Google Chrome 2

[Guest Reimar]

Google has now a new version (2.0.170) ready to download which can be also downloaded from HERE.

Cheers.

[malcolmswaine]

I love Chrome. I have been using it as my default browser for a while now. Hats off to Google, they do some good stuff.

[Phil Conners]

I like their ideas but I'll stick with Firefox until Adblock and Foxmarks modules becomes available .

[Digitalbanana]

Google has now a new version (2.0.170) ready to download which can be also downloaded from HERE.

Cheers.

The filehippo web site says it is beta. My Chrome 1.0.154.48 says it is latest version and no updates required.

[phaethon]

The filehippo web site says it is beta. My Chrome 1.0.154.48 says it is latest version and no updates required.

Yes R., you should mention it's a beta for those who don't want to play roulette.

Also STILL no Linux version.

Edited March 20, 2009 by phaethon

[TexasRanger]

I like google stuff but just couldn't get used to the browser, I find Firefox much superior.

[lopburi3]

It is a beta. I immediately have an issue with page display on LP Forum which was not present on release 1. Also never got install complete pop-up but tools shows it is the new 2 version. If anyone has it installed take a look at the LP Forum page (other LP pages are fine) and advise if bad for you. Maybe will try a re-install - have already cleared cookies and re-booted.

[Guest Reimar]

It is a beta. I immediately have an issue with page display on LP Forum which was not present on release 1. Also never got install complete pop-up but tools shows it is the new 2 version. If anyone has it installed take a look at the LP Forum page (other LP pages are fine) and advise if bad for you. Maybe will try a re-install - have already cleared cookies and re-booted.

I don't know the LP Forum you mention but I run the new beta already! No any issues yet! May you send me the link to the LP forum and I'll test it.

Cheers.

[phaethon]

If you mean Thorntree - it won't load in my Chrome 1.0.154.48, loads fine in IE7 and Firefox. LP itself loads in Chrome.

Chrome 2 installer isn't working for me - I'll try again when I close this browser.

[phaethon]

Ho hum... installer won't launch on my Vista desktop nor my vista laptop - separate downloads.

Bored now, I'll wait for the alpha.

[lopburi3]

All other pages load but thorntree. It (thorntree) did work in version 1 of Chrome for me. Works fine in IE8. I am also using Vista and indeed the installation did not work normally but it seemed to have updated the open version 1 somehow. Have you checked version since you tried to update - may have done the deed as on mine as now reports itself as version 2.

Edited March 20, 2009 by lopburi3

[Guest Reimar]

Tested from my own Office connection now on TRUE and I can access with Chrome to but I do believe just about 50%!!

[webfact]

nor does Thorntree work with XP and chrome 2. No problems to install C2. It updated my version 1--? to version 2!

Edited March 20, 2009 by webfact

[lopburi3]

That is exactly what I get so guess it is Chrome/web site rather than a fluke install.

[MeetJohnDoe]

I like their ideas but I'll stick with Firefox until Adblock and Foxmarks modules becomes available .

Sorry TV advertisers...I never see you!

[Cromarty]

Ho hum... installer won't launch on my Vista desktop nor my vista laptop - separate downloads.

Bored now, I'll wait for the alpha.

if you don't get on with the beta, I would steer clear of the alpha

For those who have installed 2, could you tell me if the Confirm Form Submission annoyance has been cured?

thanks.

[lopburi3]

Version 1 was a release not an alpha - and it seemed to work pretty well. Not sure what the Confirm Form Submission problem was but do recall often seeing such wording (when going back on secure sites?). At this point have returned to FF. It gave me a pain as had reverted to Thai Google (cookies cleared I guess) and took awhile to find how to change (easy way is type google.com/ncr in address bar and go to it) as makes a new cookie.

[Cromarty]

Version 1 was a release not an alpha - and it seemed to work pretty well. Not sure what the Confirm Form Submission problem was but do recall often seeing such wording (when going back on secure sites?). At this point have returned to FF. It gave me a pain as had reverted to Thai Google (cookies cleared I guess) and took awhile to find how to change (easy way is type google.com/ncr in address bar and go to it) as makes a new cookie.

I know. I was being a sm@rt@rse with the wrong use of Alpha by phaethon.

Confirm Form Submission is a huge annoyance, I am sticking with Chrome for now as I like it, but I will ditch it it this isn't fixed in 2.

[lopburi3]

Thought it might be sarcasm but was not sure. I really liked it but without ability to add things had to forgo IE only sites (like Immigration) or use WOT (web of trust) which I find very handy when calling up Google search information (avoiding the scam sites). For now using FF again. Love Google, Google Earth, Picasa 3 and Gmail.

