Advanced

Google Chrome 4.0 Beta for Linux Arrives

Posted by hanuca on · 13 comments
Softpedia; By Marius Nestor 		Mail this story
Print this story

Just in time for holidays, the wonderful developers at Google announced a few minutes ago that the Chrome browser for Linux is finally in a beta state and has been added on the official Chrome website for download!

Google Chrome 4.0.249.30 Beta comes with binary packages for Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora and openSUSE operating systems. Both 32-bit and 64-bit architectures are supported at this time, as well as a preinstalled repository (at least on the Ubuntu platform) for easy updates.

Just like the popular Windows version, Google Chrome Beta for Linux is extremely fast, stable, extensible and last but not least, very secure! Did we forgot to mention that it has support for HTML5? Yes, that's right... it has! Moreover, the new Google Chrome will work very well on both GNOME and KDE desktop environments.

You can grab the new beta version of Google Chrome for the aforementioned Linux systems by accessing the download page at the end of the article or by going to its official website. Whichever method you choose, please remember that you need to uninstall any existing package of the Google Chrome web browser before installing this new version.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Story Type: Announcements; Groups: Linux

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (13)

herzeleid ·
So, what have I been running here all this time? The version number I see on my browser is "Google Chrome 4.0.249.30" - I first installed it some weeks ago and it has been updated with apt-get several times since then.

Perhaps they just meant it's easier to find and download now?
tracyanne ·
The question I have, is how come it's taking so d@mn long to build a Linux version?

On the other hand I don't think I really care, I'm not particularly interested in even trying it.
herzeleid ·
LOL @ TA - the linux version was apparently a well kept secret until yesterday. I love it, much much faster than firefox. I'm using it as my default browser now.

The mac users have also been complaining but now they have a beta version of Chrome too

More choice is a good thing IMHO.
gus3 ·
"Choice," as in...

"Which insecure platform shall I use for running a browser put out by a company that's more evil by the day? I know, I'll use the platform that was deranged by design!"

No, thanks.

/cynic still on
number6x ·
How about plugins like adblock for chrome?
helios ·
How about plugins like adblock for chrome?

Yep, There are about 8 extensions I now have on my "cannot function without" list. Any bare browser is fast...the test is if and when they develop decent plugins for it. True, some extensions for Firefox can completely hose it but the ones I use (and have collected for you) bring real functionality to my browser. I am anxious to see what addons Chrome incorporates to make it more than a stripped down browser...

For your consideration and convenience: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collection/slam

h
herzeleid ·
@gus - wow that's really melodramatic.

@helios - chrome is hardly a bare browser. It's fully functional, and on flash/javascript heavy sites it's a lot faster than ff. For instance, facebook really bogs down under ff but flies under chrome - and chrome is not doing a "stripped down" version of facebook, it's doing the same version that ff is - and doing it a lot faster.

The biggest contrast is in using multiple tabs. If I have 8 tabs open in ff, and one of them is waiting on a remote server response, the whole ff browser is hung, completely unresponsive. With chrome, the other 7 tabs are fully responsive. The difference is night and day.
azerthoth ·
herz but it has one epic fail, lacks multiple home page (that I can find). I open FF and it starts with my 5 tabs, try to set it up in chrome and it has no clue what to do. This is a must for me.

*edit* never mind, I'm an unobservant moron. */edit*
gus3 ·
@herz:

They tossed out their "don't be evil" and "we refuse to censor" taglines when it suited them (actually their board of directors, but it's the stockholders' fault for electing them). They've squandered a lot of goodwill and trust.

Then they decide to build their own browser, and to give platform priority to the most insecure multi-user OS out there. They'd call it "the biggest market share," but these two are not in any way congruent, as this week's Gnome Look exploit demonstrates.

No amount of speed, convenience, whatever, is worth any risks from a company with an increasingly poor record of decisions.
jdixon ·
> No amount of speed, convenience, whatever, is worth any risks from a company with an increasingly poor record of decisions.

True. But we're not talking about Novell here.

However, I agree that Google has made a number of question decision over the past few years.
gus3 ·
Quoting:True. But we're not talking about Novell here.
Different wolf-pack, but wolves nonetheless.
herzeleid ·
@gus - true, google may have lost some of the sheen from that halo, but if I have to choose between google and microsoft, there's no contest - it's google by a mile. In a war (and make no mistake, microsoft is at war against linux) we sometimes can only choose the lesser evil.
caitlyn ·
I agree with herzeleid. OTOH, I still use multiple search engines (not including Bing) because I can't trust Google. I also think there are other fast, excellent browsers out there that aren't getting much press because they are not made by Google. Think Arora or Kazehakase.

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post