Comments on: Google Chrome breaks out of beta

The Web giant's recently launched browser is now officially ready for the public. Plus: How to make sure you get the new build.

[corporatejet]

Finally, a Google product that has made it out of Beta!!!

[gsmiller88]

I do believe that was Google's shortest beta ever...

Oh I know why, 'cause it only works on WINDOWS!

[forever4now]

I expect many PC vendors will want to make Chrome the default browser on their machines, even without Google asking, to improve their customer's internet experience.

[tm_anon]

Have you read the comments on this article? People are still having trouble rendering web pages. The only thing people have said they like about the browser is its speed and the fact it doesn't have much to it. But not having much to it means it's missing vital compotents that allow other browser to render web pages. If you want to give people an improved internet experience, preload Flock. It has everything you could want in a browser and it's always loaded quickly for me. Preload FF and you get all the FF users going out to buy that PC before it's even on the shelf. Preload Opera and you sell a couple hundred and wonder why nobody cares and whine about it. Or, better yet, ask the customer what browser he uses and preload that. Sounds like a much better idea to me.

[dancote]

Just tried Chrome. Lots of things to like. But no switch for me until/unless Roboform works with it.

[rafe]

I'm with you on that. Roboform makes all the difference. But I find myself using Chrome more and more regardless.

[JunkSiu]

"Download error. The downloaded file failed verification. Error code = 0x80040204. "

Well, seems I have to wait a little bit longer...

[Jyakotu]

I'm surprised that Google is releasing Chrome from beta this early. Especially since GMail and most of its other products are still in beta. Chrome has speed, yes, but that's because that's all it really is. Just a simple web browser. Well...Opera is a lot of things, including an email client, but it's still fast. But still, Chrome is just TOO barebones for me.

[ferretboy88]

Who will they sell my data to?

It would be nice if we can actually get a Mac version of Chrome...

[zcollvee]

When i first downloaded it, It was fast but crashed alot. since its now out of beta, I will take it for a spin again!

[littledoc88]

dude chrome is 10 time's the browser that ff is period. FF is a memory hog it has so much junk that has to be added to it. Chrome is way better. I can tell you don't know your stuff..

[tm_anon]

FF doesn't have so much junk that has to be added to it. When you add something to FF, that's your choice, it's something you don't get with Chrome. If you download FF 3.1 and do a head to head comparison, FF is faster. FF also renders more web pages, better. FF also has the option (look up this word if you don't know what it means) to download addons that will aid in your daily use of the internet. I'm currently using Flock, no addons needed. I blog, I use web 2.0, I've used every single option that Flock has available to me at least once a day and have wondered why would anybody use another browser if they use even one site that could benefit from Flock? I'm constantly connected to everything and no, it doesn't use any more system resources than I've seen both IE and FF use, plus it's always been more stable for me. Of course, from your wording, you've already been brainwashed by CNETs apparent favoritism of the Google "browser". The reason that's in quotes, it still won't render tons of pages. Out of beta my ass.

[loose_screw]

FF is NOT faster. I use Chrome as my default browser and love it! Don't make it like a FF or IE clone.

[0zSpit]

chrome is probably one of the worst browsers i've ever used. it doesnt remember saved passed words, doesn't ask to save all passwords, the cache needs cleared often to keep it operating, no security thats worth anything, no site advisors work, the updater constantly runs, google analytics spys on everything you do. this is probably why they push it off as being "fast", that's about all it did right. it's just typical google junk-ware.

[DarkHawke]

Got the update. Still no add-ons. Still no themes or customization options. Still really, really fast.

It may be "out of beta," but compared to the tried-and-true (Firefox), it's still not ready for prime-time.

Maybe Lorne Michaels could help.

;)

[loose_screw]

No, that's exactly why I love Chrome. Fast, reliable, simple to use, no add-ons to slow it down. I don't want a FF clone. I never use add-ons in FF, and it's still too slow for me.

[LJ39]

Chrome's okay, I guess.. but, I'll stick with Firefox. Besides, it hasn't failed me yet... so, if it isn't broken, don't fix it.. or in this case, change it!

[firefoxluva95]

Startup for Firefox may be slower but I'd rather wait for a browser that has good benchmarks in performance than start a browser that fires up quickly and does nothing else efficiently. I noticed a problem with chrome, when I close a tab, it sticks as a process. I know each tab is it's own process but really, does it have to stay there after I close it? And then chrome randomly decides to disappear from my screen without warning.

[joevai52]

I have used Chrome a little, and I have noticed that it is somewhat faster than Firefox. I just updated to the new, non-beta version, and tried loading about a dozen pages in both it and Firefox. The pages loaded in about half to 3/4 of the time with Chrome an all the pages except one. From what I have seen and tested (non-scientifically), Chrome is definitely faster than Firefox, so if you just want a simple, fast browser, Chrome is a good alternative, but if you like all the add-ons, and security features of Firefox, Chrome is definitely not a good substitute.

Unless Google is able to maintain the simplicity and speed of Chrome while they try to add extension support and more security features, they will lose the only good reason people currently have to use Chrome.

