail.net]
Safe-mail because it's safe? Why trust it? (Score:2)
Oh, I didn't realize I was asking a question to an AC. Getting a response from that is impossible.
I tried safe-mail as well when I was looking for an allegedly non-mainstream and secure mail service. It didn't impress me but what really made me ponder if I should use such service was the fact that it was based in Israel. I don't know if I'm being paranoid but putting emphasis on providing a safe mail service would be a great place for Intelligence Agencies to perform surveillance.
PRIVACY: Safe-mail.net will not disclose information about you or your use of the Safe-mail.net system, unless Safe-mail.net believes that such action is necessary to comply with its legal requirements or process; enforce these terms; or protect the interests of Safe-mail.net, its members or others. You agree that Safe-mail.net may access your account, including its contents, for these reasons or for service or technical reasons. Please note that your Internet Protocol address is transmitted with each message sent from your account.
You're simply taking the
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Hotmail's UI doesnt' like other browsers very much, in case you haven't noticed. It might present problems under proxy as well.
Email forwarding, importing, exporting, etc are all covered by gmail while hotmail or yahoo don't allow you nuless you upgrade.
gmail has always been faster than Hotmail in my experience.
Hello, net passport (Score:2)
Why don't you just associate your gmail account to an msn live passport and use that to chat with Windows Live Messenger?
Re: (Score:2)
Distant 3rd? Any sources? I see it clearly as first in our small town mid-western USA schools and businesses. Maybe it is just popular in this area.
Spanish speakers use WLM (Score:2)
Windows Live Messenger is widely used among spanish speakers for casual communication (and sometimes work).
Gtalk is gaining audience in the business oriented sectors.
Re: (Score:2)
Now, that's another matter: with all those click farm that pretend to be review site, or that simply copy-paste tiny amount of information from all over the web, I had to go back to the gold old fashioned bookmark, neatly organized and synchronized. That sucks, but nowadays if you do not want more than intro level information on a subj
Waste my Time! (Score:5, Informative)
And I actually really LIKE Chrome (on the PC; Opera on the phone).
Re:Waste my Time! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Waste my Time! (Score:5, Funny)
I don't know why people want humanoid robots because it's obvious that if they're anything like the electronics we have now they're just going to be rude, annoying, obnoxious, fucking assholes.
So what you're saying is that you're afraid we wouldn't be able to tell them apart from humans?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome and Linux don't jive (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
huh?
ive been running chrome on ubuntu for ages now and never ever had even one issue with it. im actually running the unstable versions and theyre perfectly fine.
i cant see your problem
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Me too, Chrome on OpenSUSE/KDE, absolutely spiffing
Re: (Score:2)
After a clean install, I installed the stable version on another machine yesterday, through the commandline, even!
http://www.ubuntuupdates.org/ppas/8 [ubuntuupdates.org]
lol javascript (Score:3, Interesting)
Javascript benchmarkS? You mean chrome's own benchmark? Because it's scoring less in SunSpider, and it's certainly not beating IE9 in it. Not that this matters a whole lot, anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It makes a big difference for web-based applications that are implemented primarily in JavaScript.
For example: If you're designing slides for a presentation, playing a 3D game, or editing a photo -- things that are graphics heavy and CPU intensive -- you want to get as much performance out of the JS interpreter as possible.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not saying that moving computationally heavy things into the browser is a good idea, but it does appear to be where things are headed; Talking about a few ms of pageload time is missing the issue entirel
What benchmark? (Score:5, Informative)
TFA is a little thin - it is basically a slideshow.
Still, IE9 beats out Chrome 10 in webkits own sunspider benchmark. On my old rig:
IE9: 348.2ms +/- 0.8%
Chrome: 446.0ms +/- 1.9%
Re: (Score:2)
TFA uses http://jsbenchmark.celtickane.com/Run.aspx [celtickane.com] which is a joke.
A useful benchmark is Futuremark's Peacekeeper, really, since it tests a wide variety of common tasks. On my machine, Chrome's the fastest at raw JS, but (by far) slowest at rendering...besides Firefox, which is actually slowest at -every- benchmark -every- time (by a typical margin of 5-10x or more; 4 RC is even slower than everything else on its own benchmarks like Kraken).
Even Opera (with no hardware acceleration at all) beats Chrome at
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Benchmarks are usually entirely synthetic, that is virtually all of their code consists of functions which are either never used, which calculate a static result or which calculate a result which is never used... Real world applications generally make use of the data that they compute, so the benchmark results will not be terribly indicative.
Optimizing C compilers have been doing this for years, thats why you can't just use a static loop for a benchmark - the compiler will precompute the resulting value and
If you can make complete junk run real fast (Score:3)
You might be able to pretend you're not running complete junk. The benchmark should use a heavy Slashdot comment page. If it can load in three seconds, you gotta winner.
