Google to release browser

[SirDice]

It's been up for a few hours and already someone found a flaw.. One that bit Apple and Firefox before...

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1843

[t34b4g5]

The source code is at:
http://code.google.com/chromium/
http://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/src/chrome/

Developer docs:
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/h...etting-started

Build instructions for linux:
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/h...ructions-linux
I haven't had a chance to try building it yet - however:

Note: If you want to use a Chromium-based browser on Linux, you should look elsewhere. Although many Chromium submodules build under Linux and a few unit tests pass, all that runs is a command-line "all tests pass" executable.

Personally, I don't think there is a good browser for linux atm. Konqueror takes first place on design/flexibility/features, Firefox on site compatibility.
As such I'm extremely excited to see this uses webkit, and even if it never becomes useable on linux, I hope konqueror can make good use of the webkit improvements.

I will be watching this like a hawk...


side note: there is a GPL violation in the code (I didn't find it, a co-worker did), the cygwin binaries have a broken link to their sources... tsk tsk

Was sent to me via email by a person i work with.

[MrLinus]

So.. took a while for it to import all my bookmarks and such from Firefox. What I found interesting was that I couldn't visit my usual cigar forum (http://www.cigarpass.com/forums/index.php?act=idx) as it pulled an error. Not sure if it's an Invision error or what (haven't looked yet). I can see the site no problem with Firefox but Chrome doesn't like it.

I'm also finding it loads AO slightly different (there's no user drop down to select things from).

[Und3ertak3r]

Has anyone done any sniffing to see what is sent home to Google? (I'm thinking that since they make their cash off of clicks and hits..)

Have been sniffing most of the day.. both off the router and local .. sofar have not noticed anything out of hand.. yet to do a closer inspection of the logs.. and see what happens in the 2nd and 3rd day of installation.. surely it must do a check for update connection at some time

[MrLinus]

Anyone read the EULA? I saw this snippet on another forum and it did raise some eyebrows:

You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

(bold and underline added to highlight specific area).

This means, particularly those that are mods or admins, you may not want to use Chrome if they can "publish" or "reproduce" your info (technically -- one would hope that ethically they wouldn't).

[MrLinus]

Ok. Found the issue with the Invision Boards. For some reason, the VPN (Proxy detection combo) was interfering with me logging into any Invision Boards (weird)

[rcgreen]

If you take it literally, that license is evil. It has already produced
controversy when applied to online services and apps.

http://computing.msu.edu/msd/documen...line_apps.html

It is an outrageous stretch to apply it to a browser. It will
be interesting to see if enough people complain to make them
back down. I can't use software that perpetually binds
me to terms like that. It's different when you give a forum
or chat room the right to content you post, but Google seems
to be claiming a right to whatever passes through the browser!

[SirDice]

Yeah, I get that same feeling..

It looks like they slapped their Google Video/Photo web service license (it makes sense there) on Chrome.

Not the type of license I expect (or want) on a browser.

[user0182]

i'm using Google Chrome at the moment, and i really like it. the interface is clean and pages seam to load much faster than i've become used to with Firefox and IE.

the licence is a bit of a concern, but hopefully the licence is also in Beta and will be changed for the stable release. does anyone know where someone can make a complaint to Google about the licence, if one wishes to do so?


- user0182

[JPnyc]

I haven't downloaded it yet but the early reports mostly seem to say it's very fast, but bare-bones in terms of features, and a bit of a memory pig. It's JavaScript parser blows away every other browser in terms of speed. That may be why it's a memory pig. Of course it may also not be why.