11 ms·
Chrome 100
- brynjolf 5y agoRight click to reopen tab is missing and I will never forgive them Yes I know I have to click outside the tabs itself, it is stupid and cumbersome.
- markstos 5y agoWith 9 known high severity vulns in release 99 this replaces, looks like they need a few more dozen releases to really get this polished.
- userbinator 5y agoIf version numbers were still sane, this would probably be closer to 10.0.
- spicybright 5y agoThey are completely sane. It's just not what you're used to.
- kibwen 5y agoVersion numbers haven't really ever been meaningful. Calendrical versioning is pretty reasonable, and Semver at least makes an effort to give meaning to the version number. But for nearly all software throughout nearly all of computer history, version numbers have been utterly arbitrary. By that metric, I see no reason why 100.0 is any more ridiculous than 10.0.
- unethical_ban 5y agoI think you're both wrong! Parent is wrong that Chrome would benefit from semver, and I believe you are wrong that semver is meaningless. Semver is useful for the kinds of tooling that need minimal marketing, have other software designed against it, and have multiple levels of improvement going on. Some software which are developed against benefit greatly from a x.y.z to let other developers know what class of change has been made. Web browsers and operating systems do not benefit in the same way, because they are a different class of software.
- kibwen 5y agoYou may have misunderstood my comment, as I said that Semver does attempt to make the number meaningful. Though I am not asserting that, on its own, it is very meaningful; it relies on users to define what a "breaking change" actually means, and it leaves it up to third-party tools to enforce any semblance of it. Meanwhile, Semver fails to say anything at all about useful concepts like version ranges. Ultimately, I like Semver! But it's the bare minimum of what it means to have meaningful version numbers, and anyone looking to make them truly meaningful has a lot of work to do. Still better that what we had before, of course.
- superkuh 5y agoVersion numbers of commercial software, or software competing intentionally with commercial software grow rapidly until they become cumbersome for the users to remember and interact with. 100+ is definitely getting there. I imagine a rebranding will come soon with some "Chrome Plus version 1" and a restart. FF will, of course, follow.
- resoluteteeth 5y agoChrome version numbers aren't something that normal users have to know or care about.
- colejohnson66 5y agoIt's not like you can use SemVer on a browser. Too many changes would make it hard to decide whether things are breaking or not. And due to backwards compatibility, it's possible that we'd actually be on 3.100.0 or whatever. It's a lot easier to just bump the major every 6 weeks with releases. Is it the best idea? Probably not, but it's something simple that works and is consistent.
- Pxtl 5y agoChrome does have an API - Selenium uses it. And selenium's chrome driver has strict rules about which Chrome versions it supports as it is versioned. So actually Chrome's rapid versioning does reflect the pace of changes to their API.
- colejohnson66 5y agoBut is Selenium’s requirements due to breaking changes actually existing? Or just a lack of effort to test multiple versions?
- kimixa 5y agoArguably with SemVer as html 1.0 pages still work with no compatibility issues, it will still be 1.x if that is the gate for "breaking" changes. The other way, if you rely on experimental features, it's likely you'll be breaking something every release, ending up with effectively a different major version every release - which is arguably pretty much what we have now. The issue is that for a sufficiently complex environment, the definition of a "Breaking" api change depends on what you use - it's pretty hard to end up making any changes that don't have some visibility across the API after all, even internal details end up leaking.
- radicaldreamer 5y agoIs the phenomenon described at http://www.chromeisbad.com http://www.chromeisbad.com still happening? Does the Keystone updater cause slow performance on MacOS when using external displays?
- saagarjha 5y agoThere was never really any good evidence backing it.
- judge2020 5y agoTo add, the author only profiled within Resource Monitor, which was like the cause: WindowServer shouldn't have a massive increase of CPU, but a bug since Catalina sometimes does cause it to do super inefficient WindowServer stuff: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25401681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25401681
- johndfsgdgdfg 5y agoThe site was made mostly to rile up HN users. So HN crowd can indulge their daily ritual of bashing Google. AFAIR the post reached the top spot of front page. Although it was flagged later.