[tm_anon]

Were you testing this with all addons in use for FF? If you were, it's not a good test. Addons slow the browser down. Try a completely fresh install of FF 3.1 if you didn't do this before, then check the speeds. According to the newest data, FF should render the pages faster for any except pages using Googles alternative to Flash, meaning, unless you're looking at one of those 5 pages, then FF 3.1 will kick Chromes ass.

[joevai52]

First of all, I tested without add-ons, but if anyone is going to use FF, they are probably going to use some add-ons. Just for the heck of it, I tested FF with and without my chosen add-ons (again, not real scientific, just my eyes, my fingers, and a stopwatch), and I found little to no difference in page load times. Personally, I use FF most of the time, but I have been using Chrome more often, and I like it. However, it would be nice to have adblock and noscript. Other than that, I don't miss the add-ons yet.

[joevai52]

Oh, and I did a fresh install to test without add-ons. In my informal testing, Chrome is just faster (a lot). Your results may vary.

[perontopsp]

Chrome Beta = Baby ( we all know that)
Chrome = Teen

Firefox = fully mature/robot adult

You dont pit babies against adults, so stop comparing chrome to firefox

But now you could somewhat compare chrome and firefox since it's out of beta, but we all know firefox = perfection.

Chrome is just going to replace all the Internet Explorer users

Firefox > Chrome > Safari > Internet Explorer > Opera

Chrome isn't here to fight firefox but to live side by it.

[tm_anon]

you give chrome a lot more credit than I would. It's toddler at best, still doesn't render lots of pages, still has trouble crashing. I'd give FF young adult, maybe early 20's before it's realized what it wants to be when it grows up, but with lots of potential to be anything. I go for Flock because it's FF all grown up. It's made it's choice as to what it's going to be, but still has potential for growth.

[Hiphopsdead]

I just bought a new computer ($1299.99-1499.99) range and wanted to fully utilize its speed in all aspects. It came preinstalled with Internet Explorer 7, which i noticed used the most system resources out of all the other browsers i've used. I then tried Firefox, which is faster than IE7. I dabbled around in the much emphasized add-ons. Didn't really see what all the fuss was about, didn't see anything that was a must have. Mostly fluff, and small preferential tweaks. One nag I had with Firefox was popups that IE7 caught, slipped through Firefox's blocker and made it to my screen. Google Chrome is by far the fastest of the three. And it blocks the popups that Firefox missed. It also warns me of entering certain sites that are dangerous to my computer. I'm gonna keep this download, for sure!

[tm_anon]

What version of FF were you using? I've got Flock downloaded on my computer, based off the newest non-beta FF core. Haven't had any pop-ups that get through that would've been caught by IE7. Actually, I have far far fewer popups than with IE7. I've also got complete access to every single web 2.0 site at the same time while being able to post to my blog, upload photos to every web 2.0 site I use, checking my RSS feeds at the same time, checking my email at the same time and looking up videos/photos on any of the major web 2.0 sites at the same time. All this while surfing the web without seeing ads since I've got adblock plus installed. Oh, didn't you hear? Chrome doesn't support adblock plus, so while you may not see popups, you're seeing lots and lots of ads that I'm not seeing. Guess what half your rendering speed is wasted on loading. You want shear speed with nothing else, try SRware Iron. It's built off the same core as Chrome, only, it's using a newer version of that core, it also supports adblock plus, something Chrome won't do. It also doesn't send your data to Google like Chrome does. Just read the other posts and you'll start to see, Chrome isn't anywhere near ready to be out of beta. It's Google brainwashing if you think it is.

[FargoUT]

I like Google Chrome's clean interface, but there are some quirks that are time-consuming/annoying. For whatever reason (and I'm not entirely sure it's Google's doing), if I have multiple tabs open in a browser window, switching tabs does not change the header info found in the Windows taskbar of the browser (it always shows the first tab's info, no matter what tab is the focus).

Popups are handled better with the official release, although I'd like to be able to "trust" websites, which I haven't yet figured out how to do. For websites I visit regularly, it becomes trivially annoying to have to open up popups. While the browser is speedy, these small quirks add up to slowing down my browsing time.

Additionally, some popups are programmed to link with their master pages, so when you close the master page, the popup also closes. This is relatively nice, but Chrome handles each separately, so you have to close both separately. Not a huge deal, but noticeable, nonetheless.

I'll continue to use Chrome and play around with it, but Firefox has mastered a balance between speed and customization which Chrome does not offer. I have a handful of browsers installed on my PC: Firefox (default), Chrome (testing), Flock (for social browsing), and IE (for NetFlix).

Sometimes I wonder why I'm wasting my time with all this stuff, but I am bored at work quite often.

[queticomn]

@ Imalittleteapot Dha FireFox is what you make of it, run a clean copy or as many add-ons as you wish. Same with Opera, Flock, ect...

[mnl1121]

i loved Chrome when it was a beta so being out of beta doesn't changed much. i'll probably use it exclusively when extensions and plug-ins come out though. right now FF is fast enough with the added bonus of ad block plus