Posts Tagged google chrome
JavaScript is the future of RIA
A few days back I had written an article about JavaScript being the future of RIA. Adobe Flex, Microsoft Silverlight, etc. are all nice and good to have. The fact of the matter is that a whopping percentage of people still prefer JavaScript when it comes to implementing RIA solutions.
To corroborate this claim of mine, I had been running a poll for quite some time now. After having got around 550 odd votes I think the time is now right to publish the results. The winner by a far and clear margin is JavaScript. Flex comes second. Here is graphic showing the results:
With the release of the new breed of web browsers that run on-steroid JavaScript engines this dominance of JavaScript in the field of RIA is most likely to increase.
The data presented here is not sponsored by any camp or company. Its strictly a poll that I ran in my personal capacity.
Add comment October 20, 2008
Google Chrome breaks Kubuntu 8.04 download: WebKit to blame?
Kubuntu has launched a KDE 4.0 version of its operating system. The KDE 4.0 environment sports a new UI also termed as Plasma which gives a refreshing new look to Linux systems. Even though the new UI needs a bit more on graphics power, I decided to try it on my humble PC.
First step was to download the ISO image. My PC that has a DVD burner runs Windows XP (unfortunately I cannot change that since its a shared one 
). So I opened up Google Chrome and punched in http://www.kubuntu.org/ . The Kubuntu website came up with a big download icon on the left as shown in the following screen shot:
When I clicked on the “Free download” buttion nothing happened. Initially I thought that the click did not register properly. So I clicked again. Nothing. I kept on trying and it just did not respond. I tried the same on Firefox and it immediately took me to the download page.
So what’s going on? Is this because Google Chrome is based on WebKit unlike Firefox? Looks likely. I tried the same thing on Apple’s Safari and faced the same problem. So probably its the WebKit software that is to blame here and not Chrome.
Here’s the version of Google Chrome that I am using:
Add comment September 26, 2008
Google Chrome losing user base
According to statistics gathered by Net Applications, the market share of Google’s Chrome seems to be diminishing. Within an hour of its release on Sept 2, 2008, Chrome had captured about 1% of the browser market. This share is apparently declining steadily. According to reports, users who had switched to Chrome from Mozilla’s Firefox and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer are going back to those.
Here are some of the figures:
Apple’s Safari has remained more or less unaffected by the launch of Chrome. This is because Google is yet to launch Chrome for the Mac platform.
Chrome’s decline is being attributed to a couple of factors. Firstly, many companies mandate the use of IE in the workplace. That is one of the reasons that Chrome’s acceptance has not improved. Secondly Google had not put in much effort in marketing its browser. Even though Chrome shows up as the first hit on Google search, on Yahoo its second while on Windows Live it does not seem to appear on the first page.
A silver lining to this seemingly dark cloud is the fact that the number of people using Chrome increases during after work hours.
1 comment September 23, 2008
Why Google Chrome uses Microsoft code
Scott Hansen in a recent post of his has dissected Google’s recently released Chrome web browser and has found code that uses the Windows Template Library(WTL). The WTL was open sourced by Microsoft in 2004. Till now it was relatively unknown, but now since Google has used it, its going to pickup interest. Google uses the WTL to draw the UI for Chrome. In using this library Chrome makes the most of native speeds. Another of Microsoft’s pioneering efforts, the XMLHttpRequest object in web browsers, was also popularised by Google in its GMail web mail system. Prior to that this little gem from Microsoft was pretty much unknown. GMail ushered in the era of Ajax and the RIA.
It makes very good business sense for Google to use the WTL for Chrome. That way they can generate impressive startup speeds and make the user experience a lot more enjoyable one. Unfortunately Chrome is yet to be released for Mac and Linux operating systems. Taking a different perpective, it makes all the more sense for Google to target the Windows version first. The fact is Microsoft Windows is the dominant desktop operating system. By providing Chrome for Windows first, Google has ensured that it reaches a huge number of people even though the Mac and Linux audiences are being made to wait. Also, due to the WTL, Google could achieve a more enjoyable experience with Chrome on Windows with relatively less effort. That is definitely one of Google’s objectives.
According to reports, the Mac and Linux versions are still some distance away.
1 comment September 15, 2008
“Enterprises stay away from Google Chrome”, says Preston Gralla
Here is a rather ‘interesting’ article that I came across from Preston Gralla. In a gist, Gralla warns enterprises from embracing Google’s Chrome web browser, because he feels that Google intends to take over the enterprise world using it!!! WOW. Is that even possible?