- kentrf 5y agoI’ve stopped using Chrome a while back, due to it being a too integrated with Google services. However, Chrome is an engineering marvel and well polished. Congrats on version 100.
- spicybright 5y agoYou could definitely argue it's the most important piece of software in the world, possibly besides whatever popular OS is running it. For the vast majority of humans, it IS the internet.
- dharmab 5y agoWhat other software would appear in the top 100? I'd guess curl, the major C compilers, the major OS kernels, Microsoft Office and Adobe Acrobat to name a few.
- nicoburns 5y agoI'd guess Firefox would make the list too, despite having a much lower install base than Chrome. If you include hosted services, then I guess the major ones like Google Search, Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, TikTok, Twitter, Reddit, Wikipedia, etc. I guess email providers too: Gmail and Hotmail at least.
- flatiron 5y agoNginx, Java jdk/jre
- alphabettsy 5y agoIf mobile counts; Safari, Facebook, WhatsApp, Snapchat, TikTok?
- nicoburns 5y agoThere was a recent post on HN where it was tangentially mentioned that Chrome has 3.1 billion users! There can't be much software in the world with that kind of reach. I guess stuff like curl, but certainly not end user software.
- TazeTSchnitzel 5y agoThat's a lot of memory safety issues. Makes you wonder how many would exist if Chromium weren't written in C++.
- colesantiago 5y agoWhat would you want Chrome all written in? Rust?
- speedgoose 5y agoYes please. And everything should be proved using the Coq programming language.
- AYoung010 5y agoI prefer my web browsers to be written exclusively in provably-safe ADA, for maximum security
- stingraycharles 5y agoOn that note, has the Rust compiler/runtime ever been formally verified?
- steveklabnik 5y agoA subset of the type system and standard library has been, but not the whole thing. It’s foundational stuff though so that was really great.
- 0xCMP 5y agoiiuc the Chrome team is actively investigating it[0] and (again) iiuc recent work with Cxx is paving the way for things like that to happen. [0]: https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safety/rust-and-c-interoperability/ https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/memory-safet...
- TIPSIO 5y agoCongrats to the Chrome team! Obviously with market dominance will come a lot of criticism (some very much deserved) but you don't get there unless you made something truly awesome for people. I remember the outrage for the forced / auto-updates and am so thankful for their insanely aggressive installer today. One small non-dev nitpick recently... I am a fan of keeping things "zen" or slim for productivity. Basically annoyingly hyper-focused on only having essentials. Today though, my Chrome browser is a mess of things I can't get rid of on my window: - Share Icon - Star Icon - Extensions/Jigsaw Icon - Reading List / Bookmarks Icon (new?) - Profile Icon - Tab arrow icon - More icon Less is sometimes more! I miss the minimalism. At least let me remove. Disgusting pic below: https://imgur.com/a/CHVLaXQ https://imgur.com/a/CHVLaXQ
- jeffgreco 5y agoYou just inspired me to dig through the flags -- at least the side panel is removable. chrome://flags/#side-panel
- Aardwolf 5y agoIt'd be useful if this side panel could be at top or bottom instead. I usually have two chrome windows side by side (left and right of the screen), so they're more vertical than horizontal
- selfhoster69 5y agoOr if they did not change the viewport size and instead appeared as a popup like how it is on Edge.
- Andrex 5y agoI find the small, label-less, monochrome icons undistracting, personally. If they tack on a few more I might start grousing, though. On the other hand, for some reason I cannot get myself over Firefox's default UI cruft in comparison.
- 5y ago
- kaycebasques 5y agoI believe they hit this milestone a little faster than you might expect (if you've been using Chrome for a long time) because previously Chrome was on a 6-week release cycle and they recently (within the last year or 2) switched to a 4-week cadence. https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/process/release_cycle.md https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs...
- eatonphil 5y agoPretty neat to see them list out all the bug reports and bug bounties paid. I don't know if that's common but it's the first time I've seen it. It's also a little odd to see a release announcement where they call out that none of the new features are in this post but will be announced later on.
