Google Preparing To Rollout Stable Chrome Releases Even Faster

[Duff~]

Don't forget Firefox was the one who started playing this ridiculous pointless game of catchup.
Watch Mozilla start to match this for no good reason why they continue to let their useless browser rot even more.

linux would turn 3.6 next year, and i would have love it

[dlq84]

"Well guys, we're already shipping spyware, we're forcing people to see ads, we're even implementing DRM to block browsers we don't bless from accessing the web. How do we make sure those 'chromium' freeloaders can't strip it back out again?"

"Use our sheer manpower to release faster and swamp their dev teams, like we did to firefox with W3C standards?"

"I like your thinking! Promotion!"

I don't get what you're saying. Are you under the impression that Chromium aren't developed by Google or something?

[rcurious]

I think AI is the cause

[avis]

Welcome SSD tear and wear.

52 releases per year, 200MB per release, > 1TB writes for nothing.

Though it's nothing in comparison to how people abuse their devices simply by browsing the web. Barely anyone around me disables disk cache or moves their browser profile to a RAM disk.

[Jakobson]

Why? what users want is stability, bug fixes and useful features, not version number!
By looking at https://www.chromestatus.com/ , you can barely see a useful feature in compare to past and this attitude.

Google Security blog earlier this month explained it very well:

Not all security bug fixes are used for n-day exploitation. But we don’t know which bugs are exploited in practice, and which aren't, so we treat all critical and high severity bugs as if they will be exploited. A lot of work goes into making sure these bugs get triaged and fixed as soon as possible. Rather than having fixes sitting and waiting to be included in the next bi-weekly update, weekly updates will allow us to get important security bug fixes to you sooner, and better protect you and your most sensitive data.

[carewolf]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you under the impression that Chromium aren't developed by Google or something?

Chromium Embedded Framework is not developed by Google, neither is Edge, Opera, or QtWebEngine.

And they are trying to kill them one by one

[ClosedSource]

Though it's nothing in comparison to how people abuse their devices simply by browsing the web. Barely anyone around me disables disk cache or moves their browser profile to a RAM disk.

Unfortunately, barely anyone on the planet is aware of electronics wear and tear. They assume things randomly break at some point and that if something lasted a week, it is likely to never break.

[avis]

Unfortunately, barely anyone on the planet is aware of electronics wear and tear. They assume things randomly break at some point and that if something lasted a week, it is likely to never break.

People are not entirely wrong though: in the average computer only the moving parts (e.g. fans) and storage have an expiration date of sorts. Motherboards (with solid capacitors), CPUs, GPUs may work indefinitely and they often do. I have more than 20 years old PCs around me which are as good as new. Well made spinning rust (HDDs) is also extremely reliable and may work for decades.

[user1]

Welcome SSD tear and wear.

52 releases per year, 200MB per release, > 1TB writes for nothing.

Though it's nothing in comparison to how people abuse their devices simply by browsing the web. Barely anyone around me disables disk cache or moves their browser profile to a RAM disk.

If only traditional package managers adopted delta updates like Flatpak - an area where Flatpak is actually more efficient. I always felt just how dumb it is when updating to a new version with a package manager essentially means completely reinstalling the software with the new version.

[schmidtbag]

At this point, they should just make it a rolling release and call it a day.

Honestly... a rolling release isn't a bad idea for them. There would be an issue of websites no longer being able to identify if the version of the browser is new enough, but browsers already have methods to inform the user that it is severely outdated. They could take it a step further by being more upfront about it if for example your browser's build were a year old.

I'm not saying they should do this, but I don't think it'd be bad if they did.