Chrome 5 stable released for Windows, Mac, Linux

[Matthew DeCarlo]

Google has released Chrome 5, bringing new features and marking the first stable build for Mac and Linux. The latest version is available for Windows too, of course. Among the new features is the ability to synchronize browser preferences, such as themes, homepage and startup settings, web content settings, preferred languages, and even page zoom settings across multiple computers. This is in addition to syncing bookmarks, which was introduced in version 4.0 earlier this year.

Extensions now work in incognito mode via the extensions manager, the bookmark manager has been tweaked, and Chrome 5 incorporates HTML5 features, such as Geolocation APIs, App Cache, web sockets, as well as file drag-and-drop. If you want to experience some of what HTML5 brings to the table, Google says you can drag and drop attachments in Gmail or enable the geolocation functionality in Google Maps.

Although Flash Player integration didn't make it into this build, it should come along with the full release of Flash 10.1, which isn't far off. If Chrome hasn't automatically updated yet, you can manually install version 5 by clicking the tools menu (looks like a wrench), then About Google Chrome. Complete installers are here: Windows, Mac, Linux.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/39071-chrome-5-stable-released-for-windows-mac-linux.html

 

[tipstir]

Sounds good! Hope they had fixed the intermittent crashing issues and lockups!

 

[TomSEA]

As soon as they get the Flash implemented, this will definitely be king of the browsers.

 

[Guest]

@TomSEA

As long as that's your opinion, it's OK. But Chrome is still years behind Firefox overall.

Chrome needs to do something about its memory consumption architecture. Also, fix the crashes it constantly has because of extensions. And not to mention the incompatibly with many websites.

Even though its not directly Google's fault, these and other issues are keeping Chrome from being the king. Overall -with or without its many issues- Firefox remains the best overall browser... for now that is...

 

[HaMsTeYr]

@Guest

Really? I find that Chrome's memory consumption and speed is better than firefox's. Firefox takes forever to launch and stuff like that, and as soon as chrome got out i jumped onto the train and its been good to me ever since.

I'm using a Q6600 as well so i doubt its processor power. And i mean, if a quad core can't run a BROWSER, then the world needs a look at itself. lol.

Overall i do still use firefox for its myriad of extensions though. I just think that in terms of browsing itself and minus the extras then Chrome wins... Even then Chrome has google dictionary, auto translate pages... and those are pretty handy. If anything i think the built in downloader is rubbish... for big files.

 

[Guest]

"Firefox takes forever to launch and stuff like that"

WOW. Yo Man I so believe you brah! Where is Fox new! This is factz!
Get Palin to spred dat wordz, make it even MORE beleebable.!

 

[Guest]

"if a quad core can't run a BROWSER"

Yo man, yo quad core is weak, aint for runnin browsa's and crap, its fo sho running tuxracer and hanna montana Linux, now dats the way u do it brah!

Get me dat quad core so I can runz me tuxracer and gimp fo sho!

Ya'll dont need office 2010 and da ebil ribbonz! Thats for smarty folk, we need vi editor, dillo web browsam gimp, tuxracer for 99.999% of ya'll needs.

 

[Vrmithrax]

Love how smartasses seem to always hide behind anonymous postings...

hamsteyr is correct, Firefox is slower. I can launch Firefox, immediately launch Chrome, and I can choose my website and start browsing before Firefox has finished launching. And this is with basic (no extensions) configurations, on my dual core laptop, my quad core gaming rig, and my office PC (also dual core)... If I load up the extensions I like in Firefox, I can usually get a bit of Techspot reading in on Chrome before Firefox is ready for me.

I have high hopes that the new update of Firefox is going to streamline that process, as I have always been a Firefox fan... And, you can't beat the library of extensions for it (yet).

 

[Guest]

@hamsteyr

You need to get your facts right. Chrome's memory consumption is the worst in the market. Do some research it you doubt.

Chrome uses Webkit. It is fast, but its compatibility rate is much much lower than the old Gecko. Gecko, while being the most stable and compatible, is slower than Webkit or Presto.

You keep bringing up the speed. Yes, Chrome is faster than Firefox, but only if we are talking about JavaScript rendering. Chrome: Speed for stability; Firefox: Both speed and stability.But by having both, it does feel slower. But the real life difference between chrome and Firefox are hardly noticeable.

Also, placebo has something to do with it too. Did you know Opera is aeons faster than Chrome? You might say that's impossible, but it is true. You guys need the FACTS. And one fact is that for now, Firefox remains the best overall browser. It doesn't sacrifice speed for stability, and it doesn't sacrifice stability for speed. Therefore, its not about if its the best, more like its simply better than everyone. For now that is...

And I'm writing this from Chrome 6 dev.

 

[Guest]

well said bro

 

[Didou]

I considered myself a devout Firefox user & but have since moved onto Chrome. Saying Firefox is more stable although not completely false is ignoring many facts, the most important of which is Chrome's ability to isolate tabs in a completely separate process (which could account for some of extra memory consumption over Firefox), but it is a very sought-after feature that even Firefox finally got in 3.6.x.

I've been using the Chrome beta for a while & haven't had stability issues either on Windows 7 or Mac OS X so to me it's up to par with a stable build of Firefox. On the other hand, the rendering speed, launch speed, overall responsiveness of the browser & better integration with the OS (on Windows & Mac OS X) really put Chrome on top of Firefox for me & blow the "extra memory footprint" argument clean out of the water.

 

[jstillion]

My experience that despite Chrome using more memory, it loads faster and performs better then Firefox, even on lower end machines (my 4-5 yr old laptop runs it better where firefox seems sluggish). It has the fastest Java script rendering engine, and ahead of Firefox in many area's. I can install themes and extensions without having to restart the browser.

I've come across very few pages that have compatibility issues. The only common issue I've seen is on forums where you try and submit a post and it finds "invalid code" in the post and it has to remove it before you can re-post (PlayStation.com forums as example).

 

[matrix86]

In all honesty, I can't tell any real time difference between Chrome and Firefox on my system. Benchmarking tests show Chrome as being almost twice as fast, but in my real world usage, load time and download time are the same. I actually run Firefox on one monitor and Chrome on the other.
The best thing I like about Chrome is that YouTube videos don't play automatically. They pause as soon as the screen loads, which gives the video time to load before I hit play to start watching it (I don't have the greatest internet speed). Although, I can't remember if this is a Chrome thing or if it's an add-on I have...I have so many add-ons that I can't keep up with what does what (both my Firefox and Chrome are loaded with add-ons that I actually use on a daily bases).