chrome-d: disappointing
September 2, 2008the net is abuzz with the latest google move: google chrome. people are trying to figure out why ? what ? how ?
i type this post from chrome, and i see: a combo of ie8 and firefox3. to go. with bits of safari and opera all thrown in. even this review is just thrown together from initial impressions.
disclaimer: i firmly believe that firefox 3 is the best browser around.
back to the show.
we have speed dial. we have the ‘omnibar’. we have privacy. we have cool animations when you move tabs out of windows, for urls on pages, previews, search etc. we have download managers. we have auto-bookmarking. we have combined features from 3 different browsers which attempt to integrate together. and they do, somewhat decently.
however, i don’t like the philosophy.
- tabs are actually seperate windows all grouped together. so chrome now has 5 entries in my windows task manager:
1 for each site i openi don’t know what they are all for. does this mean that chrome has better memory management? for the 0.2 release, chrome is currently using 71 mb, when i have 2 tabs open. - there is a ‘chrome’ task manager with detailed stats. this looks neat and informative - still not relating to my windows task manager though. the download manager looks neat too, with details and a nice hour clock progress bar.
- there’s no google integration. i was hoping to see a sign-in screen for google. chrome is google, therefore the interface should magically interface with google. 2 tiny mentions of google: statistics reporting, and gears. i don’t see options login to my bookmarks, reader, gmail. the point ? launching a ‘google’ browser - it should have been launched with complete google integration. wasn’t that the point of this browser ? i would have switched. or at least been more enthusiastic.
- i now have a GoogleUpdate.exe sitting in the systray. why ?
- i can’t set the web-page speed dial. it depends on my browsing history. thats a little silly. what if i watch a lot of pr0n ?
- google search via omnibar, no seperate area. this takes a lot of getting used to.
- i’m not checking for compatibility. i read that ajax (is supposedly better implemented) and flash are fine. i’m assuming most things will be broken while google or others run around setting up functionalities.
Hmmm... This is the first negative review I have read
Alok | September 6, 2008Hmmm… This is the first negative review I have read (Other than my personal dissatisfaction that there is no Chrome for Gnu-Linux). I do agree that a browser is the last think internet needs today. There are better avenues to invest Google’s efforts and money.
But considering the way Google has been doing things I think they will eventually take over the internet anyways (even without Chrome).
Interesting article over at Lifehacker about FF vs Chrome. I think
Ubertechnophile | September 8, 2008Interesting article over at Lifehacker about FF vs Chrome.
I think Chrome is more of bringing Firefox to the masses, fine tuning it though.
@ Satish - I’ll second that, FF was, is and hopefully, will always be the best browser around. I’m rooted to FF.
Chrome is too raw right now..
@Alok - Chrome runs flawlessly from within fine. I know you’d have tried already, but, just in case..