d wrote:

REALLLLLy needs to support roboform if i’m going to use it.

RF Support told me that they won’t be able to support Chrome because they chose for Safari. Safari is not extendable according to them I think they should rewrite RF so that you can connect the RF floating toolbar to any application (so also incl. Opera for instance). It should be possible..?

I would think that they could make some sort of JavaScript-based version of Roboform. That way it’d work in most browsers.

Plus I’d have to imagine that it would be possible with Safari since 1Password on the Mac side of things is almost the same as Roboform.

REALLLLLy needs to support roboform if i’m going to use it.

RF Support told me that they won’t be able to support Chrome because they chose for Safari. Safari is not extendable according to them I think they should rewrite RF so that you can connect the RF floating toolbar to any application (so also incl. Opera for instance). It should be possible..?

Didn’t Google just recently get around to giving Gears Safari compatibility? Perhaps Chrome was part of the reason for getting that released.

I’m sure that played a big role in Google releasing Gears for Safari.

Didn’t Google just recently get around to giving Gears Safari compatibility? Perhaps Chrome was part of the reason for getting that released.

There’s the compatibility fear (Fx more accepted than safari), but it seems like most sites (Y!Mail) are supporting Safari too. My next fear is it preventing other search engines (Yahoo!). We’ll see.

Also, the process-per-tab is an old feature that has been in IE8 since the beginning ([blogs.msdn.com])

IE8 doesn’t put every tab and plugin in its own process, it uses 3-4 processes max afaik. They went for the middle ground: a bit more ram usages but not too much for a bit more stability. Several tabs can be within one process (usually the ones opened from the one parent tab). Plugins never open in a separate process, and they don’t have an internal task manager. The idea is definitely very similar though!

I’ve heard Google is adjusting the EULA. It sounds like they mostly copied the EULA for their web services, of which a lot of things don’t (or shouldn’t) apply to the browser of course

Ryan, I’ve understood the browser is a combination of the Firefox source code and Webkit, where did you read it was just Webkit? (from the blog: “We’ve used components from Apple’s WebKit and Mozilla’s Firefox, among others — and in that spirit, we are making all of our code open source as well.”)

Yes, it is based on Firefox as well. My mention of Webkit above was focused on the rendering engine. The browser itself does use Firefox for some of the ground work as well.

My sentiments exactly. It is faster, but I miss the features added by some of the extensions I use.

Yes, the TOS has some rather frightening statements that would lead you to believe that they don’t care about your privacy.

I disagree actually. If their goal wasn’t to dominate the browser arena I don’t think they would have created one in the first place. Everything Google does they try to become number 1, and while they may not always get the results they are looking for they definitely try to take the top spot.