I know there was some discussion here in July about Google Chrome, but any
new feedback? Is it worthwile to switch from Firefox?
***
** THIS LIST HAS MOVED TO YAHOO**
** PLEASE JOIN THE DISCUSSION THERE **
** Info at http://www.cguys.org/ **
***
> I know there was some discussion here in July about Google Chrome, but any
> new feedback? Is it worthwile to switch from Firefox?
>
>
I don't know about switching from Firefox, but Google Chrome/Chromium
now functions quite well and reliably as a browser. If there is
something that really a
There is no real need to switch for everything. I use different
search engines for different things. I like Chrome for some things
and it is faster than Firefox with a tons of add ons. Try it and
figure out what you like it for.
Chrome was more secure for at least one exploit that escapes me no
http://blogs.computerworld.com/14797/google_chome_add_in_for_ie_speed_demon_or_big_fat_security_hole
"Google's just released Chrome add-in for Internet Explorer can speed
up IE by as much as 10 times, tests show. But if you listen to
Microsoft, it also leaves you more vulnerable to malware an
On Oct 2, 2009, at 4:24 PM, John Duncan Yoyo wrote:
My guess is part of the speed up is them by passing IE's security
filters.
Bad guess.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/09/22/2138201/Google-Brings-Chrome-Renderer-Speedy-Javascript-To-IE
Try this...
http://www.chromeexperiments.com/
"Not yo
On Oct 2, 2009, at 4:24 PM, John Duncan Yoyo wrote:
My guess is part of the speed up is them by passing IE's security
filters.
"Microsoft says "hey, that thing just give malware more attach points
and makes our browser less secure" -- which cause a lot of chuckling
around the blogosphere.
WFBs =
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM, tjp wrote:
>
> http://blogs.computerworld.com/14797/google_chome_add_in_for_ie_speed_demon_or_big_fat_security_hole
>
> "Google's just released Chrome add-in for Internet Explorer can speed up IE
> by as much as 10 times, tests show. But if you listen
WFB is Tom's term for anyone who disagrees with him. It's his way to end
the debate, anyone not agreeing with him is obviously a paid shill or WFB.
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Judy Cosler wrote:
> WFBs =
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 11:46 AM, tjp wrote:
>
> >
> >
> http://blogs.compute
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:33 PM, mike wrote:
> WFB is Tom's term for anyone who disagrees with him. It's his way to end
> the debate, anyone not agreeing with him is obviously a paid shill or WFB.
WFB = Windows Fan Boy(s).
Steve
Tom is again either misinformed or just carrying Apple's water once again.
Google voice does not in any way 'reengineer' the iphone. Only if you think
an app like rhapsody reengineers it or one of those photo swimsuit apps.
Apple is just being it's over controlling self in the google voice
rejecti
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:46 PM, tjp wrote:
>
> http://blogs.computerworld.com/14797/google_chome_add_in_for_ie_speed_demon_or_big_fat_security_hole
>
> "Google's just released Chrome add-in for Internet Explorer can speed up IE
> by as much as 10 times, tests show. But if you listen to Microsoft
Ok, changing the subject about Google Chrome:
I am webmaster of a site that offers download & playing of music for
those who want to hear it.
I have tested the web site on all major browsers, but only Chrome fails
to open the music for playing. I sent a complaint to Google about this
when i
Anyone with chrome on their system when encountering the problem will
just open the link in firefox. I'd not worry about it playing in
chrome much.
Sent from my iPod
On Oct 2, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Robert Carroll
wrote:
Ok, changing the subject about Google Chrome:
I am webmaster of a sit
13 matches
Mail list logo