begin quoting Brad Beyenhof as of Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 06:58:36PM -0700: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 4:29 PM, MattyJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > <quote who="[EMAIL PROTECTED]"> > >> On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 03:13:35PM -0700, MattyJ spake thusly: > >>> I'll try Chrome when it's no longer vaporware but I can't wait to see > >>> some > >>> real benchmarks pitting it against the other three browsers out there. > >> > >> It looks like the Windows version is available and they are working on a > >> Linux version. I have signed up to be notified (via the Chrome homepage) > >> when a Linux version comes out. > > > > I was somewhat excited about this until about 2 minutes ago. > > Regardless of the installer, I already don't like it much. It crashed > on me twice in the first 10 minutes. And screw the "Each tab is a > separate process" thing... each time it crashed it brought down the > entire browser.
Didja file a bug report? > I know it's a beta, but if someone can have an experience like that > out of the box they should have kept it to themselves a while longer. Well, things shift. Used to be, you sat on Alpha, gave Beta out to a few users, released Gamma to a few more users and trumpeted the software, and then shipped version 1.0. Then you called Alpha version 1.0, Beta version 2.0, and Gamma 3.0, pushing version 1.0 to 3.1 or even 4.0. Now you call the Alpha "Beta", trumpet it and ship it, and then leave it in Beta until it's about to die. That way you can respond to the criticisms with "what do you expect, it's only Beta software", and it minimized your (the vendor/developer)'s pain. -- We're problem-solvers. Pain is a problem. So we solve it. Stewart Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
