Chrome to pre-load pages for "wicked fast" browsing

By on November 11, 2010, 2:00 PM
Google is working on a new feature that could boost Chrome's browsing speed even more. Still in the works, the new page-preloading capability will allow Google's browser to load Web pages before they're actually needed. "Pre-load pages in background tabs for 'wicked fast' page loads," a brief description of the feature reads on the Chromium issues tracker (via CNET). The feature is expected to arrive via an early build in February 2011.

As with any browser, Chrome lets you browse the Web via multiple tabs. Loading select pages in background tabs would mean the browser will not have to load those pages from scratch when they're needed by the user, which will make them available much more quickly. How this will be executed isn't clear yet. Google won't be able to take up too much memory with background tabs or the speed benefits will quickly fall apart. Furthermore, Google will need to choose which pages to preload among the hundreds of thousands a user might want to visit, and how long it will keep them cached.

Google has an obsession with speed that many have benefitted from. It is one of the primary reasons why Chrome's market share continues to grow at a steady rate. Nevertheless, we're going to reserve judgment until we see this feature for ourselves. The idea is an interesting one, but as always, it all comes down to execution.





User Comments: 56

Got something to say? Post a comment
zogo said:

The best browser I have ever used. Reliable and fast and now they are making even more faster. Nice work Google, you always know how to satisfy your users

Guest said:

I want this, but with Opera!

ikesmasher said:

only thing if, what are there are like 50 links on that page, is chrome gonna load them all at once?

Hatrix said:

i've already tested in Chromium latest version and its amazing!!!

If other browsers dont keep up with this tecnology they will surely be left behind

to ikesmasher, its not for links on sites, at least for the moment, its for searching via hyperlink, like for example "ww.techsp....." and you havent clicked enter yet and it will show on the screen already behind it.

maybe they will do when you mouse over in the future

Nima304 said:

I might switch to Chrome if this is as awesome as it sounds.

z71kris said:

I will say I have used Chrome exclusively since it has come out....only I dont is because I am on a Mcirosoft site that has to IE8

DokkRokken said:

I'm not sure how I managed to browse the internet before I had Chrome. It's a fantastic browser, and this will only make it better yet.

KG363 KG363 said:

Google is dedicated to making chrome the fastest, that's why I use it

Chazz said:

It seems like this is a expansion upon their "Instant search" feature for google.com. Sounds very nice! But, still I am a firefox fan. Mostly because I'm not one to notice the speed differences in a browser...and I am a "if it's not broke, don't fix it" sort of guy. If firefox presented me with a reason to change..than I will. I've tried chrome and opera(multiple versions) and to me...it's just another browser.

If I needed to change though, I'd pick opera..mainly because I do not want a advertising company to track my movements 24/7. I'd rather not trust them to not be evil...I'll just make sure they have no choice but to.

PanicX PanicX, TechSpot Ambassador, said:

I'm not sure of the details, but I'd think this would be a problem for when I'm tweaking website design. It's already a pain being sure the browser reloads a fresh copy of a page or CSS file, I'd think it'd be even worse when you've got predictive cache to hassle with too.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

I really do not understand this. Does anyone really benefit from, or see the difference between a page loading in 180ms vs 200ms? is this purely bragging rights?.... or is there a practical application for this 100ms (or whatever the ridiculously small increment of time is?)

Cueto_99 said:

I think this is a great way to speed things up, I visit certain pages almost daily... and I would really love if those pages load instantly, even more, if for some reason there is no access to Internet, chrome could load the last saved version... Cool! Keep it up and simple google!

Puiu Puiu said:

As long as it's RAM usage doesn't skyrocket because of this then they should try it.

sMILEY4ever said:

Nima304 said:

I might switch to Chrome if this is as awesome as it sounds.

I might too but I'm still staying with FF for Noscript, adblock plus, foxfilter.

compu4 said:

puiu said:

As long as it's RAM usage doesn't skyrocket because of this then they should try it.

Same here. One would think that pre-loading all of those pages into memory (some site homepages have hundreds of links) would occupy loads of system ram.

Leeky Leeky said:

I really do not understand this. Does anyone really benefit from, or see the difference between a page loading in 180ms vs 200ms? is this purely bragging rights?.... or is there a practical application for this 100ms (or whatever the ridiculously small increment of time is?)

God knows, most pages load immediately when I click them, or have pretty much displayed as I hit enter when typing a URL in, so I don't really get how it would make my experience any better.

Would it be an improvement for slower internet connections though?