Ok, so Gmail, Google Docs, etc. would run faster on Google Chrome. But is that a serious enough reason for enterprises to dump their current setup of Microsoft Exchange(or any other mail solution), Microsoft Office, etc ? Come on Mr Gralla get real.
For arguments sake let’s accept Mr Gralla’s warning. So Google intends to dominate the enterprise. So what? Hasn’t Microsoft being doing that successfully to a large extent for years? Where were the warnings then? Doesn’t Apple harbor similar ambitions?
In fact Microsoft and Apple’s products have much more potential of casting dominance rather than Google’s. But according to Mr Gralla, Chrome is what people should be worried about.
With Chrome, the enterprises would rather have an expanded choice. They can choose to run JavaScript enabled web applications that would be responsive and efficient. Their software teams have more flexibility in choosing a technology stack for implementation. There would be a very steady flow of development resources that would keep their development efforts from being stymied. For developers who would otherwise have to learn new tips and tricks, Google’s Chrome saves their existing skills from obsolescence. Isn’t that a good thing?
I am not against new technologies, but I firmly believe in open technologies. Embracing open standards based new technologies is probably the best bet for enterprises keeping in mind return on investments in the long term. Proprietary technologies, though sometimes very compelling, can prove to be very expensive and might be an overkill.
Chrome is meant to be a browser and people should consider it exactly that and nothing more. I doubt that Google would be betting on seeing an increase in their enterprise business because of Chrome.
Add comment September 15, 2008
Google Chrome performs better than Firefox 3.1 Alpha 1 … at least for now
Reports have been rife that Mozilla’s TraceMonkey JavaScript engine would leave Google’s V8 in the dust. As of the latest build, this does not seem to be the case.
TraceMonkey is the new JavaSctipt engine that would be integrated in Mozilla’s next release of the Firefox web browser (v 3.1). Presently the alpha release of the browser is available for download and since its still alpha TraceMonkey is disabled by default. To enable TraceMonkey for Firefox 3.1a1, go to the about:config URL and add a Boolean preference with the name javascript.options.jit.content and set it to true.
I used the SunSpider JavaScript Benchmark tests to see how Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox 3.1a1 measure up against each other. Here are the results:
Mozilla Firefox 3.1a1
Total: 2413.0ms +/- 1.4% 3d: 267.0ms +/- 5.8% cube: 89.4ms +/- 0.8% morph: 78.2ms +/- 2.6% raytrace: 99.4ms +/- 15.1% access: 340.2ms +/- 5.1% binary-trees: 42.8ms +/- 32.8% fannkuch: 156.0ms +/- 2.0% nbody: 101.8ms +/- 3.7% nsieve: 39.6ms +/- 5.7% bitops: 272.8ms +/- 1.6% 3bit-bits-in-byte: 51.6ms +/- 1.3% bits-in-byte: 67.4ms +/- 1.0% bitwise-and: 66.8ms +/- 4.6% nsieve-bits: 87.0ms +/- 1.8% controlflow: 31.6ms +/- 2.2% recursive: 31.6ms +/- 2.2% crypto: 167.0ms +/- 1.7% aes: 60.8ms +/- 0.9% md5: 53.0ms +/- 4.7% sha1: 53.2ms +/- 4.2% date: 201.8ms +/- 12.2% format-tofte: 122.2ms +/- 20.6% format-xparb: 79.6ms +/- 2.4% math: 257.0ms +/- 1.5% cordic: 114.0ms +/- 0.8% partial-sums: 91.2ms +/- 2.2% spectral-norm: 51.8ms +/- 8.4% regexp: 209.0ms +/- 10.2% dna: 209.0ms +/- 10.2% string: 666.6ms +/- 2.8% base64: 67.4ms +/- 2.8% fasta: 120.4ms +/- 3.3% tagcloud: 118.0ms +/- 4.9% unpack-code: 273.6ms +/- 4.3% validate-input: 87.2ms +/- 9.2%
Google Chrome
Total: 1291.8ms +/- 1.5% 3d: 92.6ms +/- 1.8% cube: 22.8ms +/- 13.6% morph: 39.8ms +/- 8.1% raytrace: 30.0ms +/- 10.2% access: 66.6ms +/- 4.7% binary-trees: 5.4ms +/- 12.6% fannkuch: 22.8ms +/- 4.6% nbody: 23.2ms +/- 17.9% nsieve: 15.2ms +/- 6.8% bitops: 49.2ms +/- 2.1% 3bit-bits-in-byte: 4.2ms +/- 13.2% bits-in-byte: 9.0ms +/- 13.8% bitwise-and: 14.4ms +/- 7.7% nsieve-bits: 21.6ms +/- 8.7% controlflow: 2.6ms +/- 26.2% recursive: 2.6ms +/- 26.2% crypto: 44.6ms +/- 2.5% aes: 17.0ms +/- 5.2% md5: 14.4ms +/- 4.7% sha1: 13.2ms +/- 7.9% date: 215.8ms +/- 5.0% format-tofte: 136.4ms +/- 3.6% format-xparb: 79.4ms +/- 10.1% math: 86.0ms +/- 4.2% cordic: 46.6ms +/- 6.7% partial-sums: 29.2ms +/- 1.9% spectral-norm: 10.2ms +/- 13.4% regexp: 309.2ms +/- 1.8% dna: 309.2ms +/- 1.8% string: 425.2ms +/- 2.4% base64: 53.6ms +/- 11.0% fasta: 46.0ms +/- 0.0% tagcloud: 117.0ms +/- 2.8% unpack-code: 148.8ms +/- 2.0% validate-input: 59.8ms +/- 0.9%