[webfact]

....Love Google, Google Earth, Picasa 3 and Gmail.

and take look @ Google Mars http://www.google.com/mars/

[Gary A]

Chrome 2.0.170.0 doesn't display my Yahoo home page correctly. Other than that, it looks pretty solid.

[edwardandtubs]

There are also problems using Yahoo! Mail Classic with Chrome. I hope they fix that problem because apart from that I really like the simplicity and speed of Chrome. Most of the stuff I used that required an add-on in Firefox comes as default with Chrome and the integration with Google's search engine is the best out there (as you would expect).

Edited March 21, 2009 by edwardandtubs

[bazmlb]

The filehippo web site says it is beta. My Chrome 1.0.154.48 says it is latest version and no updates required.

Yes R., you should mention it's a beta for those who don't want to play roulette.

Also STILL no Linux version.

Is anything of googles out of Beta, gmail logo still carries the beta in its bottom right corner

[Guest Reimar]

The filehippo web site says it is beta. My Chrome 1.0.154.48 says it is latest version and no updates required.

Yes R., you should mention it's a beta for those who don't want to play roulette.

Also STILL no Linux version.

Is anything of googles out of Beta, gmail logo still carries the beta in its bottom right corner

Even the Chrome 1 was still Beta!!

[CDNinKS]

Confirm Form Submission is a huge annoyance, I am sticking with Chrome for now as I like it, but I will ditch it it this isn't fixed in 2.

Completely agree with this.......can anyone confirm if this problem is fixed with Ver 2

[Digitalbanana]

The filehippo web site says it is beta. My Chrome 1.0.154.48 says it is latest version and no updates required.

Yes R., you should mention it's a beta for those who don't want to play roulette.

Also STILL no Linux version.

Is anything of googles out of Beta, gmail logo still carries the beta in its bottom right corner

Even the Chrome 1 was still Beta!!

Not sure the meaning of this? My Chrome 1 (actually 1.0.154.48) says it is latest version and no updates required. I assume this means Chrome 1 is release and not beta? This thread is confusing by neglecting to announce Chrome 2 is beta.

[ThaiLife]

Thought it might be sarcasm but was not sure. I really liked it but without ability to add things had to forgo IE only sites (like Immigration) or use WOT (web of trust) which I find very handy when calling up Google search information (avoiding the scam sites). For now using FF again. Love Google, Google Earth, Picasa 3 and Gmail.

I had not heard about WOT , thanks . Ive been using Scandoo , may be have a look

http://www.scandoo.com/

[webfact]

Using WOT for some time I realize a lot of reliable and "clean" web sites are marked as dangerous. I remember TV was one of them a few month ago.

[lopburi3]

WOT rates on a number of factors (which you can list). So far have found them to be rather accurate (have used for a year or so) but as with any such system there will be glitches - some of the pay for systems are known for being way behind the curve in there reports. This is free, and I believe better.

[ronz28]

This was a surprise to me and I will probably use Chrome more .....

Hackers steer clear of Google Chrome, say too challenging

At the CanSecWest security conference in Vancouver BC, hackers were invited to find and exploit holes in modern browsers. A popular target for hackers at this year’s conference was Safari on a Mac — definitely the lowest hanging fruit.

Charlie Miller explains that it’s not whether a product has holes (all of them do), its how easy it is to exploit those holes — and on a Mac, it’s very simple:

It’s clear that all three browsers (Safari, IE and Firefox) have bugs. Code execution holes everywhere. But that’s only half the equation. The other half is exploiting it. There’s almost no hurdle to jump through on Mac OS X.

He did mention, in his interview with Ryan Naraine, that Chrome was pretty much in another league. Their “sandbox” makes it extremely difficult to exploit — not only do you need to find a problem, but you also have to figure out how to get out of their Sandbox (an environment that has no access to anything on the computer).

There are bugs in Chrome but they’re very hard to exploit. I have a Chrome vulnerability right now but I don’t know how to exploit it. It’s really hard. The’ve got that sandbox model that’s hard to get out of. With Chrome, it’s a combination of things — you can’t execute on the heap, the OS protections in Windows and the Sandbox.

I might have this bug and I might be able to get code execution. But now you’r ein a sandbox and you have no permissions to do anything. You need another bug to get out of the sandbox. Now you need two bugs and two exploits. That raises the bar.

No hackers took on Chrome at the conference, simply because everything else was easier.

Source is http://blogs.zdnet.com/Google/?p=1334&tag=nl.e550