Re: (Score:2)
Dupe? (Score:5, Informative)
"Google Releases Stable Version of Chrome 10 [slashdot.org]"
Is it really this hard for /. editors to use the handy little search function this site provides and see if a story is a dupe? This story was even posted two days ago (albeit on a different website but it's pretty much the same thing).
Re: (Score:2)
"Google Releases Stable Version of Chrome 10 [slashdot.org]"
Is it really this hard for /. editors to use the handy little search function this site provides and see if a story is a dupe? This story was even posted two days ago (albeit on a different website but it's pretty much the same thing).
People like yourself who are too lazy to read full articles love whining about dupes. The problem is that this is not a dupe. The article the other day was about Chrome 10 being released, this article is because someone actually bothered to benchmark it.
Whether someone benchmarking it is news worthy is a different question but you did not ask it, instead you just carped on about something being a dupe without reading it to see if it contained any new information. Quite often news outlets run a story that i
12% faster JavaScript! (Score:2)
<breathless>JavaScript pages should now load 12% faster than in previous versions, and Chrome 10 beats IE9 by at least 50% in a JavaScript benchmark.</breathless>
I just came in my pants! 12% faster!
"beats IE9" ??? (Score:2)
If we're benchmarking unreleased software how about going head to head with FireFox 5? We'll only have to wait a month or so of If FireFox is on the same release schedule as Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
IE9 and FF4 are both in RC status. The performance should be identical to the released versions. IE9 is coming out on Monday, so there won't be any performance differences.
Nice Javascript Benchmarking (Score:3)
Written by John Resig for Mozilla:
http://dromaeo.com/ [dromaeo.com]
I'm interested in seeing how much DOM manipulation improves w/ Chrome 10.
Re: (Score:2)
NoScript? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Firefox 4 is not bad compared to Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
Master Password (Score:2)
Does it have a master password yet? Until then there's no way I can use it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Does it have a master password yet? Until then there's no way I can use it.
Though the 7 slides in TFA contain almost no content at all, this was in fact one of the questions answered: yes, they now have a master password.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
.... They did.
No, thanks. (Score:2)
I won't touch Chrome as long as it has that horrible interface that looks completely alien in any operating system.
NoScript (Score:2)
And still can't run 'NoScript'. :-(
Sticking with Firefox until I have the safety of NoScript.
Flash sandboxing busted (Score:2)
Flash seems to be busted for me on Chrome 10. The controls will not work always on youtube. also most of the time if I click a different tab then go back, Flash is replaced with the content of the other tab (it shows what would be in the same location if I was on the other tab). This is happening on my work machine, work laptop and home PC. ::sadface::
I have been ejoying the FF RC though.
Re: (Score:2)
one example of faster being slower (Score:4, Interesting)
Firefox is still faster in at least one real-world web app that matters to me. A free GPS smartphone app called Waze lets you edit and make corrections to the map by signing in to your account on their website. Their editor at http://www.waze.com/cartouche/ [waze.com] is where you make these edits, and Firefox is amazingly responsive with this web app. Chrome, on the other hand, has been getting more and more aggravating to use with this app. User input responsiveness has been getting worse and worse ever since Google starting making huge gains in their javascript performance. If I click on a road segment in Firefox it pretty much instantly gets selected and highlighted. There is a very large delay in doing the same thing in Chrome. In Firefox, if I click on some point in the map and drag to move my view of the map, the map starts moving right away. If I do the same in Chrome I get the same glacial delay before it starts moving the map, and every time you drag the mouse before letting go of the mouse button there is the same delay before your movement translates to movement of the map. In fact, any and all user interactions with the app involves an awful lot of delay. And why, I don't know. How come it's perfectly fluid in Firefox, and in Chrome it's an exercise in patience? If Chrome is *that* much faster, why is it an insane amount slower to edit Waze maps with it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ok, I did that. I don't know if I described it very well, but here it is anyway. http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=75734 [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting result in that it so exactly counters my own experience developing an extremely complex spreadsheet-like application in HTML/JS. Tremendous amounts of DOM manipulation, string/integer comparison, and raw maths.
IE8 is a non-starter; our clients know this up front. FF isn't bad, but Chrome, especially the last 2 or three releases has come out shining! We've begun specifically recommending it.
I guess it's not whether or not it's optimized, it's a matter of what you are optimizing for.
Openstreetmap (Score:2)
Just in case you missed the alternative that actually lets people use the map for something try osm.org [osm.org].
