Google Chrome 4.0 graduates to beta status
More people will get a chance to try out bookmark synchronization with Monday's release of a beta version of Google Chrome for Windows.
Google introduced the bookmark sync feature for the developer-preview version in August, but now it's also in the better-tested beta version, Chrome 4.0.223.16. However, there's still no Chrome beta for Mac OS X or Linux.
In a video explanation, Google's Anthony LaForge somewhat breathlessly describes how the sync feature can keep bookmarks the same on multiple machines. That's a fair point, but let's be realistic here--bookmark sync in Chrome is more catch-up than paradigm shift. Indeed, with the popular Xmarks extension--in the works for Chrome, people can synchronize bookmarks among multiple browsers, not merely multiple computers.
And Chrome's clever message-based sync technology notwithstanding, Chrome bookmarks would be a lot more magical if they synchronized with the Google bookmarks service, which is linked with iGoogle and the Google Toolbar.
Speaking of extensions, one of the 4.x series' biggest features is the ability to accommodate extensions, but because Google is shifting the extensions interface, the feature isn't enabled in the beta version. Chrome is released in three versions: the roughest, fastest moving developer preview, the more stable beta, and the stable edition for the broadest audience.
The 4.x series has other significant features, too, though it's not clear whether they'll arrive in the beta or stable versions. One is Google's Native Client, which lets JavaScript applications take more direct advantage of a PC processor's horsepower through a careful security mechanism. Another is WebGL, a 3D interface that does the same with hardware-accelerated graphics.
Together, the features have the potential to dramatically improve the power and sophistication of Web-based applications. That's particularly interesting given that Google is building Chrome OS, a browser-based operating system.
The Mac version isn't in beta yet, but it's a priority.
"Our goal for this Friday is to be able to count our Mac P1 M4 release blocker bugs on one hand (we're in the 20s now)," said Chrome programmer Mike Pinkerton in a mailing list announcement on Monday. P1 bugs are priority-one; M4 refers to milestone 4, or version 4.0.
And Google is willing to put more manpower onto the Mac version, he added. "Everyone should have their P1 list practically at zero by the end of this week. If you are not going to be able to reach this, let me (or other triage folk) know ASAP so that we can get you some help.
Chrome edged up to 3.6 percent of browser usage for October, its highest showing so far in Net Applications' statistics since the browser's first public release 14 months ago. That's within striking distance of third-place Safari at 4.2 percent, but still well short of second-place Firefox at 24.1 percent and dominant Internet Explorer at 64.6 percent.
Chrome has helped fan the browser war flames even without becoming dominant, though. In particular, it's helped increase the emphasis on performance such as the speed to load the software, load Web pages, and run Web-based JavaScript applications. Here, more than with bookmark sync, Google's chest-thumping has some merit:
"As with every release, this new beta comes with many speed improvements. In particular, as Web applications we use every day become increasingly dynamic, browsers like Google Chrome need to be able to construct and change elements on web pages as fast as possible," said programmers Idan Avraham and Anton Muhin in a blog post. "We've improved performance scores on Google Chrome by 30 percent since our current stable release, as measured by Mozilla's Dromeao DOM Core Tests, and by 400 percent since our first stable release."
There has been some slowdown with the arrival of Chrome extensions, though, so Google will have some more optimization work to do to keep the browser in fighting trim.
Updated 9:57 p.m. PST with further details on the Mac OS X beta priority.
Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank. 
I mean stop this foolishness over some little 3% market share homebrew niche users.
Macs are so expensive why would they need Chrome I though all Mac users use Safari.
If you going to spend $150o on a laptop just to use Chrome or Firefox, then just get a $300 netbook and use those browsers coded better than they are on Mac.
I understand what you mean. Windows will ALWAYS be the top priority for releasing any application (and this goes for Apple too because without Windows iPod, iTunes, iPhone would be nothing - majority of iPod, iTunes, iPhone users are Windows users).
But think of it from the business stand point. Google is doing a smart thing. If it was my business I wouldn't want to leave out those 7-9% of the people whom I can monetize on as well. At the end of the day, all Google cares about is YOU USE GOOGLE FOR YOUR SEARCH AND HOPE THAT YOU CLICK ON THE SPONSORED LINKS - irrespective of which OS you are using.
Just one last thing - 100% is always better than 91-93% share.
What the hell does an OS have to do with the browser?
this.
I'd use Chrome more, but the lack of extensions support makes me go back to Firefox 3.5.4 for general use.
For now, firefox satisfies my needs. IE tab extension on firefox can accomodate me 99% of the time. I only launch IE when I do any windows updates and software development. Beyond that there is no need for launching IE.
IF you want the version without updater download Google Chrome portable.
Besides if you use privoxy it blocks ads on Google Chrome and because it creates a local proxy you can get improved speeds.
LOL, no, it's not cancer at all. If you have a decent product at a decent price, people will get there via regular product searches. If your livelihood depends on people clicking on pretty/shiny/flashy things on your website, then you need to re-examine your business model.
I couldn't agree more. Get out of my face, make a good product, and I'll buy it. However, reek of desperation and ruin my browsing experience, and I will purposely go to a competitor. As they say, an empty barrel makes the most noise.
Oh yeah? What about all the sites you visit that don't offer a product. I'm sure cnet relies heavily on advertising, considering they don't make any money from you reading their news stories
Gmail, or other heavy JavaScript websites runs circles around FF on Google Chrome.
