In Google Chrome, go to about:internets :)
Sep 4 2008
Yesterday, I used Google Chrome for a whole day, and got on with it suprisingly well after my opinions yesterday morning. I do agree with Chris though, there are some plug-ins I miss from Firefox:
- Permatabs
- Faviconize Tab (thx to Newboy for those suggestions!)
- Flashblock
- Adblock plus
- Twitterfox
- Firebug
- IETab (maybe we now need FFTab too??)
I also discovered yesterday Google’s attempt at mimicking Firebug. The Javascript console suprised me, and isn’t just a Javascript console, it’s almost Firebug, but it does lack some features I really liked in Firebug, and the most noticeable for me as I use it the most is the missing “Inspect” button. I’m not so sure on the HTML layout/font either at the moment, it’s a bit confusing, but then so was Firebug - but that had the “Inspect” button. The Styles/Metrics/Properties dropdowns aren’t too bad, but aren’t editable. I’m hoping that it’s just an incomplete feature for now, and these kind of things will be sorted. I hope so anyway.
As you can see, a few things are still getting to me, but it’s all been negative in my review so far, so here’s what I like about it:
- It’s without a doubt the most compact and well-laid out non-confusing browser I’ve used
- Options are simple (although missing an option to prompt before closing the whole browser) and self-explanatory
- The password saving feature is pretty smart, but distinctly lacking IMPERATIVE security features such as master passwords. I’d double take if the passwords weren’t stored in plain text either… BIG security flaw in my eyes (although I believe Firefox stores them in plain text too…)
- I sort of like the integrated Google search in the address bar… not sure yet…
- It’s really really quick!!! I am taken aback as to how good the speed is, processing Javascript and just generally loading web pages. I’m not sure if that’s down to Webkit (Safari’s rendering engine), the multi-processedness, or just awesome programming on Google’s behalf. Whichever way, I like it.
- Tabs at the top took a while to get used to - and I had to move Winamp to the other screen, but it’s good - it maximises your browser space, and the lack of Status bar also helps that.
- General look and feel - although different, is really nice.
- It convinced me to move to using GMail properly with my main e-mail account, and even though the Labels concept really put me off, it makes sense and I figured out how it works.
So, generally I really like this browser, and I’ll carrying on using it, but there’s still work to do. Features I’d like to see:
- Plug-ins - Definately. Some things just can’t be replaced.
- A prompt to question wether the user wants to close the browser if more than one tab is open (but make it opt-in perhaps)
- If there is no decent debugger plug-ins, I’d like to see the Javascript Console mimick Firebug better
- A “slow throughput” mode. Chris told us this morning about his slow speeds on his mobile internet connection. We put this down to the multi-process format, and obviously needing more throughput, making Google Chrome actually slower than other browsers.
- A STOP button!! Something I’m guessing has been phased out of browsers, but I still use it a lot - I want it back!
Sep 3 2008
Well, yesterday evening, Google released their latest (and possibly greatest) invention, Google Chrome. It’s been the buzz this morning in the office on the tech floor. Mixed feelings all around really - Kelvin likes it, Chris thinks it lacks the pluggable power of Firefox (probably due to it being so young!), Jon wonders why his is using Live Search, Sii thinks it’s really really really quick, and I’m just not sure yet.
I’ve become quite set in my ways with Firefox, I’ve got it running quickly by disabling pretty much all flash (including YouTube). I’ve got an ad blocker as well, so that helps a little. I have to say, the thing I do like in Google Chrome is the speedy Javascript execution. I’m not sure how it works, but from what I understand it actually parses Javascript into machine code (i.e. compiled code that has been put together to work on the processor you are using). It opens a whole new window (and I’ve thought of compiled Javascript before, and it seemed to be a good idea to me… interpreted languages just aren’t as quick). Think of it like this:
Current JS Execution:
Browser parses Javascript, and goes back and forth between the JS, interpreting it, which can be slow. The parser interacts with the script, and does the calculations by processing the information. It’s constantly going back and forth. It’s just running a clean tidy binary that just parses a text file that could be very VERY messy and unoptimised.
Google Chrome’s Idea:
On page load, browser parses Javascript and compiles it into compiled binary code. The code can interact directly with the CPU, and magic is done, there is no on-the-fly parsing and it just works, and quickly.
It’s a really good idea, and I approve of it. Even though I thought of it about a year ago… hehe.
I’m an advocate of Google stuff, and I’m not too worried about them invading my privacy etc., like some people… and this browser has an opt-in button to send information about how you use the browser to Google. I’m all for this sort of thing, as it makes me feel like I’m doing my bit to make the browser better. They should have microphones so you can hear the swearing and cursing at the browser when it messes up.
One final thing to note though is that it actually uses Webkit, the rendering engine of Safari, as opposed to Gecko, Mozilla’s prized rendering engine. I’m not sure what to make of it yet, I never liked Safari, but so far things are rendering well in Google Chrome. I’ll try and use it today (despite using Firefox right now) and see how I get on with it…
Oh, and for those of you who have seen this, take a look at this for a bit of a laugh.
Aug 22 2008
I posted the other day that I couldn’t get Bugzilla working due to missing Perl modules*. Well last night I badgered 1and1.co.uk to install the modules, but I got a vauge no. I carefully read various pages, and got it installed… here’s how:
Read these instructions** first. If the CPAN shell complains about not having permissions to modify /root/.cpan, read this. Instead of putting the whole Apache httpd.conf <Directory> section (you probably dont have access to an httpd.conf…), you can put the AddHandler/Options/DirectoryIndex lines in a .htaccess file in the Bugzilla directory. Just to note that I couldn’t add the AllowOverride option in for some reason - it threw a 500 error…
Another thing that confused me was this:
perl -pi -e 's@use strict\;@use strict\; use lib \"/home/foo/perl/lib\"\;@' *cgi *pl Bug.pm processmail syncshadowdb
Perhaps the document is out of date, but none of those files existed. I changed Bugzilla.pm (note: you must use the FULL path to your local Perl installation, not just ~/myperl/lib!!!), and hey presto, it works! I now have a nice neat and tidy Bugzilla installation.
* It turns out that Bugzilla 3.2 (in release candidate stage) has a script to do all this for you - doh!
** Updated documentation link to the correct version - doh!
Aug 21 2008
I signed up to Fire Eagle a couple of weeks ago, but have not used it since. I’m really not sure wether I should or not. It’s a cool idea being able to put on my blog where I am in the world, but on the other hand, it’s a bit of a risk… I might wait out the weaning period for it and see what the general public reaction is.
Bit of a funny name as well…
I was planning to write a WP plugin as the ones I’ve found so far have been rubbish, but I might wait it out until I actually start using it (if at all…)
