So far...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| rijelkentaurus Sep 03, 2008 2:32 PM EDT |
...so good. Been using it on my work laptop, it's fast and stable. Quite nice. It's not "pretty" but it's quite functional, and it has a lot of screen real estate. I like it. I'm very interested in seeing how it works on Linux. I've seen at least one page explaining how to get it working in Ubuntu, didn't read it. |
| DrDubious Sep 03, 2008 2:43 PM EDT |
Hopefully the "Linux version" of this will be better than the "Linux version" of Picasa... |
| tuxchick Sep 03, 2008 2:54 PM EDT |
No kidding, drDubious. Don't know how they picked me, but I got an email many moons ago asking if I wanted to give some news coverage to Picasa. I said "sure, when you make a native Linux port." They seemed to think the WINE bundle was the same as native. |
| dinotrac Sep 03, 2008 3:15 PM EDT |
You guys might want to read the license carefully, esp. WRT to Google's rights to what you browse. |
| bigg Sep 03, 2008 3:21 PM EDT |
> Hopefully the "Linux version" of this will be better than the "Linux version" of Picasa... Given that it's under a BSD license (at least the parts that Google wrote), _some_ version of it will eventually be available that's better than we got with Picasa. |
| herzeleid Sep 03, 2008 3:24 PM EDT |
> You guys might want to read the license carefully, esp. WRT to Google's rights to what you browse. There is no privacy on the internet. act accordingly. |
| alc Sep 03, 2008 4:37 PM EDT |
More on the license@ http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chro... |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 4:56 PM EDT |
I can't think of any reason for using it, and if they never build a Linux version I can't see that it matters. |
| techiem2 Sep 03, 2008 5:02 PM EDT |
If you read through their explanatory comic it's quite impressive what they are trying to do. http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/ I'm playing with it on my work laptop. |
| jdixon Sep 03, 2008 5:11 PM EDT |
More about the license terms from the Register: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/03/google_chrome_eula_s... |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 5:13 PM EDT |
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=9855&tag=nl.rSINGLE http://blogs.zdnet.com/perlow/?p=9241&tag=nl.rSINGLE http://blogs.zdnet.com/Burnette/?p=646&tag=nl.rSINGLE http://blogs.zdnet.com/Foremski/?p=300&tag=nl.rSINGLE |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 03, 2008 5:15 PM EDT |
Their plan seems impressive. Lots of good tech that will hopefully find it's way into other browsers as well. As for the licensing issue, I think that's a screw-up of Google. Notice how it refers to "the service" while Chrome isn't a service but a product. Looks like a copy/paste error from their other licenses like Knol which contain the same language. |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 5:16 PM EDT |
Quoting:If you read through their explanatory comic it's quite impressive what they are trying to do. What develop a method for marketing based on comics. I still can't see any advantage from using Chrome, and lots of disadvantages. I downloaded it at work, because we need to know how it plays with our web apps. |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 5:23 PM EDT |
Their comic consists of 1 page, and it explains nothing, there ia a next link at the bottom of the page but it takes me to this message The page - http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/next - does not exist. Suggestions: * Check the spelling of the address you typed * If you are still having problems, please contact us And no I'm not going to allow google to run scripts on my browser, nor am I going to unblock them in other ways. I don't trust them. |
| jdixon Sep 03, 2008 5:25 PM EDT |
> As for the licensing issue, I think that's a screw-up of Google. Obviously, and I expect it to be fixed fairly quickly. Google, of all companies, should have known better though. A licensing mistake like this shouldn't happen. The fact that it did is very troublesome. |
| happyfeet Sep 03, 2008 5:38 PM EDT |
FYI: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080903-google-on-chro... |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 03, 2008 5:39 PM EDT |
@jdixon: trueQuoting:I still can't see any advantage from using Chrome, and lots of disadvantages. Are you kidding? Just that they jail every tab in a separate process is just incredibly useful. I just hate it when some script or flash thing crashes and takes down all my 20 tabs I had open in firefox. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 03, 2008 5:43 PM EDT |
@happyfeet: Thanks for that. Best quote from that article:Quoting:It's worth noting that the EULA is largely unenforceable because the source code of Chrome is distributed under an open license. Users could simply download the source code, compile it themselves, and use it without having to agree to Google's EULA. |
