<mar...@spam-free.org.uk> wrote: >Google Chrome is certainly tearing through the version numbers >quickly. I suppose it's got a lot of catching up to do to join Opera >on version 10. :)
I have been running beta 4 for a few weeks. It works very well and I've not had any problems. What I like about Chrome is it's simplicity without any loss of functionality.
. Wow, what is taking up all that space? I don't care about the space per say, but I'm curious about how it's used. I just checked my Firefox folder and it's using about 27 megs.
> . > Wow, what is taking up all that space? I don't care about the space per > say, but I'm curious about how it's used. I just checked my Firefox folder > and it's using about 27 megs.
Sorry it's 44 MB,I had a zipped versin in the same folder.
<st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk> wrote: >On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:23:57 +0000, Martin Jay ><mar...@spam-free.org.uk> wrote:
>>Google Chrome is certainly tearing through the version numbers >>quickly. I suppose it's got a lot of catching up to do to join Opera >>on version 10. :)
>I have been running beta 4 for a few weeks. It works very well and >I've not had any problems. What I like about Chrome is it's simplicity >without any loss of functionality.
>Steve
I like Chrome cuz it's fast and stable and doesn't lock my mouse. Love the smiley when it recovers :-) Don't like auto updates.
Once there's a stripped down version for Chrome. Is it still around?
Mister2u, 11/6/2009,2:46:57 PM, wrote: > On Nov 6, 1:59 pm, "Victek" <vic...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > "Mister2u" <miste...@gmx.com> wrote in message
> > . > > Wow, what is taking up all that space? I don't care about the > > space per say, but I'm curious about how it's used. I just checked > > my Firefox folder and it's using about 27 megs.
> Sorry it's 44 MB,I had a zipped versin in the same folder.
> Iron is a modified version of Chrome's source code that removes all > the components in the original browser that collect usage data. This > means that Iron blocks the unique user ID, doesn't send user-specific > data to Google, disables the report-on-crash feature and doesn't > connect to Google to check for updates.
> I have been running beta 4 for a few weeks. It works very well and > I've not had any problems. What I like about Chrome is it's simplicity > without any loss of functionality.
. Can you say a little more about this? I've tried Chrome a few times including the 3.X builds. Yes it's clean and simple. It's also "one size fits all". I use Firefox because it can be customized to do exactly what I want.
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 20:07:43 -0800, "Victek" <vic...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> I have been running beta 4 for a few weeks. It works very well and >> I've not had any problems. What I like about Chrome is it's simplicity >> without any loss of functionality.
>. >Can you say a little more about this? I've tried Chrome a few times >including the 3.X builds. Yes it's clean and simple. It's also "one size >fits all". I use Firefox because it can be customized to do exactly what I >want.
There's not much else I can say. Chrome does exactly what I want without any customization.
Martin Jay wrote: > Google Chrome is certainly tearing through the version numbers > quickly. I suppose it's got a lot of catching up to do to join Opera > on version 10. :)
I see they are still violating the intended use of the %userprofile% folder as a data repository and instead using it to install their *programs*.
Can't see what is new in the v4 beta version. Would help if Google ever bothered to provide a What's New document for each version so users would actually know what is new, especially since "new" implies something got added or changed but users shouldn't have to guess. Looks like we get stuck with an overview description of the new version by reading blurbs in a blog.
|
