Quantcast
Today @ PC World
News, opinion, and links from the PC World staff.

Chrome Browser Review Roundup

Posted by Daniel Ionescu | Wednesday, September 03, 2008 9:29 AM PT

b_Chrome.jpgLess than 24 hours after Google launched Chrome, the search giant's foray into the Web browser rumble among IE, Firefox, Opera, and Safari, everyone is talking about how Web heavyweight Google will do. So here's a roundup of the most interesting comments about Chrome across the Web.

Chrome is an " excellent browser that is friendly enough to handle average browsing activities without complicating the tasks, but at the same time it's powerful enough to meet the needs of more-advanced users," says PC World Assistant Editor Nick Mediati in his review. Nick also points out that Chrome " is Google's operating system", despite year-long rumors of a Google OS.

J.R. Raphael gives Seven reasons for and seven reasons against Chrome in another PCW article. Among J.R.'s top reasons on why to adopt Chrome: "it won't crash," "it's really fast," and "it opens new doors on your home page." On the downside, Chrome "is only in its first beta" (and we all know about Google's perpetual beta products, it lacks available add-ons, and has no synchronization features yet.

PCW Contributing Editor Harry McCracken analyzes Chrome vs. the World, saying that "It's tempting to assume that Google's entry into any new market will be world-changing." Harry adds that "it wouldn't be the least bit surprising if Chrome did turn out to be a great big deal" even if "in the Windows world peace isn't a word that comes to mind when considering Chrome. If the new browser ends up mattering at all, it will be explosive--and absolutely nobody, Google included, can predict exactly how things will shake out." Obviously, we yet have see how far Chrome will go in the browser market. One thing is for sure, though: Google is already advertising Chrome on its search homepage, right under the search field (hard not to notice).

ArsTechnica's Ryan Paul gives a take on Chrome as well, saying that "although the software [Chrome] feels polished and robust, the early stage of development is clearly revealed in its lack of support for advanced features like RSS integration and full bookmark management." Fair enough, Ryan; Google has a bit more work to do on Chrome to bring it up to date with some of the features we've been largely accustomed by now.

Meanwhile, CNet's Stephen Shankland put Chrome to the test (yes, the speed test). Stephen revealed that Chrome is by far faster than Internet Explorer 7, Internet Explorer 8 Beta 2, Firefox 3.0.1, or Safari 3.1.2 in the Javascript component benchmarks execution speeds. It is quite interesting that Chrome is faster than Safari, especially as both browsers are based on the same open-source rendering platform, Webkit. Nevertheless, Stephen makes a good point in a different report saying that "on the Web, a site that responds a few milliseconds faster can make a big difference in people's engagement. It's for this reason that Google believes its new Web browser, Chrome, is a project worth investing in rather than a footnote in the history of the Internet."

Silicon.com's Nick Heath can't help bashing Chrome, and gives Five reasons why Chrome will crash and burn." Nick thinks one of the reasons for Chrome's future crash is that "the Google brand [is] already ubiquitous worldwide" and "the sheer scale of the search giant's reach starts to scare consumers." Here's a question for you, Nick: Atypical user has Micrsoft Windows installed, browses the Web with Microsoft Internet Explorer, has an e-mail address with Microsoft Windows Live Mail (Hotmail), and types documents in Microsoft Office Word. What's the problem if they replace some of those products with Google's? In the end, it's about whom they trust and like more, right?

Still, Glenn Derene of Popular Mechanics asks whether "the world really needs another big web browser?", pointing out that "Chrome does have one subtle function that could eventually prove transformative. It can create Application Shortcuts, putting launch icons on your desktop or quick launch toolbar for Web-based apps. It's actually a pretty simple idea, but it puts cloud-based programs on equal footing with the resident apps on your PC." And yes, this is a good idea, as cloud computing is becoming ever more popular.

And even though Google's Chrome may be aimed at Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla's Firefox, which has grabbed a 20 percent market share in the last few years, is likely to lose ground as well. John Lilly, chief executive of Mozilla Corporation, has blogged about the launch of Google's promised Chrome browser, neutrally commenting that Chrome will be a browser optimized for the things that they [Google] see as important, and it'll be interesting to see how it evolves." And as Google has been one of Firefox's prime promoters and distributor, Google's focus on Chrome will inevitably diminish its support for Firefox.

Comments (3)

"Nick thinks one of the reasons for Chrome's future crash is that "the Google brand [is] already ubiquitous....." "

Well actually he doesn't. Read the article again, he is quoting "Tor Odland" Head of communications for Opera.

LukeL
September 03, 2008
4:53 PM PT

I think the biggest concern here should be how developers will deal with the proliferation of browsers and the market share they accumulate. It's hard enough to support the ever-evolving behavior of major-version browser releases (IE5-IE7 in context of Javascript, CSS and even DHTML), but having to develop for multiple browser technologies also means more test environments, familiarity with the platform-specific debugging tools, etc. And that all translates to cost.
Being a techie, keep it coming. From a development management standpoint, one standard for browser technology would be fine with me.

Malakai
September 04, 2008
7:08 PM PT

I think the biggest concern here should be how developers will deal with the proliferation of browsers and the market share they accumulate. It's hard enough to support the ever-evolving behavior of major-version browser releases (IE5-IE7 in context of Javascript, CSS and even DHTML), but having to develop for multiple browser technologies also means more test environments, familiarity with the platform-specific debugging tools, etc. And that all translates to cost.
Being a techie, keep it coming. From a development management standpoint, one standard for browser technology would be fine with me.

Malakai
September 04, 2008
7:10 PM PT