| happyfeet Sep 03, 2008 5:46 PM EDT |
@Sander & others: How do I code the hyperlink to get it to display like the others? |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 5:56 PM EDT |
Quoting:Are you kidding? Absolutely not, do I look as if I'm smiling. I value my privacy, and I also value being able to surf without ads. Google make their money from advertising, they are not to be trusted. |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 6:07 PM EDT |
Quoting:I just hate it when some script or flash thing crashes and takes down all my 20 tabs I had open in firefox. I just restart Firefox and all my tabs a re reloaded. |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 6:22 PM EDT |
I'll wait until Mozilla give me separate processes in each tab thank you, and I don't do email in the browser. |
| number6x Sep 03, 2008 6:39 PM EDT |
tracyanne, the comic as a pdf: http://techmech.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/google_chrome_co... or as a google doc http://books.google.com/books?id=8UsqHohwwVYC&printsec=front... surprisingly informative. |
| techiem2 Sep 03, 2008 6:41 PM EDT |
Quoting:Their comic consists of 1 page, and it explains nothing, there ia a next link at the bottom of the page but it takes me to this message You have to allow scripts for the next/previous to work. Just like lots those news sites that use some odd scripting for their article pages. |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 6:51 PM EDT |
Quoting:You have to allow scripts for the next/previous to work. I know. I script and adblock google by default, and also regularly remove their cookies, and actually have no pressing need to allow them, not even to read a comic. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 03, 2008 7:18 PM EDT |
Quoting:@Sander & others: How do I code the hyperlink to get it to display like the others? Just post the URL. The forum will make the hyperlink for you. Quoting:I value my privacy, and I also value being able to surf without ads. Google make their money from advertising, they are not to be trusted. The thing is 100% open source. The native linux and mac version is their #1 priority now. When they arrive you can bet it won;t take long for packages to appear in $DISTRO repository. Get it from there. No backdoors. No EULA. Plus, you can bet that AdBlock wll be among the first 10 plugins ported from Firefox to Chrome. Do yourself a favour and read the comic so you know what it's all about. Here's a mirror that doesn't use JavaScript: http://blogoscoped.com/google-chrome/ Google's aim with Chrome is not advertising. It's breaking IE so that MS can play funny with Google though IE's browser dominance. |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 7:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:Do yourself a favour and read the comic so you know what it's all about. I have. They are all wonderful ideas that implemented in another browser, not controlled by google will be wonderful. I still have no use for Google Chrome, Google live and breath by advertising. Quoting:Plus, you can bet that AdBlock wll be among the first 10 plugins ported from Firefox to Chrome. Unless Google make it available, in the way Mozilla does, it won't be available to most of the people who end up using Chrome, and I can't imagine Google doing something that is inimical to their revenue stream, even if they "do no evil". |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 7:31 PM EDT |
Quoting:When they arrive you can bet it won;t take long for packages to appear in $DISTRO repository. Get it from there. No backdoors. No EULA.[ I don't give a rats, it won't find it's way onto my desktop, and will be removed smartly if it's there by default, I still have no use for Chrome. Many of the ideas presented, will be great in a browser not controlled by Google. |
| jdixon Sep 03, 2008 8:13 PM EDT |
> Their comic consists of 1 page, and it explains nothing... It didn't work for me under Firefox (Windows, no scripts or ads blocked) either, but worked fine under IE. I read the first dozen pages or so. |
| theboomboomcars Sep 03, 2008 8:17 PM EDT |
So if Chrome is supposed to be open source why does it include this in the EULA:
Quoting:10.2 You may not (and you may not permit anyone else to) copy, modify, create a derivative work of, reverse engineer, decompile or otherwise attempt to extract the source code of the Software or any part thereof, unless this is expressly permitted or required by law, or unless you have been specifically told that you may do so by Google, in writing. Though it looks like they have removed the offending section that has got everyone up in arms. |
| jdixon Sep 03, 2008 8:48 PM EDT |
> ...or unless you have been specifically told that you may do so by Google, in writing. Don't their written statements stating that it is open source (I believe the BSD license) constitute being "specifically told that you may do so by Google, in writing"? |
