GOOGLE CHROME

GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:21 pm

Just downloaded it to try out. Seems pretty fast and kind of neat, not busy like the others. One nice feature, if it freezes, you only lose the tab that froze. Not the whole browser.

Anyone else? What do you think of it?
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: 009to090 On: Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:18 am

Your on the bleeding edge of technology! :D Let us know how it goes.
009to090
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: EFM 520 HighBoy
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: DVC-500 x 2
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Rice

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: Richard S. On: Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:46 am

I might install to test websites if i start having a lot of visitors use it but I'm sticking with Firefox, just too many damn good extensions for web development like firebug which I've come to rely on.

BTW, how's the site look in Chrome, normal hopefully?
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite


Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:57 pm

Basically the same, some minor nuances. When you post the borders change colors, I'm not sure what that is all about. It is fast though.
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:54 pm

Cool, when you open the browser, there is a screen shot of your six most frequent websites staring at you. Oddly enough, this forum was at the top. :)
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: 009to090 On: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:02 pm

coaledsweat wrote:Cool, when you open the browser, there is a screen shot of your six most frequent websites staring at you. Oddly enough, this forum was at the top. :)


IE8 does that already. I like it.
009to090
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: EFM 520 HighBoy
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: DVC-500 x 2
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Rice

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: brckwlt On: Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:07 pm

coaledsweat wrote:Cool, when you open the browser, there is a screen shot of your six most frequent websites staring at you. Oddly enough, this forum was at the top. :)


so it was #1 coal forum
then #2-#6 was all *censored* ... right ?
brckwlt
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Axeman-Anderson
Stove/Furnace Model: Rebuilt 1953 AA-130

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:57 pm

brckwlt wrote: it was #1 coal forum
then #2-#6 was *censored* ... right ?


Nope, drag racing sites. :)
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: Razzler On: Wed Jun 03, 2009 4:09 pm

I installed Chrome and it all looks good, except for when i click on active posts everything is huge? Did anyone else have this?
Attachments
Google Chrome 1.JPG
(152.94 KiB) Viewed 17 times
View: New PagePopup • Select:BBCode
[nepathumb]12999[/nepathumb]
Google Chrome 2.JPG
(164.93 KiB) Viewed 18 times
View: New PagePopup • Select:BBCode
[nepathumb]13000[/nepathumb]
Google Chrome 3.JPG
(95.79 KiB) Viewed 15 times
View: New PagePopup • Select:BBCode
[nepathumb]13001[/nepathumb]
Razzler
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman SF 250

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: Richard S. On: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:08 pm

Razzler wrote:except for when i click on active posts everything is huge?


Bad tag, should be fixed. ;)

Some browsers will "fix" things and it wasn't evident in FF or IE. *censored* should just break if there is something wrong instead of being helpful


------edit--------

Fixed, downloaded chrome to check it out myself. First impression is that is quite fast.
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: Razzler On: Wed Jun 03, 2009 9:12 pm

Richard S. wrote:should be fixed.


Yup! Looks good now. :) Thanks Rich! Yeah the speed is really good, I'm impressed with it so far.
Razzler
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman SF 250

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: rberq On: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:20 am

I don't know details, but I saw an article saying that some "official" group has agreed on browser standards. Firefox follows them pretty well, and Microsoft has announced that IE8 will also adhere to the standard. Don't know about Chrome. For IE8 that means some of the idiosyncrasies that worked in IE6 and IE7 will fail in IE8. Overall it should be an improvement for the end user (you and me) because web developers will not have to write special code to adapt to the various browsers.

That's the theory, anyway. Monopolists like to add "extensions" to the standard to give themselves an edge. IBM did that back in the 1970's with the COBOL language. Software developers would naturally take advantage of the extensions if it made their jobs easier. Then the software would not work on other companies' computers, so they had to match the extensions or they'd sell no computers. The bottom line was, the dominant company's product became the de facto standard. I suppose you could argue the case both ways: that standards promote efficiency, or that standards stifle innovation.
rberq
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: DS Machine 1300
Coal Size/Type: Nut -- Kimmel/Blaschak/Reading
Other Heating: Oil hot water radiators, propane

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: Yanche On: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:39 am

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) develops interoperable technologies (specifications, guidelines, software, and tools) to lead the Web to its full potential. Check it out at: http://www.w3.org/

Before a knowledgeable Web page author publishes his web page he will test it for meeting standards by testing it with the tools provided by w3.org. See http://validator.w3.org/

A check of nepadigital.org shows five errors. Bad, bad Richard. :-) Correct use of the w3 tools can improve your web site.
Yanche
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Alternate Heating Systems S-130
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: Richard S. On: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:45 am

Well this was bug caused by me but as i said stuff should just break. It's easier to fix if you know it's there. Another example is IE produces the red ex if the image is missing which is good as far as I'm concerned. FF instead will either put a text link that goes no where. Not very helpful as it might not be noticeable.

The group is the WC3. They have no official recognition as far as I know if you wanted to compare them to someone like those that control building codes in more ways that one such as being able to actually download the documentation. :P All browsers try to adhere to the rules, and they set specification for any open web document like HTML, CSS, etc. Opera I beleive is considered the most compliant at least of any that has any significant usage. The test for compliance is the acid test, Ilinked to the Acid2 test on wiki because it has a nice gallery of how much rendering can vary in different browsers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid2



rberq wrote:For IE8 that means some of the idiosyncrasies that worked in IE6 and IE7 will fail in IE8


You can add a meta tag in the header to force IE to render a document as IE7, IE6 etc. ;)

that standards promote efficiency, or that standards stifle innovation.


Yes it's double edged sword but I don't see the WWW being what it is today without a set of standards, the innovation comes from it's largess. If their was no standards it would be like a bunch of power companies all offering electricity at different voltages. Where's that leave the people making appliances?

Browsers need to adhere to them, once they meet the standards they can add extras from their such as Flash. There is still to this day no way to reliably embed a video into a web page without Flash or Silverlight. That's for variety of reasons but at the top of the list there is standard way to do it and there is no open source standard codec adopted, there is only one codec that can reliably played on any platform and that's MPEG1 which requires about 5X the bitrate of a modern codec like WMV9, DIVX, or any of the MPEG4 derivatives. Embedding it in a page is without the use of plug-in like flash is for all intents and purposes impossible even when you break the rules.

The issues are many, the people setting the standards are slow to set them, as I look at it we are still in the era of the model T. They need to speed it up. The next issue is that browsers makers are so slow to adopt them. Some of them don't even fully support CSS2 which came out years ago. Lastly people simply want to stick with old reliable for whatever reason. Almost 20% of the traffic I get is still using IE6. :roll:
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Re: GOOGLE CHROME

PostBy: Richard S. On: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:46 am

Yanche wrote:A check of nepadigital.org shows five errors. Bad, bad Richard. :-) Correct use of the w3 tools can improve your web site.


They are related to the paypal link, as I'm forced to use what they provide please direct your complaints to paypal.com :P

Edit: for all their bluster about build good pages check out Google.com

56 Errors, 14 warning(s)


While on the topic when using that tool be aware errors can cause a cascading effect. So if you're checking your pages with it fix the first error then recheck as the others may magically go away.
Richard S.
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite