woow, thats great i just

arthur — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:22:16 +0000

woow, thats great i just listen about it,,, i never have been seen it.. did u check that, hows it working, and is it providing tool bar services.??

We should thanks to Google

John Williams — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 07:58:40 +0000

We should thanks to Google team that they releases a new searching web browser, were as Google is more than enough for me to search my data related to studies and learning but its good to see Google creativity. It is super and very easy to follow. I have bookmarked you and will be back regularly. Thank you

Term Papers

after reading the

fantastvik — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 14:25:27 +0000

after reading the post
http://www.webmaster-forums.net/webmasters-corner/big-problems-google-ch...
iam too scared to use it now.
interesting fact is we use
gmail for mails,
google for search,
analytics for SEO,
i hope the free information is not going to cost too much to us in the future...
i have shifted back to chrome

I, for one, find Google

decibel.places — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:21:14 +0000

I, for one, find Google stand-offish

Have you ever tried contacting customer support? "We won't respond to your inquiry but we will consider it to improve our products" (my paraphrase)

Couple of years ago I developed a link-back widget that did not violate a careful reading of AdSense TOS: It was triggered by the page unloading (if the mouse was hovering over the AdSense ad) - not by the click on the ad (a few milliseconds difference, but significant in operation)

The JavaScript code is separate from the Google code.
The Google JavaScript is not modified in any way.
Magic Return launches when the page unloads -
not when the ad is clicked.
It's not activated by the Google code.

The "direct link from an Ad to an Advertiser Page" is not affected.
The end user is referred to the Advertiser Page without interference.
The end user may choose to close the Magic Return window at any time.

I corresponded with Google AdSense customer service, to gain pro-active approval, but their bottom line was "a click on our ad generates a pop-up" (technically, not true).

Yes, and I know for a fact

James — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 01:29:17 +0000

Yes, and I know for a fact shared hosting owners are afraid. They feel that anything they build up now on is in jeopardy to the sheer power of global brands.

When you really think about it, the more all these end-of-internet-freedom conspiracies become more believable!

I do think google is a bit different from Microsoft though. But then again what's Google's opponent on the net? Nothing.

I have also heard and read

ms2134 — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:29:24 +0000

I have also heard and read about Google & Microsoft trying to take over the web.

Google is a good search engine, Don't get me wrong; but to try and take over the whole business aspect of the internet is just plain and greedy.

They will be offering their own website hosting next, i can bet on it.

James wrote: Google already

Megan — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:06:12 +0000

James wrote:

Google already owns a chunk of the net. It's trying to own every web services sector now. There must be some laws to prevent them killing smaller businesses.

You'd think, right? Unfortunately any such laws are often very poorly enforced, if they exist at all. Just look at all the Microsoft cases.

One benefit I see in this, at least in terms of market share, is that Google is widely known enough and respected enough to actually compete with Microsoft. They can reach those users who don't even realize that different web browsers exist and that they do have a choice. That's one thing I'm hoping to see happen with Chrome.

I share your concern about Google getting too big and into too many markets. We know that Microsoft has plans to take over the intenet. Google could do the same thing which wouldn't be any more beneficial.

This new browser is very

James — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 10:11:58 +0000

This new browser is very well. But I think there is a bigger issue which must be seriously considered.

Google already owns a chunk of the net. It's trying to own every web services sector now. There must be some laws to prevent them killing smaller businesses.

If I give you a example, share hosting providers are now worried about the development of Google's website services.

I personally think that their ambitions and greed will eventually be harmful for them.

I used it but i don't like

ymedia — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 07:27:41 +0000

I used it but i don't like it, Mozilla is best

Hope it wont muddy the

JeevesBond — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:01:48 +0000

Hope it wont muddy the waters still further in respect of website/appearance browser compatibility issues.

It's based on Webkit (what Safari and others use), so rendering Web pages should be fine. The Javascript engine is new, but as Google own many JavaScript heavy Web apps I expect it to work well.

Also, the slideshow mentions that they've been using Google's own index of the Web for testing, so common compatibility issues should not occur. This is more about creating a new interface and speeding up Javascript execution, than the usual problem areas of HTML and CSS support. Speaking of speeding up JavaScript: just have a look at this comparison chart. Unfortunately Opera wasn't included in the comparisons though.

According to several sources, Chrome already has a browser market share of between one and three percent!