By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Google Chrome already has a 3% market share

NJ5 on 05 September 2008
reverie said:
Google Chrome has very few bugs considering it's a beta. I don't think it's much more buggy then the other browsers. The security issues are not bugs however, they are rooted in Google's design decisions.

Of course they're bugs. There's already a stack overflow exploit, which is most definitely a bug. They also got some Safari bugs due to copying old code I suppose.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 05 September 2008
NJ5 said:
SamuelRSmith said:

 

I was actually aiming the comment at the "prime time" remark, as it isn't meant to be for the primetime. I do feel that Google shouldn't have released the browser in its current state, however, it is just a BETA, and that's a perfectly valid excuse. The problem is, Google has got to such a size, that a on-the-quiet BETA release wasn't really possible (linking to it on their front page didn't help, either).

Gmail has been out of BETA for quite some time, now. But, yeah, it was in BETA for ages. I just think they use it as a backup "Yeah, your computer's fuxx0red, but we aren't responsible because it's BETA".

Nah, Gmail is still in Beta! It's in the logo. Google just has the habit of launching beta products as if they were ready for the mainstream.

I agree with your last sentence.

 

 

 Well, what do you know? They've either shrunk the size of the BETA text so that I never noticed, or I'm in need of some thicker lenses.



SamuelRSmith on 05 September 2008
NJ5 said:
reverie said:
Google Chrome has very few bugs considering it's a beta. I don't think it's much more buggy then the other browsers. The security issues are not bugs however, they are rooted in Google's design decisions.

Of course they're bugs. There's already a stack overflow exploit, which is most definitely a bug. They also got some Safari bugs due to copying old code I suppose.

 

 

 Yeah, they both use webkit, don't they? What confuses me is why Chrome uses an old version of webkit. The latest version of Safari (not released yet) uses the latest version, and that scores 100 on the Acid3, so why didn't Chrome use it?

Methinks this may have been in development for quite some time, and when the new webkit finally rolled around, it was too late to implement it.



reverie on 05 September 2008

Konqueror is the grand daddy of Safari and Chrome. It is a Linux browser that is built on the KHTML engine. Apple took the KHTML engine and branched it out into their own WebKit engine (both engines are open source).

Now WebKit has become the rendering engine of choice for not just Apple, but also Google and companies like Nokia (S60) and Adobe (Air). It is arguably already more important on the web than Firefox' Gecko engine, even though the market shares don't show it yet. This for me is the biggest news out of Chrome release: It's a kick in the butt for Firefox.



Hardcore gaming is a bubble economy blown up by Microsoft's $7 $6 billion losses.

reverie on 05 September 2008

There are some bugs, but as you noted, these are the same bugs that were released in Safari 3.0, which was not a beta, so those bugs don't make Chrome look more like a beta-release.

The real security issue with Chrome is that it gives Google even more information about you. And that is by design.



Hardcore gaming is a bubble economy blown up by Microsoft's $7 $6 billion losses.

Around the Network
O-D-C on 05 September 2008

but I like IE7...



NJ5 on 05 September 2008
SamuelRSmith said:
NJ5 said:
reverie said:
Google Chrome has very few bugs considering it's a beta. I don't think it's much more buggy then the other browsers. The security issues are not bugs however, they are rooted in Google's design decisions.

Of course they're bugs. There's already a stack overflow exploit, which is most definitely a bug. They also got some Safari bugs due to copying old code I suppose.

 

 

 Yeah, they both use webkit, don't they? What confuses me is why Chrome uses an old version of webkit. The latest version of Safari (not released yet) uses the latest version, and that scores 100 on the Acid3, so why didn't Chrome use it?

Methinks this may have been in development for quite some time, and when the new webkit finally rolled around, it was too late to implement it.

I don't know much about WebKit, but I guess you're right.

I'm expecting Google to release a new version of Chrome quite soon. Maybe in a month or two. The browser's face is already quite polished, it just needs more features and improved stability.

Most importantly, they need stringent security audits and to use the latest libraries if they want to be taken seriously as a secure browser. First impressions count a lot.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

SamuelRSmith on 05 September 2008
O-D-C said:
but I like IE7...

 

 Just try OPERA, Firefox, or Chrome, and say that again.



perpride on 05 September 2008
SamuelRSmith said:
perpride said:
Does anybody other than me think Intenet Explorer sucks ass?

 

 Did you even read the thread?

 

No harm in tallying up supporters :)



thetonestarr on 05 September 2008

It has such high marketshare because so many people are all, "OMG lets check it out."

It's not like that 3% is permanent users... yet.



 SW-5120-1900-6153