Well from these results it looks like Google Chrome is almost twice as fast as Mozilla Firefox 3.1a1 in its present form. Firefox trumps Chrome in the date tests and the regexp tests. In all the others Chrome outdoes Firefox by a huge margin.
Hopefully the final version that would be coming out of Mozilla will have better results.
1 comment September 11, 2008
The future of RIA is JavaScript not Flex or Silverlight
With the advent of Web 2.0 a new concept became the most sought-after technology for web applications. Popularized by Google’s GMail, rich internet applications or RIA very quickly became the need of the hour. At the heart of RI applications was JavaScript, a scripting language for the web, that was in existence long before Google was even born. Google, with its GMail, demonstrated what could be achieved with JavaScript and thus paved the way for the next generation of web applications.
JavaScript had its own problems. The biggest of them was probably cross-browser compatibility. Led by Microsoft through its Internet Explorer web browser, JavaScript quickly became a victim of non-standard usage. Microsoft, in order to prove its dominance over Netscape, supplied browser objects and functions that could be used to generate ‘cool’ effects in a web page easily. These were never ratified by any standards bodies. Since Microsoft was dominant on the desktop and also bundled IE with its Windows operating system, the exponential growth of IE in popularity apparently vindicated their arrogant violation of established standards. Netscape died under Microsoft’s onslaught and so did the standards of JavaScript. Developers started writing applications that were IE specific. It was not uncommon to see applications labeled “Best viewed in Microsoft Internet Explorer”.
The arrival of Mozilla’s Firefox web browser changed all this. Users, plagued by IE’s numerous vulnerabilities and instability, adapted to Firefox. Firefox implemented a more standards compliant version of JavaScript. So developers started writing rich applications that used standards compliant JavaScript. Even then there was one more problem with JavaScript and that came to the forefront due to RIAs. This was performance.
Some of the leading vendors saw an opportunity in this short coming of JavaScript. Notable amongst them is Adobe and more recently Microsoft. Adobe’s Flash technology was initially meant to serve the multimedia needs of web applications. Flash was great for animations and effects, for video and audio playback, for slide shows and image manipulations, but it was never meant for rich internet applications. So enter Adobe Flex, a technology based on Flash, but offering widgets and controls for business applications. Cross-browser compatibility was achieved but at the cost of an added Flash plug-in. Not to be undone by Adobe, Microsoft entered into the fray with its Silverlight software. Silverlight did all the cools things that Flash did and also needed a plug-in to run. It seemed like JavaScript was doomed.
Mozilla and Google had different plans. Mozilla’s Firefox 3.1 browser, still in testing, and Google’s recent Chrome web browser breathed a new life into JavaScript applications. In Google Chrome, Google introduced the V8 JavaScript virtual machine that offered significant performance boosts for existing applications. Mozilla has incorporated the new TraceMonkey JavaScript engine that has reportedly achieved performance boosts of up to 85%!!! With these two products JavaScript is surely set to make a come back.
As things stand, JavaScript has overcome its two worst adversaries – cross browser compatibility and performance. With the availability of brilliant libraries like Yahoo UI Toolkit, Dojo toolkit, etc. that help ease development of RIAs, JavaScript is here to stay and the way to go for future applications. For a JavaScript performance comparison study click here.
