New Chrome is more than polish
Yesterday's introduction of Chrome version 2.0.172.28 was touted by Google as being up to 30 percent faster for handling JavaScript. After using the update to the stable release extensively for the past day and running it through two JavaScript tests on two computers, it's conclusively faster than the previous stable version of Chrome.
In addition to being faster, the new Chrome now has a full screen mode.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)The two computers I used were a Windows Vista Service Pack 1 desktop with a Pentium 4 processor running at 3.00 GHz and 2 GB of RAM, and a Windows XP Pro Service Pack 3 laptop with a Core Duo T9400 processor running at 2.53 GHz and 3 GB of RAM. Chrome was benchmarked by the Webkit test, SunSpider, and the JavaScript-only sections of the Mozilla test Dromaeo. Chrome was tested with no other tabs open and no other programs running on the computer.
When testing SunSpider, Chrome v1.0.154.65 scored 919.2ms on the laptop, and 1864.2ms on the desktop. Chrome v2.0.172.28 scored 583.6ms on the laptop, and 1323.4ms on the desktop. The laptop score was 36.6 percent faster, and the desktop was 29 percent faster.
Running both versions of Chrome through Dromaeo came up with similar results. Keeping in mind that the higher number is better for Dromaeo's tests, the older Chrome scored an overall 113.25 runs/s on the laptop. The newer one hit 139.90 runs/s, an improvement of 23.5 percent. The desktop results were the inverse of the laptop's.
Where the SunSpider results showed greater gains for the new Chrome on the laptop, the Dromaeo desktop tests showed an improvement of 33.8 percent. Chrome v1.0.154.65 hit 146.63 runs/s while v2.0.172.28 scored 196.29 runs/s.
Also new: Users can set forms to autofill in the Options menu (foreground, right), and selectively remove thumbnails on the New Tab landing page (background, left).
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)Actual results will vary based on your hardware and other program running simultaneously, but it's irrefutable that the new version of Chrome, with its updates to the WebKit rendering engine and Google's V8 JavaScript engine, is significantly faster than its predecessor. I strongly recommend that you upgrade if you've been using Chrome for script-intensive Web apps.
Also new in this version of Chrome is the F11 hot key to toggle full screen mode, which drops all hints of the browser frame except for the scroll bars--but only if they're appearing on that site in standard mode. There's also a new form autofill under Options in the Tools menu, and users can selectively remove thumbnails from the New Tab landing page.
Seth peers into the deep, dark corners of software so that you don't have to. He has yet to suffer a single nightmare about OS/2. You can follow him on Twitter. 
Honestly about how much has chrome crashed or hung-up, can't be more than firefox remember, its not made to improve your hardware-Chrome USER default browser
Whoosh!
--shelly
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/mac-detailed-status
I am not impressed, Google. Get me a secure browser and I may get interested, but so far I will stick with firefox....
I have a feeling that Google is waiting for the next release of the cat. The new 64-bit kernel and better multi-core CPU support makes sense - and is just weeks away from announcement.
but now.. I've really come to like chrome..
and the difference between the two comes down to this magic word.. called.. THE FUTURE
no matter what.. Firefox will never have a billion dollar development team.
But Google could afford to throw 10 billion into chrome and not break a swear.
Chrome has a future-- it is not now-- but Chrome has a future.
I just don't get why these willy-nilly-browser writers.. don't bother to come up with something that is compatible with ActiveX and vbScript.
Sorry. but to be compatable with the worlds most popular browser-- you've got to be able to do the same things. There are no right answers-- other than-- Yes-- Firefox and Chrome need to adopt the full standard desktop browser-- from A to Z.. _COMPATIBLE_ with Internet Explorer.
I don't think that all 3 browsers _NEED_ to have a different type of interface for anything.
Make firefox extensions work _INSIDE_ of Chrome.. instead of Google coming up with their own scheme!!
Cooperation spells success.
Make Microsoft a deal--- Firefox and Chrome will implement ActiveX and vbScript.. and even gosh-- dotnet smartforms--- and Microsoft agrees to give them the information that they need to do it.
I think that it would make for a better future of the web.
I don't think that implementing half of a standard is good enough... So until Firefox or Chrome adopt the FULL SET OF FEATURES IN A MODERN BROWSER - LIKE ACTIVEX AND COM AND VBS-- Until that day, neither Chrome and Firefox cannot be my main browser.
Having Microsoft fully open-source the specifications for ActiveX / COM would sure win a lot of votes also.
Browser should prevent spyware and viruses but sometimes it comes down the user- be fair what browser can't be exploited.
Then we get to actual performance. I guess you could say it's personal preference, but I find my pages loading in the blink of the eye instead of noticeably seeing the page render. I don't know about you, but I actually enjoy my browser working fast like Chrome.
