Google Chrome

jdickerson said:
Also, I don't understand why people keep saying it is fast.
Click to expand...

Nor me. I'd like to know what sites people are visiting where they are seeing an appreciable speed increase. Most sites I visit load virtually instantly, if not instantly in FF2 already, so it's rather hard to improve on that. And FF doesn't feel the need to put up a white screen every time you navigate to a new page which I find rather off putting.
 
It's definitely faster for me in loading pages, maybe due to the pre-cache feature though I would've expected similar speeds with the same feature in Firefox.

One thing I'd like to see is another bookmarks menu as I've only seen the bookmarks taskbar and I'd like to get rid of it rather than have to "drag and drop" from "Other bookmarks" to make a list.
 
dirtydog said:
What sites, and how does the precache feature (?) differ from the caches that other browsers use?
Click to expand...

So far it seems to be pages with a few Flash advert banners like Planet Rock or Digital Spy, so I'm not sure if it's just the Flash player or not.

Then again some benchmarks on the browser is saying it's 8x faster than Firefox at processing JavaScript so maybe it's that instead?

http://code.google.com/apis/v8/run.html

I don't know how (if at all) pre-cache on Chrome is any different on other browsers.
 
It seems to have blocked peoples signatures on here and I don't have any adverts on gmail. It seems to have semi-adblocker.

I like the term "stats for nerds" in the task manager.

EDIT - Adverts are now on gmail :(. Im not using this until they have greasemonkey and adblocker
 
Last edited:
dirtydog said:
It is a killer app which makes using the web significantly more pleasant than without it. It isn't simply the fact it stops pages being cluttered up with crap, some pages are so ad heavy that they take longer to download or to render, or indeed make the page perform sluggishly even once it has rendered.
Click to expand...
You can effectively render ABP unnecessary with a decent hosts file though.

Still, I use a combination of the two.
 
For people who are having fun killing random processes and seeing what happens, you have to be careful because one of the chrome processes controls the gui, kill that one and you will lose everything, obviously. This one doesn't seem to be involved in any rendering though so shouldn't be crashed by a rogue page.
 
AIUI, Chrome does DNS precaching which AFAIK no other browser does - it shouldn't make much difference really, unless your DNS servers are slow at responding and the page you're going to doesn't already have a record cached within the OS.

afraser2k said:
Then again some benchmarks on the browser is saying it's 8x faster than Firefox at processing JavaScript so maybe it's that instead?
Click to expand...

There's a lot of variation there - the ones I ran before (Sunspider and dromaeo) showed Chrome being somewhere between 2x faster and 2x slower.
That said, Fx2 is a good chunk slower than Fx3.

http://code.google.com/apis/v8/run.html

I get weird results from that one - it has Fx3.1 slower than Fx3 then a massive gap between them and Chrome, when everything else has Firefox the other way round, and the gap much smaller.
 
tolien said:
AIUI, Chrome does DNS precaching which AFAIK no other browser does - it shouldn't make much difference really, unless your DNS servers are slow at responding and the page you're going to doesn't already have a record cached within the OS.
Click to expand...

Doesn't Windows do its own DNS caching? Making browsing DNS caching entirely redundant I'd have thought.
 
Haircut said:
Yeah, I've been having another play and it seems that if you navigate to the page through your favourites or enter a site directly it does it in a new process.
When I did it before I clicked on a loan of stuff in my links bar and it opened all of them in new processes.

If you click on a link from a previous tab it opens the new tab in the same process as the originating link.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's what I'm seeing, unless the link is to another site (domain) in which case that is opened in another process.
 
You want a faster site? Try these forums :) Every time I load a new page in firefox it loads the text fairly quickly, but then it loads all of the images again and keeps on pushing down the text as it loads (an effect I REALLY don't like that they've seemed to introduce in FF3). With Chrome it loads the whole page very quickly, even when I open a thread in a new tab (something I do quite frequently).

I do like the whole idea of each tab and plugin using a separate process, it does mean that if/when they introduce plugins they will probably use the same idea and won't grind the whole browser to a halt.

One thing I did just notice: the dictionary highlighting is working, but the right-click suggestions aren't there :) Still, features like that will come eventually, I just hope that they don't add them at the expense of speed. The speed of Chrome begs the question why hasn't this been done before...
 
dirtydog said:
Doesn't Windows do its own DNS caching? Making browsing DNS caching entirely redundant I'd have thought.
Click to expand...
Pre-caching, it looks at the domain names in the links and requests a lookup before you click on them so you don't have to wait for the name to resolve before connecting to the server.
 
Installed it on my work machine and its not working too well with the bluecoat proxy. Cannot display content from most https sites (just get a blank page) and its struggling with CSS on other sites.
 
Yeggstry said:
You want a faster site? Try these forums :) Every time I load a new page in firefox it loads the text fairly quickly, but then it loads all of the images again
Click to expand...

It shouldn't do that :confused:

These forums load in a flash for me in FF2.

Am I the only one who dislikes the white page you get when navigating to a new page in Chrome?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom