Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Google Chrome, is it a good thing?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhick View Post
    Konqueror still uses KHTML and afaik there's no way of telling it to use webkit instead.

    There has been webkit enabled Konq builds for quite a while now.

    http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2007/1...led-konqueror/
    As well as opensuse. kde4-webkitpart WebKit render engine for Konqueror



    Once installed Systemsettings -> Advanced -> File Associations -> text/html -> Embedding -> Select Webkit -> Move Up (as often as needed) -> Apply.
    Last edited by deanjo; 09-03-2008 at 05:58 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aradreth View Post
    The EULA is just slightly worrying when coming from a company that excels in data mining. Although with the browser being open source you could just remove any pieces of code that report back to google but I'd hope it would never reach that stage.
    Google fixed Chrome's EULA. Apparently it was just an oversight.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    Chrome is horrible. Fat! And google wants all the rights of all your stuff. Are they insanse?

    EDIT: ok, they corrected it. The new eula looks fine. Still - the memory consumption is horrible.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    Still - the memory consumption is horrible.
    That's odd, that's the exact opposite of what all the other sites are saying.

    1) close all browsers
    2) open all of your browsers and navigate to the same web page in all of them
    3) open a new tab in Chrome and type about:memory for the url it will display all the browsers that are opened and how much memory they are consuming.
    Last edited by deanjo; 09-04-2008 at 07:21 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,712

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    I realize that with multiple tabs and sites open that chrome will take more memory, that is the price of running a multiprocess solution. The flip side however is that if one of those processes hit a snag and crash/hang, you can simply close the offending tab without crashing the complete browser. This is not possible on other current browsers.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    you know, I prefer non-crashing browsers. And the only thing that makes 'tabs' lockup is bad java-script. Luckily konqueror detects javascript gone bad and gives you the option to kill the script. Now that is userfriendly.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    you know, I prefer non-crashing browsers. And the only thing that makes 'tabs' lockup is bad java-script. Luckily konqueror detects javascript gone bad and gives you the option to kill the script. Now that is userfriendly.
    Plugins such as flash and others can also lead to crashing browsers as well.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,712

    Default

    nspluginwrapper. Flash goes down. Browser stays up.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    nspluginwrapper. Flash goes down. Browser stays up.
    Unfortunately nspluginwrapper is just as buggy and causes just as many browser crashes as many other plugins.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •