Also Mark, if it is using up a lot of your CPU, try disabling the malware & phishing site protection. It's probably streaming all that stuff while you're playing, I unchecked it and it uses FAR less ram for me (not that it's really noticeable cause I don't have it open while playing other games but w/e)

I haven't tried with games yet but this more or less fixed the problems I was having with flash so I imagine it has. Thanks.

edit: ye doesn't fuck me over in games either, that phishing filter must be mad intensive

OK so I've used it pretty much non-stop since release, and gave it some time just to get used to it, and here would be a list of problems with it for me anyways:
-Fails to render certain buttons in the right spots, generally the ones that are for like "browse..." or "choose file...". It displays the button inside the bar that shows the directory to the file. For the record, it doesn't even DISPLAY that bar sometimes, like in the GW Uploader.



-It is forced to render the whole site before loading it, unlike FireFox which displays whatever it has rendered (afaik). This is a problem because I've had an adserver fail to send me its ad in Chrome, and as a result the site never loaded for me.

-The Phishing & Malware option uses up a lot of RAM, though I have plenty so this doesn't matter to me, it could really cripple lower end PCs which don't have as much (I have 4GB)

-There's no option to choose PHISHING ONLY or MALWARE ONLY. (to lower your PC's resource usage)

-There's no option to only send crash reports and not stats. It's both or none. This wouldn't be much of a problem for me if it was complete ass to send a crash log manually.

-Sometimes the tabs bug out if you open too many too fast, the words in the tab will all be the same, even if they are actually different processes.

-Sometimes it isn't just a name and all the tabs will become the same process for no reason at all.

-Skin changes when you restart it after the first time, no option to go back to it from fitting whatever you have.

-It's based on some Netscape code and not Mozilla's XPI so stuff like AdBlock isn't possible apparently (wikipedia says so.) (But since it's open source someone will fix this I know it.)

-No option to mask as other browsers, which sucks for banking sites etc.

That's really all the problems I have with it.

-Skin changes when you restart it after the first time, no option to go back to it from fitting whatever you have.

This didn't happen for me

Yeah it sucks, it used to be blue but now it's Aero. Granted I like Aero way more, but wouldn't mind a choice.

ugh just the v8 engine apparently

i read the comic and i thought they were writing their own java virtual machine, but they've made a new javascript virtual machine.

i don't care about this anymore

why the fuck would you care more about them writing a java virtual machine than a javascript virtual machine when javascript powers 99% of web applications?

just a reminder nobody uses java on the web anymore. nobody.


edit!!! (i did an edit nto a dp)

chrome is not as fast as google claim

their benchmark focuses on recursive scripts and not real-world benchmarks.

just a reminder nobody uses java on the web anymore. nobody.


edit!!! (i did an edit nto a dp)

chrome is not as fast as google claim

their benchmark focuses on recursive scripts and not real-world benchmarks.

Regardless of whether or not their benchmark focuses on recursive scripts or real-world benchmarks, I've yet to meet somebody that has actually said it has rendered anything slower than any other browsers, and I've heard TONS of people remark that it is rendering EVERYTHING faster than Firefox for them.  And it certainly is loading up and processing javascript faster than I've ever seen Opera work, so I'd say that your point is pretty moot.

Hey guys try typing this into the address bar:

b l a b l a b l a : %

(without the spaces)

PS: it's supposed to crash chrome according to some people http://evilfingers.com/advisory/google_chrome_poc.php

Thanks for the heads up buddy.

Ya using a javascript test I got like 1142ms load time in IE, ~246ms load time in firefox, roughly the same in Opera, and 44ms in Chrome. hawt.

EDIT:
You don't even have to click that link in the thing Mince posted, if you even barely hover over it it crashes.

Double posting because here's an adblocking solution for you:
http://www.fritscher.ch/blog/2008/09/03/google-chrome-adblock-with-privoxy/

You can also use AdMuncher, it works great too and has got a lot of positive reviews (however, it isn't free.):
http://www.admuncher.com/

Regardless of whether or not their benchmark focuses on recursive scripts or real-world benchmarks, I've yet to meet somebody that has actually said it has rendered anything slower than any other browsers, and I've heard TONS of people remark that it is rendering EVERYTHING faster than Firefox for them.  And it certainly is loading up and processing javascript faster than I've ever seen Opera work, so I'd say that your point is pretty moot.

my point is that the performance gain of chrome is negligible, whereas the loss of features is huge, making chrome a huge waste of time until they actually start making a competitive featureset (which they probably wont because they want chrome to be light)

edit: and firefox will soon include tracemonkey (the trunk already has it) which is faster than chrome already

Yeah, I use Chrome for everything save the few few sites I can't access on it yet, for some reason. I really enjoy using it.

scrolling the text box downwards is mad fun

My only complaint for Chrome is Bookmark Management sucks big time. I fav so many websites , thinking that I can manage them into groups later like in firefox. I regret it  = =

I am back using firefox now because even though it isn't as fast I find it a lot easier to use.