Chrome

All of today’s reading and posting will be done via Google’s new Chrome browser.

At first glance, it appears a bit sluggish (okay, a lot sluggish), but I mostly want to verify that my sites display and function correctly. In the early going, all appears fine.

UPDATE: Hmmm. It appears that each tab you open is actually a separate process with its own discrete resources. Makes each tab its own little island, but memory usage grows quickly that way. Ouch.

UPDATE 2: End of experiment. Performance was a 1 out of 10. Until the first production release is out, I will not try Chrome again other than to check my site design for compatibility.

Comments

  1. Careful of that EULA that you clicked through, and be SURE you know exactly what Google legaly refers to as a “Service”. For example, their spell check is almost certianly considered a “Service”.

    11. Content license from you
    11.1 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.

  2. KTLA: I actually just came that EULA bit after I concluded my lunch time test.

    I guess Google can legally use my “Performance was a 1 out of 10” if they want to.

  3. Don’t be evil. For some odd values of evil, I guess. That Eula is more draconian than average, and that’s not exactly a low bar of achievement.

    However, my experience using Chrome is a bit different from our peerless leader. I like the idea of separate processes as that will improve security, and avoid the problem of huge memory hogging if you leave the browser running all the time, as I usually do. Close a tab, and all that memory is freed.

    I didn’t find any noticeable lag in performance – chrome seemed rather snappy, and its performance on javascript heavy sites like backpack is really impressive. I also like the layout, the minimalist interface, and the new tab page. The url box works as advertised. For example, I type “mu” and murdoc online is right there. Cool.

    I’d give it a 6 out of ten, and that’s pretty good for a steaming fresh beta.

  4. buckethead: I agree that the separate processes have some definite advantages. However, I had a Firefox 2 with about a dozen tabs that had been open for about three or four hours (had accumulated a lot of memory) but two new Chromes with a total of about 8 or 10 tabs (so 8 or 10 processes) that had been open for less than ten minutes were consuming about three times as much memory and had slowed my machine to a crawl. I actually had a hell of a time copying and pasting text.

    It was really, really, awful. Unusable for me to blog at lunch like I normally do.

    I had read that the new javascript thingy was supposed to be the bomb, but I couldn’t really tell. Didn’t do anything terribly strenuous in that regard.

    Yes, it’s early in the cycle. I’m not swearing off of it, just not going to play with it until things get a little more settled.

Comments are closed