- pdoconnell 5y agoTime to find out how many applications have regexes with a user agent parser with version /d{2} instead of /d+.
- eklitzke 5y agoI haven't followed exactly where they landed on this but both Firefox and Chrome have been testing user-agent strings with version 100+ for a while, and have (or at least had) a fall back mechanism to present the version as 99.xxx where the xxx contains additional information with the true browser version. There's also a longer term plan to phase out User-Agent headers as they exist now, more details at https://blog.chromium.org/2022/03/chrome-100-beta-reduced-user-agent.html https://blog.chromium.org/2022/03/chrome-100-beta-reduced-us...
- nanochad 5y ago
- russellbeattie 5y agoCongrats to the Chrome team! In my opinion, easily the most important tech project/product in the world. The amount of innovation built on top of it is simply mind boggling. We've all benefitted from their incredibly hard work. I look forward to seeing the progress made over the next 100 versions.
- coolso 5y agoWhat a horrible web browser, created by an abhorrent company. Safari, Firefox, and Edge should be recommended to our friends and family at every opportunity to help counter its market dominance.
- Markoff 5y agolast time I checked Edge was running in chromium as well and if you wanna do yourself service use Vivaldi instead Edge
- ______-_-______ 5y agoTell us how you really feel
- ffritz 5y agoAnyone noticed, how Google Meet screen sharing on macOS is broken on a daily basis? I then always check for an update and then after a restart of chrome, it works again. Next day, it has some weird issue again. But boy is it annoying. I wonder if it is an Apple Silicon only issue.
- zaphod12 5y agoI think this may be a somewhat more specific to your environment...I'm running on a new generation macbook pro (so M1+) and haven't had any trouble screen sharing
- Kiro 5y agoNo, this is definitely a much more widespread issue than that. Every single person that has tried to screenshare in my Google Meet meetings the past week has experienced the same problem.
- dudus 5y agoSame issue here on Intel MacBook Pro 2020. It seems the OSX permissions for Chrome Screenshare, Mic and Video get reset quite frequently. I can't pinpoint exactly what triggers it. If it's a Chrome update or OSX update. EDIT: Just updated Chrome to 100 and sure enough it lost screen recording permissions. Camera and Mic were kept though.
- kitsunesoba 5y agoIf I had to guess it probably has to do with how Chrome updates itself, which is likely causing the OS to see it as a new binary that hasn’t had permissions set after each update.
- morvita 5y agoI've been seeing this problem too at $JOB. Amusingly, the people on my team that use Firefox don't have these issues, but the Chrome users are seemingly losing the ability to screenshare daily.
- hparadiz 5y agoReally wish they'd bring back being able to edit shortcut keys yourself. I end up having to compile my own version so that I can have the shortcuts I want. https://github.com/ungoogled-software/contrib/blob/master/tweaks/shortcuts/macos-hotkeys-on-linux.patch https://github.com/ungoogled-software/contrib/blob/master/tw...
- kitsunesoba 5y agoUnder macOS at least you can set custom key shortcuts for any function in any app that has a corresponding menu item under System Preferences > Keyboards > Shortcuts. Really wish other OSes had a similar feature, though it’d be more hit or miss there due to how often standard menubars are eschewed under Windows and Linux.
- DantesKite 5y agoOn a side note, Chrome for iOS is much faster and easier to use than Safari, which always cracks me up.
- syspec 5y agoChrome for iOS is Safari with a skin on top
- judge2020 5y agoThe API for loading web pages, yes, so it's not running Blink or V8, but people choose to use (or not to use) Chrome nowadays for its integration with Google services and sync across devices. The only difference is that you don't get the wide compatibility Chrome affords via its engine, but IMO Apple's control over blocking JIT-compiled code allows them to maintain enough global browser marketshare to ensure developers at least test against two browser engines and not just one.
- flixing 5y agoNot until chrome implements extensions.