Guest said:

...there's been a Firefox extension that does the exact same thing out for years.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Firefox is the best ive used but i do like chrome a lot.

slh28 slh28, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Chrome runs very nicely on slow PCs, so wouldn't this slow them down? And people with higher spec computers probably won't even notice the difference anyway.

ChrisG683 said:

What is that Firefox extension called? I'd like to try it out.

I could see this caching being useful... but it seems very risky and expensive if you don't get it right...

At least this would matter to most users though, unlike java script  speeds which really doesn't affect people as much as it is hyped up to.

Guest said:

Chrome is just a stripped down version of Opera...

IAMTHESTIG said:

interesting... I think they could easily do this when people hover their mouse arrow over a link. But on top of this, I suppose google's keeping track of peoples browsing habits could help predict what links you may click and preload those pages.

PanicX PanicX, TechSpot Ambassador, said:

Chrome is just a stripped down version of Opera...

Absurd.. Naive... Ignorant.. Troll....

I really dont know which to call you.

Jetatt23 said:

This sounds like a cool idea, no matter how they implement. I don't see this really helping stumble upon users though, as the sites are completely random

spyx said:

To me Chrome is already the browsing choice if this works out as they want it it would be great but im thinkin it maight take more ram and processin power i hope it doesnt over do it now chrome barely takes anything and its really fast regardless of internet im talking about loadin speed and such

Archean Archean, TechSpot Paladin, said:

@Emil

I think they are probably going to use their massive infrastructure at the back end to provide this caching ability; but it is a calculated guess.

@red

I totally agree, it is simply for bragging rights nothing more, because browser can only do that much, if the user doesn't have a fast connection you can't go too far with such features anyway.

motrin said:

sounds like a great feature but i hope there is an option to opt out of this. I have slow internet and need 100% of my bandwidth to load a simple webpage or it will never load. this pre-loading would certainly slow me down even further.

Razerblade said:

I have been using Chrome as my main browser for a while. Firefox 4 and IE9 are ok but do not have anywhere near the speed of Chrome! This feature could be really useful, not quite sure how it is going to work though as it almost has to predict which website you want to go to. Look forward to seeing it though.

Demons said:

Chrome is currently my primary browser of choice. I love the simplicity and speed of it. This seems to be an interesting feature. I wonder how they will limit the bandwidth and memory usage while the system waits for the user to open up that page. If they can pull it off, it will be very nice, though the page may not be quite up to date from when it cached it. Things change pretty quickly on the internet.

DSparil said:

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I don't really find this preloading web pages useful. It's kind of like that add-on for Firefox called... I forgot.

A lot of USEFUL things are missing in Chrome even though I do prefer it over Firefox just because it's faster. I, however, do need Firefox for more of those "Power User" elements that it has that Chrome is severely lacking.

It's kind of surprising how slow the Chrome community is in producing useful extensions. Sure it's only a year or so old, but at that frame of time Firefox already has the primary useful extensions ready and being constantly updated. It just feels like the Chrome community isn't as active (or at least as adept in scripting) as the Firefox crowd.

xcelofjkl said:

Chrome has never failed me compared to how pathetic Safari is. I have both of them (chrome on desktop and safari on mobile). Safari is just the most annoying browser ever made.

omega00 said:

Sounds promising. Other browsers will continue to play catchup with Google thanks to this innovation. Hopefully, this new feature doesn't end up slowing down old computers.. computers with limited memory.

Jibberish18 said:

sMILEY4ever said:

Nima304 said:

I might switch to Chrome if this is as awesome as it sounds.

I might too but I'm still staying with FF for Noscript, adblock plus, foxfilter.

Chrome has Add-Ons of its own ya know? Don't know for sure if it has the ones you mentioned above though.

Serag said:

Does that mean it will be continually downloading page data in order for the page to load in a blink when clicked ?

If so it won't be of use to someone like me with a very low internet speed and bandwidth, I still use Firefox as my only browser, but I'm sure interested in new features in other browsers, and Google sure is obsessed with speed more than anything else.

Guest said:

i want it on opera! both preview and instant!

fpsgamerJR62 said:

Chrome 8 beta seems pretty fast already. I wonder when they will upgrade Chrome 9 to beta status. Opera is fast too, although not quite up to Chrome's speed. However, Opera may pull a surprise with their coming Opera 11.

Jibberish18 said:

Chrome 8 beta seems pretty fast already. I wonder when they will upgrade Chrome 9 to beta status. Opera is fast too, although not quite up to Chrome's speed. However, Opera may pull a surprise with their coming Opera 11.

