Hmm, so it’s based off the WebKit source (just like Safari) and has a “Private Browsing” mode (just like Safari has had for the past year and a bit)—I’m not really seeing the point nor the need for another browser really.

I’m not really seeing the point nor the need for another browser really.

Seems to be the consensus. I’m underwhelmed myself.

Additionally, it has a Javascript “virtual machine” which, like other virtual machines, seems cumbersome.

I agree: Javascript being interpreted at the browser already, why bother with doing a further abstraction? I guess it may help with security or something…

Interesting that they went with WebKit and not Mozilla as the foundation though. Must be some reason for that I suppose.

NEATO!

So, how many browsers does everyone have on their systems? And which do you use? Personally, I have Firefox 3.x and use that as my primary, Safari, and IE 7 (for the pesky .NET websites that need it).

I have FireFox, IE6 and Opera, which I use in that order.

Looking at the comic book overview it certainly looks interesting. We’ll get to play with it tomorrow, yahoo!

IE for work and FF for personal. That’s it. I haven’t tried Opera, but I really don’t see a need for 3 browsers.

FF3 for browsing, Safari for times when I’m in a hurry (it faster, but lacks some features), IE7 for PC Pitstop and certain other sites.

I’m sure the Google Browser will provide a smoother interface for things like Blogger and gmail.

Playing with the Chrome beta now: it’s fast, it has resizable text fields, from a brief test it looks good.

Google Apps seem to work well, as you’d expect.

The interface is a little different and it’s not immediately apparent what the benefit of that is. The text in the address bar is HUGE, and the window controls etc. are all Vistay, even on XP.

It’s probably obvious, but clearly Google didn’t want to have to hope and pray that IE would continue to be a host for Google’s apps; plus Android needs a good web browser and WebKit scales much better in that way.

A browser is a browser is a browser though. Be interesting to see how the OS X and Linux versions measure up.

It’s a small thing, but creating “Application Shortcuts” for web sites / apps is pretty cool: I now have a nice little icon on my desktop titled “Fat Jerry” and opening it gives a nice, very clean display of our site.

Honestly, if it doesn’t come with Pimpzilla (TM), or if I can’t download Pimpzilla (TM) and apply it, I don’t want it.

Sadly, I’m completely serious.

Didn’t you read the comic book? Sheesh. That’s why they called it “Chrome” - no pimping!!

I may be missing it, but there’s no easily obvious way to change the skin (a la Pimpzilla): this may be a design decision (Enterprise Hate Themes!) Maybe it’ll appear later.

I’m not too happy with the icon (a blob with some colors) or the name (Chrome? What the heck does that have to do with web browsing—at least Netscape Navigator, IE, and Safari have some mental resonance--true, FireFox also doesn’t have a name that gives a clue as to what it does either, and I loves me some FireFox.)

I agree about the icon dimmer. It looks like a multicolor Pokeball.

The problem I have with Google’s browser is that their entire business model is built on selling targeted advertising. So now in addition to tracking our search activity they want to track our browsing activity and sell the information to their clients.  I will use this browser on a very limited basis (Will Sony please put Safari, Firefox, Opera or Chrome on the PS3 so it has a decent search engine. Then I will have one and only one truly integrated entertainment\information device at home and be happy.)

I do not need ads for cakefart purveyors popping up all over the place!

Microsoft Internet Explorer, Apple Safari and Google Chrome all have embedded design elements to serve larger corporate agendas. Mozilla and Opera produce Firefox and Opera browser software as their end game.

<3 Firefox