- asddubs 5y agowhat ever happened to the plan for chrome to get its own certificate store, anyway? It was announced a while back but never happened feels like it would be a good thing especially for old android devices (although at least one can use firefox which does have its own store)
- Andrew_nenakhov 5y agoEarly chrome was a breath of fresh air. Design was light, it was fast, and it felt like the promise of the web will soon pay off. Unfortunately, it helped kill the hated IE6/7 dragon only to take it's place. If you value the free internet and open standards, use Firefox. It is not important how's good chrome is or how beautiful it is (it actually isn't, early design was way better), because, after the demise of Opera, Firefox is the last alternative browser engine we have. We don't want one company decide the standards, it'll end badly.
- slowwriter 5y agoI think the larger tech community should be made more aware of this. Maybe if the likes of LTT or MKBHD (popular YouTube tech channels) could be convinced to do a video on it, it could help get more people into the Firefox camp
- staticassertion 5y agoDoesn't Chrome already effectively decide standards? What do they do that isn't standards compliant anyway? AFAIK they push new web standards all the time, and even if they didn't, they have the vast majority of the market share so the boat's sailed on Firefox imo.
- RubyRidgeRandy 5y agoAgreed. I also always feel like linux communities or hackernews is gaslighting me into thinking that firefox is just as fast as chrome. It's not. There is a tangible speed difference when using it.
- cyberpunk 5y agoI use it on a M1 and in my (totally subjective) experience it goes in order of fastest to slowest: safari, firefox, then chrome for speed on heavy websites...
- spartanatreyu 5y agoI just ran a little test to see what the difference was on my end. I opened a private tab in Firefox and Microsoft Edge (which is for all intents and purposes the same as chrome) on a 2020 iMac. (I uninstalled Chrome and installed Microsoft Edge when I found that their css styling of the chromium dev tools was easier to read) I wanted to test a commonly visited heavy website. I settled on reddit.com due to it's famous weight. Before loading the website, I opened both browser's dev-tools, switched to their network tabs and disabled both of their caches. These were my results: ----------------------------- Firefox (with uBlock Origin): - DOMContentLoaded: 2.84s - load: 4.19s - Network requests: 291 ----------------------------- Microsoft Edge: - DomContentLoaded: 3.99s - Load: 5.79s - Network requests: 318 ----------------------------- I double checked the network tabs and noticed that Firefox received 291 network requests while Microsoft Edge received 318 requests. Thinking that uBlock Origin may have blocked some ads and trackers making the site load faster, I disabled uBlock Origin on firefox and reran the test (again with the caches disabled). ----------------------------- Firefox (without uBlock Origin): - DomContentLoaded: 3.02s - load: 5.14s - Network requests: 305 ----------------------------- By my (admittedly small) testing, it appears that Firefox is faster than Microsoft Edge (which is just a restyled chrome). Also, this really highlights just how great uBlock Origin is on Firefox and how painful it is for Google to push Manifestv3 on their browser (and by extension, other browsers) since it neuters uBlock Origin.
- outside1234 5y agoHonestly one of the first steps that has to happen when Google is broken up is put Chrome in a foundation with open governance.
- smm11 5y agoI've switched to Edge. So, yeah.
- nabaraz 5y agoI'd switch too but that bloated right click menu gives me scares.
- shabier 5y agoI'm with you. The early builds, after they just released the canary, were so refreshing. From the UI to the UX, it just right. It's a shame they have integrated so much bloatware. The PDF reader, however, is my favorite feature. It has the right UI and tools that other browsers are missing.
- staticassertion 5y agoI think Chrome may be the single most impactful piece of software with regards to end-user security. Click to play plugins, sandboxed flash, sandboxed renderer, process isolation, auto updates, etc. Chrome completely changed the threat landscape in just a few years.
- ben174 5y agoWhat about privacy? Does it not phone home with every single browser request?
- staticassertion 5y agoIt doesn't, no.
- pjmlp 5y agoThe usual collection of bug fixes: - Use after free (9) - Type Confusion (1) - Heap buffer overflow (2)