They both excel at different things as well. This is something that people never seem to mention. They just look at Peacekeeper tests and say that Chrome is faster. Which is true. But look at the details and generally, Opera is faster at specific areas compared to Opera.

codefeenix codefeenix said:

compu4 said:

puiu said:

As long as it's RAM usage doesn't skyrocket because of this then they should try it.

Same here. One would think that pre-loading all of those pages into memory (some site homepages have hundreds of links) would occupy loads of system ram.

Just load them on to the disk. Read speed from your HD greatly exceeds your internet connection.

Guest said:

I invite you to use OPERA!

Guest said:

I use Firefox for best compatibility and security, and I use Opera for everything else.

Guest said:

Do you want speed, then you should try to use Opera!

Guest said:

Sounds like the web accelerator app Google discontinued. At this point hardware is the only thing that will accelerate the web. SSDs and memory are already out now......

jazboy said:

It could be nice features. I am using Google Chrome from last 4 months and now i have almost stopped using mozilla firefox which was my favorite browser from quite long time.

Zecias said:

the speed chrome has is for people with slower computers, or for people with slower internet. no matter how fast yur internet or computer is, u will still probably notice a difference between chrome and other browsers. i think that chrome should give us the option of using more or less of our ram and cpu so that people wont lag out or can use their computer to its full potential.

Det Det said:

The piece of news said:

Google has an obsession with speed

I liked that. The fact that Google really focuses on speed with Chrome - rather than bloat it and slow it down with zillions of unnecessary features - is very true and the phrasing used here is not derogatory against Google in any way.

Always remain neutral - that's why one of my daily visits of finding out what's going on in the world goes to TechSpot.

ps. Gotta love these Opera fanboys saying: "Chrome is just a stripped down version of Opera...", etc. 1) Opera is closed source. There's not a way in _hell_ would you be able to get its source and just cut down all the unnecessary features. The only possibly way is to either use someone else's code (open source code) or do everything yourself from scratch - in case you did the latter one you really earned some respect. 2) Just because Google wants to create/succeeds in creating a faster web experience with Chrome/Chromium (I'm talking about a common web experience) and quickly gets more market share than Opera has, it's not really a good reason to start blutantly trolling around and trying to prove yourself how Opera has got to be the true 'future of browsers today'.

I'm not, of course, saying that Opera is a really slow or bloated browser (the installation size and startup times are actually quite surprising concidering how many features has been stucked into it) nor am I saying everybody here talking about Opera in a positive way is just trolling his/her ignorance like that guy is/was. It's very fast and hardware acceleration will be added to it at some point (sooner or later, since taking advantage of your GPU can _really_ speed up your browsing (which is also what Microsoft relies on with IE. Single great features to improve performance rather than trying to gain every possible speed increase through smaller changes)) but my 'vote' still goes for Chrome. It's _exactly_ the kinda browser I want to have and no closed source browser will ever be able to keep up with it. It's a tough job for the open source ones too.

Call _me_ a fanboy but that's just my story.

silvershad0w said:

I'm curious to see this in action. Chrome can be pretty demanding on memory but along with this new feature may provide some new technology that allows the browser as a whole to be more memory efficient. I currently use Chrome because from what I've read and seen myself it is the safest browser for Windows at this time. The market is ever evolving and continues to grow on one of the key points in a user's choice of a browser: speed & security. This sounds to be a promising new feature and I've already got a few ideas on how they could cache pages a user visits most often, however, I'm no developer so I'll just keep it at that. The privacy of a user with this feature enabled keeps coming to mind as I'm writing this since keeping your browser history stored to some degree will most likely be a part of this new feature. Only time will tell... Keep it up Google

Guest said:

don't think its gonna affect too much ram, u should be happy that ur able to utilize ur computer fully if you not a hard core multitasker .

if i talk about my computer i have got all the browsers and i keep them open all the time plus some other applications likek photoshop and dreamweaver n still more than 3 gb of ram is available i don't think its gonna affect urs tooooooooo just becoz of a browser ;) cheers now.

therickster90 said:

The Firefox extension in question is called FasterFox.

[link]

I think it came under some fire from websites claiming that it used up a lot of bandwidth. Article here:

[link]

255juan said:

I'll stick with Firefox

fritz123 said:

this would be a very usefool tool. i like chrome and i think it is really reliable. i believe this wont be really give so much of a difference since it aint really that slow in the first place. i would matter to those with a lot slower connections(lets see in Feb). chrome is great but it still doesnt support some sites. im sticking to firefox still.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.