Not to mention the UI of FF is bulky and ugly. Thats why you guys need addons because the browser by its self is a piece of sht. Not to mention add ons slow FF even more.
I never use addons Windows 7 Gadgets more then make up for the lack of extensions and they are always available.
what PC you got ?? if your FF is slower by 10 seconds , and 1-2 sec's difference per click , then you must be having a 10 years old PC .
on my PC FF opens in less than 5 sec's "only 1st time after i startup my PC " after that it opens in 0.0009 sec .
and i have like 10 add-ons .. that doesnt mean the browser is **** as you think .. it means the browser is so awesome that it can be like an OS ..you add whatever you need to it..
for instance..i love Fire Gestures, why w'd i use back,forward,new tab, close tab...etc buttons when i can do that by moving my mouse only .
how could anyone visit a site like www.6arab.net "where alot of ugly flash ads and java scripts that force you to join a chat room " without ABP and NoScript ?
why not use skip screen so when u want to download 10 files from rapidshare with a free account you dont have to wait 15 minutes after you have downloaded your 1st file..you just let skipscreen get all your downloads started automatically .
now if you think all the add-ons are **** cuz the browser you use doesnt have any good addons this only shows how Hypocrite you are . cuz you'll be making a big deal when chrome gets stupid addons like WooT or the addon that let you change yahoo logo in flickr .
Wrong, I have a new PC 64 bit, 4gb ram.
FF is significantly slower then Google Chrome.
You want Adblock on Google Chrome? Download Privoxy.
The rest of the addons you mentioned are because the browser is **** without them.
You are joking right? Chrome is fast on Gmail? Really? Who would have thought!
And btw even my 5 year old laptop with 512 MB of RAM needs 3 secs to open FF, 10-12 the first time. So stop talking ********, and get a life.
Oh and, btw, don't accuse FF of having addons because Chrome doesn't... Hurts to admit, doesn't it?
"The rest of the addons you mentioned are because the browser is **** without them"
if adding gestures to the browser makes it **** cuz it makes people lives much easier then no wonder you are using the naked chrome where you cant even protect your password with a master password .. stay with chrome and enjoy the 2 addons it got after more than a year of 1st release .. and keep using the green theme "the cows lovers version "
I second that, Chrome simply works much much faster on both of my machines: one netbook and one pumped-up desktop. I do miss the add-ons from FF sometimes, but I still use Chrome for 95% of what I do.
Really I don't see a point in bashing either browser... chill out people! Both are great and excellent options to replace IE. And I'll bet that the majority of people bashing Chrome haven't tried it. Just download it and use it exclusively for a few days. If you can't get used to it and still prefer FF, just uninstall it. That's what I did when it came out, out of curiosity mostly, and I've stuck to it since then.
lol thumbs down
This browser is a Joke!
I don't think Google will ever give us a Adblocker and Noscript.
oh well, there's always Firefox with tons of add-ons for the rest of us who cant live without.
I completely agree with you. Without the Adblocker and Noscript, no matter how good Chrome ever gets, it's of no use to me.
That's the primary reason why I use FF and I will continue to use it even if FF was the slowest browser as long as it has Adblocker and Noscript (not that it would be the slowest but just hypothetically speaking).
The one thing I can say for sure is, Safari is soon be out of the Top 3. Safari... say hello to Opera your soon to be closest friend - the bottom 2.
Apple just doesn't seem to learn from it's past. Microsoft crushed it in OS market when Windows first came out and now Google will do the exact same thing in the browser and soon in the cell phone market. It's like history repeating itself.
FYI - No matter how good Mac or the iPhone is, Windows still has the largest market share and the same will be true (soon) with Android because unlike Apple, Microsoft and Google understand the only way to increase market share (which translates to increased revenue) is by licensing your product to multiple vendors.
Adblocker is cancer that is hurting website owners. Not to mention there is an adblocker for Google Chrome its called prvioxy, how could be such an ignoramus.
thats actually what they are doing.. stealing webKit and alot of ideas from Firefox ..and taking credit for other people work .after adding so many craps to it..like services that you cant even get rid of by installing chrome.. so after installing chrome ads w'll be forwarded even to your bra :D
And that wouldn't happen at all if you blocked adds in the first place.
Unless there is a good reason to do so (bug fix? Performance increase?) leave Chrome alone.
P.S. Check out Opera 10.10 beta and its new Unite feature.
yeah keep dreaming.
it took them a year to add support for rss feeds .. and still no master password to protect your saved passwords.
so maybe in the next 10 years and with the release of Chrome155.44.0.104 you'll get your adblocker
Seems like Chrome has a niche, if all you care about is speed of Google mail and other Google pages, go for it. It just isn't a good choice for anything else. As for Google's GL extensions and all of that, its poor engineering for the purpose of making their Web apps run faster. Would be better if they did the real engineering work to make their web apps better rather than making back doors.
- by ibelieve01 November 4, 2009 2:44 PM PST
- So let's see, in the past year, Opera has gone up less than half a version number, from 9.6 to 10, and in that tiny fraction, gave us a better spell check, visual tabs, customizable speed dial, Opera Turbo, Opera and Opera Unite. In the pas year, Google has gone up THREE version numbers, from 1 to 4, and all they have to show for it are synchronized bookmarks?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by November 7, 2009 5:24 AM PST
- Cannot agree more! I just wonder why those creative fellows at Google can't stop copying features from Opera! One can easily foresee Chrome 5.0 with Visual Tabs and Chrome 6 with Chrome Turbo! lol
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (64 Comments)