No, I meant what I said. It's a direct compile to machine code. Starting at 24:34 in the video I linked to, they explain it.

It's true. Why are you surprised? Google has been a big player in Open Source with their Summer of Code projects and open APIs.

They are working on it. Already parts of Chromium are ported, and they are on track to make the entire browser available.

That's better. In Linux we face a problem with Java plug-ins. 64-bit browser don't recognize 32-bit plug-ins. 64-bit plug-ins is not available from SUN. But, I think as it has its own compiler with it, it won't create any problem regarding Java.

Just found the google site which states that "Google Chrome is built with open source code from Chromium". They are trying to build Chromium-based browser on Linux.

Alas, that's an issue in Windows as well. I ended up dumping 64 bit Java and going totally 32 bit Java because of of that issue.

BTW, V8 is just JavaScript. It is not Java. You still need a virtual machine to run Java.

JavaScript is not Java. Java is not JavaScript.

To be more precise, what we commonly call "JavaScript" is really ECMAScript, and is a totally different language than Java.

That's cos no-one actually uses Linux for anything other than to say they do.

Jafo runs and hides from the Geek-Squad for whom Torvalds is GOD ....

Exactly. I should have noticed that you were taking about Java Scripts.

32-bit browser never supports 64-bit plug-ins. Similarly, 64-bit browser never supports 32-bit plug-ins. This is the general rule for every OS - Windows, UNIX, or, any UNIX-like OSes.

To use 64-bit browser with 32-bit plug-ins, we need to install "nspluginwrapper" in Linux. But, I don't know about any such plug-in for Windows.

But, "nspluginwrapper" is not compatible with Java plug-ins. So, even after installing "nspluginwrapper" the problem continues with Java.

Sorry, m1. I used it for 10 minutes and hated:

a. creepy spy crap

b. can't be skinned

c. leaks all over (security)

so, you're second banana (  ) on this one.

Which to me is actually quite odd, considering how well the 64 bit OS itself handles 32 bit applications. I dunno about Linix, but 64 bit Windows normally works quite well with 32 bit applications. I'm wondering why browsers are different in that respect.

64 bit Linux also works quite well with 32 bit applications, but not the plug-ins and drivers. A 32-bit application need 32-bit plug-ins for it and similarly a 64-bit application need 64-bit plug-ins.

I thought I'd give it a try and speedwise it's much quicker at loading pages than IE7 and Firefox. I'm not a great lover of google products and some of the horror stories I've heard and read about from Gmail users on Security issues made me very reluctant to even try it however glad I did. System resource useage seems pretty OK. With a bit more work google may have something that I might actually use apart from their great search engine 

I don't trust Google, half the stuff I install tries to sneakily set my homepage to it, and install a toolbar, it's annoying and I certainly wouldn't browse with it

IE may suck.. but better the devil you know

Me either... I point blank refuse to have Google crap on my PC and refuse to use their search engine. I don't give a toss what anyone says, Google is EVIL and seeks purely to profit from everyone's information, which most often is gathered covertly and via dubious methods: IE, google analytics, which gathers data on peoples online activities/site visits without consent.

To me, Google is as invasive as CCTV cameras in toilets... getting your tonsils removed through your armpits, so it'll be a cold day in hell before I install Google's Chrome on any PC in this household.

Uh, oh... that black van with the darkened windows and a G on the doors is outside again.  

Indeedy starkers, in fact, the other day, I spent mostly checking the HJT forums, looking for a way to kill the copy-book Google virus.. it's gone now, but I didn't go to any sites, I got it just searching but not clicking on anything

iam with you , i dont trust google chrome. anything that is still in beta is unstable..dont care what critics say. the most stable would be FF and opera 

Sorry guys, I found this and had to post it

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wicked

Well I for one, love Chrome, and I have used Google since forever...just my 2 cents worth!!

Google Chrome is just a new born baby. So, the features Chrome has are good enough for a new browser. It's clear that Google is seriously thinking about the web browser. So, we can expect in near future Chrome would include all the options and features it's missing right now. I would not be surprised, if I found Chrome as the no. 1 browser in near future.

I've known some Web devs, but the last time I got to look over that their working shoulders was when the fresh grads in our shop were telling everyone that Yahoo was over and showing us the Google search page. It's the third-party part of the data collection that really rubs me the wrong way--smells like a potential online privacy analog to 'mortgage-backed securities.'

My real complaint is with myself because I want to stop 'Googling' but there just doesn't seem to be a search engine anywhere nearly as good. That new Google ex-pat project (weird name I can't remember) seems like Live Search, but even more pushy in its 'helpfulness.' I'd consider going back to Yahoo, but the stupidly busy page is just too annoying. Frakkin' real world, always forcing a fella to make comprises between high-falutin' values and base appetites...

Well, if you're really bored, you can always waste time dropping random searches into Ms. Dewey. Just as evil, but far more distracting - {G}

Jonnan