15 comments September 8, 2008
Google Chrome peformance data through about: commands
Google Chrome, the latest browser to enter the arena, has already seen quite a few downloads and reports. There have been rave reviews and circumspection. Only time can say whether it would be a success.
Google Chrome is a from-scratch browser that incorporates quite a few new design methodologis and performance boosting technologies. The most talked about of those is the new V8 JavaScript virtual machine.
To get more data on the browser’s peformance Google enables certain special URLs commonly known as about: commands. Mozilla Firefox implements quite a few of them. Also its not all work and no play for the folks at Google. Check out this one - about:internets. Here are a few of the rest:
about:, about:version – shows the version
about:cache – shows cache information
about:plugins – shows information on plugins
about:memory – shows memory usage information
about:stats – shows statistics
about:network – shows network activity data
about:histograms – performance information
about:crash – crashes the active browser tab
These commands will surely help developers get an insight into how their applications are behaving inside Google Chrome.
1 comment September 4, 2008
Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft IE: SunSpider JavaScript performance test results
With the release of Google Chrome, JavaScript applications received a much needed performance boost. Google Chrome, the newly released open source web browser, incorporates a high performance JavaScript virtual machine called the V8. Mozilla is also working on including a high speed JavaScript engine called the TraceMonkey in its next release. Test results for Mozilla have shown almost 83% peformance improvement in JavaScript execution. So it seems that web applications that used JavaScript heavily have been breathed new life with the advent of these new breed browsers.
A very standard test for judgin JavaScript performance in web browsers is the SunSpider JavaScript Benchmark tests. This benchmark tests the core of JavaScript and not the DOM or other things. The SunSpider tests focus different scenarios for JavaScript performance including 3D raytracing, cryptography, code decompression, etc. I ran the SunSpider test on recently released Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox 3.0.1 and Microsoft Internet Explorer 7. Google Chrome beat the competition hands down. The worst possible performance came for Microsoft’s Internet Explorer. It was way behind the others.
Here’s a graphic showing the results in the different test categories:
Microsoft’s Internet Explorer performed the worst in the string manipulations test. Here are the full results of the test:
| Category | Test | Google Chrome 0.2.149.27 |
Mozilla Firefox 3.0.1 |
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 |
| 3d |
Category Sub-total |
91.4ms |
|
|
| cube |
|
|
|
|
| morph |
|
|
|
|
| raytrace |
|
|
|
|
| access |
|
|
|
|
| binary-trees |
|
|
|
|
| fannkuch |
|
|
|
|
| nbody |
|
|
|
|
| nsieve |
|
|
|
|
| bitops |
|
|
|
|
| 3bit-bits-in-byte |
|
|
|
|
| bits-in-byte |
|
|
|
|
| bitwise-and |
|
|
|
|
| nsieve-bits |
|
|
|
|
| controlflow |
|
|
|
|
| recursive |
|
|
|
|
| crypto |
|
|
|
|
| aes |
|
|
|
|
| md5 |
|
|
|
|
| sha1 |
|
|
|
|
| date |
|
|
|
|
| format-tofte |
|
|
|
|
| format-xparb |
|
|
|
|
| math |
|
|
|
|
| cordic |
|
|
|
|
| partial-sums |
|
|
|
|
| spectral-norm |
|
|
|
|
| regexp |
|
|
|
|
| dna |
|
|
|
|
| string |
|
|
|
|
| base64 |
|
|
|
|
| fasta |
|
|
|
|
| tagcloud |
|
|
|
|
| unpack-code |
|
|
|
|
| validate-input |
|
|
|
|
| Total |
|
|
|
3 comments September 3, 2008
Google Chrome crashes: First security flaws discovered
Google’s Chrome web browser has been out for about a day and already there are at least two known vulnerabilities published.
The first vulnerability, reported by Rishi Narang from Evilfingers, causes Chrome to crash without user interaction when malicious link with an undefined handler followed by a special character is provided. The following HTML makes Google Chrome crash without any user intervention:
<html>
<body>
<a href="idonotexist:%">Click me</a>
</body>
</html>
For more details about this click here.
The second vulnerability reported by researcher Aviv Raff makes the browser susceptible to carpet-bombing attacks. Raff found that by combining a flaw in WebKit and a Java bug it was possible to launch executables directly from the browser of an unsuspecting user. Raff has a proof-of-concept available and it can be seen here. This bug was also present in Apple’s Safari that was later patched by Apple in version 3.1.2 of the browser. The vulnerability is present in WebKit 525.13 which is at the core of Google Chrome even though it is outdated.
Add comment September 3, 2008