| tracyanne Sep 03, 2008 8:53 PM EDT |
So if Chrome is supposed to be open source why does it have a EULA at all, what's wrong with referring the the BSD license it's supposed to be released under. |
| happyfeet Sep 03, 2008 9:02 PM EDT |
@Sander: Kewl - thx! |
| jdixon Sep 03, 2008 9:50 PM EDT |
> So if Chrome is supposed to be open source why does it have a EULA at all... Well, that's the key question, isn't it? And why wasn't it caught by someone before it got this far? The EULA should never have made it out the door without getting caught by someone. Google has dropped the ball big time on this one. |
| theboomboomcars Sep 03, 2008 10:49 PM EDT |
I guess that is why the picked the BSD license, so they can relicense the binary and throw in a scary EULA like windows users are accustomed to clicking through. It also makes me wonder what proprietary bits they threw into the windows version that is not included in the source code. It has some cool features, and it will be cool when they are implemented into a real open source browser. |
| Scott_Ruecker Sep 04, 2008 12:30 AM EDT |
jdixon and boomboom: That is why they used the BSD license in the first place: so they could copyright what they want to, whenever they want too. They could change their minds and back again, that's the soulless joy of using the BSD license. I am not trying to start a flame war, just saying how I feel. I don't like the BSD license because it lets humans be selfish and petty if they so choose, which of course they almost always do. That aside; I downloaded Chrome and used it for most of the day on the desktop I run XP on and its pretty cool. I get the concept of the separate tabs and I like being able to do all the cool drag to create, recombine, etc. tab fun but I wish I could right click inside the browser and have my bookmarks. Kind of like the menu system in DSL where I can right click anywhere on the desktop and have my menu tree. That would be cool. It would take some getting used to though, I am very very comfortable with my FF setup right now. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 04, 2008 1:53 AM EDT |
Quoting:So if Chrome is supposed to be open source why does it have a EULA at all, what's wrong with referring the the BSD license it's supposed to be released under. Corporation-itis. It's FOSS. Download source. Remove EULA. Remove Google Suggest and other bits you don't like. Build. Run. Which is exactly what's going to be done by Linux packagers all around when the Linux version hits the street. Keep an eye on Debian Experimental. I am. |
| jezuch Sep 04, 2008 2:15 AM EDT |
Quoting:The native linux and mac version is their #1 priority now. From http://www.monroe.nu/archives/138-Not-Holding-Breath-for-Chr... : Quoting:So after poking at the code for a bit, it comes to no great surprise that crossplatform wasn't a big concern from the start. #1 priority, yeah, right. Quoting:They could change their minds and back again, that's the soulless joy of using the BSD license. They *own* the code (I suppose) -- they can relicense it to GPL and to totally proprietary and back again, and be perfectly fine. But the code already released will stay that way. And re the comic: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/02/google_chrome_comic_... :) |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 04, 2008 3:17 AM EDT |
Quoting:So after poking at the code for a bit, it comes to no great surprise that crossplatform wasn't a big concern from the start. Uh. Yeah. So Chrome isn't coming to Linux because it uses Android's Skia (which already runs on Linux since Android is Linux) and uses Chromium Views instead of Qt (Firefox ships with 3 widget back-ends and also uses it's own UI toolkit - Xulrunner). Because eh, you know, like the UI is 90% of the code in a browser. </sarcasm> |
| number6x Sep 04, 2008 11:17 AM EDT |
Hey! I'm writing this using chrome, in Windows xp, running on virtualbox ose, running on Xubuntu 7.10. (windows xp installs easily in virtual box. Much easier than on raw hardware.) |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 04, 2008 11:24 AM EDT |
Quoting:windows xp installs easily in virtual box. Much easier than on raw hardware. That's sad, hilarious and oh so very true at the same time :-) |
| tracyanne Sep 04, 2008 5:07 PM EDT |
Quoting:windows xp installs easily in virtual box. Much easier than on raw hardware. I can vouch for that. |
| jdixon Sep 04, 2008 5:33 PM EDT |
>> (windows xp installs easily in virtual box. Much easier than on raw hardware.) > I can vouch for that. Ditto. Though I'm using VMware Server. I can't get Virtual Box (either OSE or commercial) to boot from the CD on my Slackware box (though it boots fine from an iso image). I couldn't get the commercial version's USB support working either. So I gave up and went back to using VMware, where both CD's and USB work. :( |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!