When it all comes down to it, I could *function* just fine with Internet Exploder, but guess what? I like speed.
Also, Chrome = Spyware? What isn't? Turn off the anonymous usage stuff and don't use Web/Search History? I don't know, but I think you should consider buying a tinfoil hat while you're at it.
Turn the damn feature off if you have no tinfoil hats around and stop whining to us like babies.
Also, just lol at your speed thing, maybe you should try the test for yourself.
Here's the latest build at the time of posting: http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/sub-rel-mac/16835/
It gets updated by the hour though.. so check to see if there are updates.
I had problems with the early versions freezing fairly often. I don't remember it happening within the past two or three months though -- and this new version presumably includes the fixes to 300 bugs -- so its performance should be even smoother..
And it does seem faster. Incidentally, I am on a laptop, Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1500 MHz, 239 MHz, 768 MB RAM, Windows XP Professional.
It makes sense that Google is focusing on PCs at the moment. This and Google Docs -- their way of going Head-to-Head with Balmer and Gates. I am aiming to be a C# programmer (for the most part -- and I think C# is better than Java), but I like what Google is doing here. Internet Exploder? A lot of security issues -- and slow. Microsoft's way of putting the breaks on the adoption of standards in CSS, XHTML and Javascript -- to keep web applications from competing too strongly against Windows-based applications, at least until Microsoft catches up. Might work, too, as long as people stick with the browser that their computer is first loaded with.
Hey, if you don't like Chrome try FireFox.
Then again, if you didn't like Chrome when it first came out you gotta expect some kinks early on, particularly with something this complex. Remember the old blue screen of death with the early Windows machines? But Windows has gotten to the point that those are fairly rare now. And how long has Chrome been around. I am not seeing the crashes anymore.
http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/
You can read about them a bit here - in the updates to an old article about early unofficial hacks/ports of the browser:
Download Google Chrome for Mac OS X & Linux
September 5, 2008
http://www.labnol.org/software/download-google-chrome-for-mac-linux/4555/
Please see:
Early Chrome builds for OS X not that promising
Friday, May 15th, 2009
by hackonia
http://www.lockergnome.com/hackonia/2009/05/15/early-chrome-builds-for-os-x-not-that-promising/
Windows people? If you haven't already, now is a good time to try. If you tried early on but had a problem with crashes and freezes, I would suggest trying again.
- by SeattleChase May 22, 2009 11:00 PM PDT
- treego14 wrote on May 22, 2009 10:08 PM PDT , "Incidentally, I see Chrome 2 as being slower than either Opera 10 or IE8 in loading pages. Chrome 2 just hangs for significant time on several pages here that IE8 and Opera 10 have no problem with."
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- by Chocobito May 23, 2009 10:33 AM PDT
- "Opera 10 has an elegant collection of tools built-in that no other browser has at all." IN THE BOX, Firefox with extension become really slow and buggy and in a real navigation experience Opera always is more fast that other browser, only make the test and that javascripts benchmark not say all about browsing.
-
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (84 Comments)This is subjective, doesn't even mention benchmarks, but at least it isn't from someone using a pseudonym -- and he apparently works for NYT:
May 11, 2009, 4:49 pm
Chrome?s Hidden Feature: Blazing Speed
By Paul Boutin
http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/chromes-hidden-feature-blazing-speed/
Here is someone else, this time from ComputerWorld:
Browser wars 2009: Firefox, Chrome, & Internet Explorer
April 13, 2009 - 3:49 P.M.
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
http://blogs.computerworld.com/browser_wars_2009_firefox_chrome_internet_explorer
Here are some objective tests that show the earlier Chrome was far faster than anything else around:
September 2, 2008 4:18 PM PDT
by Stephen Shankland
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10030888-92.html
Are you saying that Chrome 2 is slower than Chrome 1. Dude! The above article is about how it is faster!
If you are trying to claim it is slower, give us some info, such as, the webpages, the time of day, hardware, etc.. Give us something replicable. Or better yet, load the pages and/or run the code under controlled conditions -- like with the tests this article centered on.
Earlier (the post immediately before the one I started responding to) you stated, "Opera 10 has an elegant collection of tools built-in that no other browser has at all." Do you mean the Opera Widgets? The first three "highest rated" are weather reports "touchtheSky", "SimAquarium" and "Artist's Sketchbook." Only 18 widgets to choose from:
http://widgets.opera.com/
FireFox has a great deal more to offer there -- like over 7000:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/search?q=&cat=all
Including Web Developer 1.1.6 -- which includes among many of its different functions the ability to edit the CSS of any webpage you are on and immediately see how that changes the appearance and behavior of the webpage.
Like who are you working for? You've got no credibility.
Addons? Go with FireFox. Speed? Looks like Chrome.