I wish they'd spend more time on DOM optimization (Score:2)
My accidental benchmark (Score:5, Interesting)
Last year, my daughter and I did a web page that generates mazes because she loves mazes and was amazed that I told her that the computer can be made to make one.
Trying it on IE8, I thought the page was broken. It took almost all day to complete what FF and Safari and Chrome did in seconds.
I then added some instrumentation and other HTML/DOM layouts to test the browsers. You can see this at http://sinz.org/Maze/ [sinz.org]
By the way, IE9 RC is much better but still an order of magnitude behind Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like microsoft have ripped off your Word Wiggle game too http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Performance/WrigglyWords/Default.html [microsoft.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Off-topic, but I have to say this is a great way to introduce your daughter to computers. Very cool!
Re: (Score:2)
Plugins (Score:2)
I personally can't imagine browsing the Internet without mouse gestures, and that includes the fucking speed dial.
Re: (Score:2)
Have they re-introduced frames? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not so sure Chrome is any faster than IE9 (Score:2)
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/chrome-10-vs-internet-explorer-9-reconsidered/792?pg=2&tag=mantle_skin;content [zdnet.com]
Who cares about all those JS benchmarks? (Score:2)
Damn YES: KWallet integration at last. (Score:2)
I tried out the new settings, and when checking out the password encryption, it automatically loaded KWallet, the default password store in KDE. That's it, as of right now Chromium is my default browser.
Still has a refresh problem (Score:2)
Chrome is my favorite browser, but it is still slow in some ways. While testing a web app I'm writing, if I hit F5 (Refresh), it takes several seconds for it to reload the page and all its images (even with all content is coming from localhost). Every other browser I test with handles the refresh almost instantly. Sure Chrome runs the JavaScript faster after it downloads it, but something is wrong with the way it manages downloads.
Re: (Score:2)
Thats weird. I'm using chrome as my primary browser and for development (until i need firebug anyway. I dislike the Chrome dev tool), and my web app, with douzans of javascript files and hundreds of small images (nothing's combined or minified while I develop), when i hit refresh, loads up in less than a second.
Thats a "one page loads everything ahead of time and use javascript for everything" kind of app, so there's a LOT of files being loaded (far more than a standard web page, by a few orders of magnitud
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that it's weird, and I don't remember noticing it with other web apps we've worked on. My co-worker is the primary front-end developer (I do most of the back-end work), and he has gotten very fancy with CSS. I have wondered if it's something specific he's doing that is exploiting a specific problem in Chrome. The main page loads fine, but the images on the page come up very slowly one at a time. On our menu bar, the images show up in order from left to right, and it's very obvious. As I mentioned, a
What to do with all that saved time.... (Score:2)
Awsome !
All those things I'll be able to do during those precious milliseconds... !
Seriously, stop about the stupid javascript speed race, and focus on user experience, protection of privacy.
Ha damn, we are talking about Google... User privacy is their currency.
Well good if it pushes competition to improve, other than that I am not sure what to get out of it
Re: (Score:3)
Re: JavaScript the fastest feature that is turned (Score:5, Informative)
Because people like you who turn JavaScript off are tiny minority of users. Almost everyone else actually uses and enjoys it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Almost everyone uses it. Few enjoy it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, people hate to be able to use IM and get instant update notifications in Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Because people like you who turn JavaScript off are tiny minority of users. Almost everyone else actually uses and enjoys it.
Your not kidding. Our site has 0.05% of users with JavaScript disabled (or otherwise unavailable)
Re: (Score:2)
Most users of NoScript have a non-empty whitelist of sites which are permitted to run scripts. Those that actually do something useful - like, you know, Slashdot.
On a side note, you also, apparently, take pride in Capitalizing random Nouns. ~
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Javascript is turned on in 90-95% of browsers in use. [w3schools.com]
Me working for Google is irrelevant: Most people leave Javascript enabled and don't block it.
You can go ahead and take pride in being 90-95% wrong, through. Yer bad to the bone, you are, a real rebel, the way you fight... well, reality.
Re: (Score:3)
To be clear, I don't work for Google. I meant that the identity of my employer is irrelevent when I've got objective statistics backing me up.
Re: (Score:2)
Go ahead Mod me down... I take pride in having a dissenting opinion
So says Anonymous Coward. Hopefully no one wastes a mod point on you.
Re: (Score:2)
Its only problematic for the following reasons.
1) Vendors not supporting common standards, instead inventing alternative ones that effectively do the same thing or , failing that,they are just missing
2) Developers not testing properly in a wide range of common browsers , worse still locking our certain browsers completely.
3) Developers not providing graceful degradation for users whose browsers do not support certain features, or have javascript turned off.
Most of these issues could be resolved if issue num
Re: (Score:2)
bah, 11.0.699.0 Canary.. working great for me!