Google Chrome

white tiger · Post by **white tiger** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:00 pm

well google says (or it SEEMS they have said) they'll fix the EULA. we will see. very very happy with opera for now

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-ch ... agreement/

Game_Ender · Post by **Game_Ender** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 12:50 am

white tiger wrote:well google says (or it SEEMS they have said) they'll fix the EULA. we will see.

Its pretty simple, google is basically a bunch of coders and they don't want to have to figure out EULA's, so they copy ones from other services. It appears they don't have legal give them a good look before hand and count on the public to do so. Its a little lame, but the thing is fully open source.

Google wants a better, faster browser because they are a web company. They want the web to be faster and easier so you can/want use there products more. It doesn't make sense for them to have a nasty EULA. I willing to give them the benifit of a doubt.

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:09 am

Game_Ender wrote:google is basically a bunch of coders and they don't want to have to figure out EULA's, so they copy ones from other services

Hehehe .... you must be talking about Google circa 1999.

Post by **Kojack** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:47 am

Maybe it is only a matter of time till a google-free version is created by someone.

Well, my previous post had a link to one. Chromium is Chrome without the google eula.
It's also more up to date. Google Chrome is version 0.2.149.27, Chromium is up to 0.2.151.0. So it should include the fix for the denial of service attacks Chrome is vulnerable to.
Hehe, to kill Google Chrome, just type :% in the address bar. Chromium has fixed that.

Cool, looks like a portable app version of Chrome/Chromium is possible. Unzip Chrome anywhere (no install needed), and run it with the command line option of "--user-data-dir=e:\profile\", replacing the path with where you want the data. I just tested it with a relative path instead of absolute, and it appears to work. I haven't tried it from a flash drive yet.

Jerky · Post by **Jerky** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 6:13 am

Matt Cutts' Blog wrote:Update, Sept. 3rd 2008: Earlier today, Google changed section 11 of the EULA to read as follows:

11. Content license from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.
I think that text is much better.

It has officially been changed.

Thieum · Post by **Thieum** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:47 am

PolyVox wrote:I have read there as been some controversy over the EULA - but actually I don't quite see how this can be. I mean, this is open source software so you could download and build it without accepting the EULA? And then you distribute it to other people, without them accepting the EULA?

When you build the browser from the sources, you don't get Chrome, you get Chromium.
I think the difference is here : the binary release of Chrome is proprietary but not Chromium. If you use Chromium, you don't have to agree to the EULA.

lonewolff · Post by **lonewolff** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am

I might download and give it a go and see if it is worth the fuss.

white tiger · Post by **white tiger** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:55 am

Thieum wrote:
PolyVox wrote:I have read there as been some controversy over the EULA - but actually I don't quite see how this can be. I mean, this is open source software so you could download and build it without accepting the EULA? And then you distribute it to other people, without them accepting the EULA?
When you build the browser from the sources, you don't get Chrome, you get Chromium.
I think the difference is here : the binary release of Chrome is proprietary but not Chromium. If you use Chromium, you don't have to agree to the EULA.

uh? i'm missing something? so if i compile ogre from source i don't have to accept the LGPL?

EDIT:

it look like Chromium is just the chrome source code under a different name and license. maybe they have done that for legal reasons?

http://code.google.com/chromium/terms.html

The Chromium software and sample code developed by Google is licensed under the BSD license

http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.a ... inux-port

Google has officially released its new Chrome web browser. In conjunction with the release, Google has also launched Chromium, an open-source software project that enables third-party developers to study, modify, extend, and redistribute the underlying source code of the Chrome browser.

lonewolff · Post by **lonewolff** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 11:05 am

white tiger wrote:uh? i'm missing something? so if i compile ogre from source i don't have to accept the LGPL?

Interesting point.

There is no EULA on the downloads page. Is this a loop hole that needs plugging? Does this mean we can all now statically link our projects without a worry of having to supply our source?

Post by **CABAListic** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 11:21 am

No, the point is that Chromium source is licensed under BSD - which means that you can use the source code under the terms of that license. Seeing as the BSD does not imply any further EULA, your self-built executable is free from any such restrictions (thereby bypassing the Chrome EULA). If they had chosen a different license for the source, things might have been different.

nikki · Post by **nikki** » Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:00 pm

I've tried it on Windows, its pretty nice. I'm just waiting for a Linux version. I've heard it runs fine in Wine though...

lonewolff · Post by **lonewolff** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 1:10 am

Just installed it. It is pretty fast, which is the way things should be these days IMO.

It doesn't seem to be without bugs though. It took about 15 goes to get flash player working. It would install the plug-in, display flash animations, but next time I opened the browser it would want to install it all over again!

[rant]

On the topic of fast applications. How bad is windows media player these days?

Under Vista, watching a DivX file the CPU usage was thrashing at 100%. Running 'mplayer2.exe' from the run box brings up the older style media player. Watching the same DivX file on mplayer2 only makes the CPU yawn at 6% (on my AMD 2000+).

Microsoft and these other companies spend too much time on producing over bloated software. Things should run at an awesome pace these days. If apps were programmed to do what they are meant to do things would be great.
[/rant]

steven · Post by **steven** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:21 am

lonewolff · Post by **lonewolff** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:28 pm

So true, steven

So true...

ajs15822 · Post by **ajs15822** » Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:16 am

Hey guys, I've made some progress on embedding Google Chrome's WebKit Port (with their Skia graphics and V8 Javascript engines). You can read more here.

It won't be long now till you see this in an Ogre3D app!

Nauk · Post by **Nauk** » Tue Sep 09, 2008 4:17 am

Very nice AJ, I was waiting for that!

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Tue Sep 09, 2008 5:37 am

ajs15822 wrote:Hey guys, I've made some progress on embedding Google Chrome's WebKit Port (with their Skia graphics and V8 Javascript engines). You can read more here.

It won't be long now till you see this in an Ogre3D app!

I am somewhat courious ... do you have this thing rendering to a generic memory buffer using platform's native 2d rendering capabilities ?

ajs15822 · Post by **ajs15822** » Tue Sep 09, 2008 5:56 am

warmi wrote:
ajs15822 wrote:Hey guys, I've made some progress on embedding Google Chrome's WebKit Port (with their Skia graphics and V8 Javascript engines). You can read more here.

It won't be long now till you see this in an Ogre3D app!
I am somewhat courious ... do you have this thing rendering to a generic memory buffer using platform's native 2d rendering capabilities ?

The internal renderer is 'Skia' (more info here); I am able to 'paint' an area of the web-view to a Skia Canvas, derive a bitmap from it, and blit it to a texture.

sisyphus · Post by **sisyphus** » Tue Sep 09, 2008 8:28 pm

@Stephen - Summarises my feelings exactly....

ajs15822 · Post by **ajs15822** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:04 am

I've made some more progress in regards to embedding chromium-webkit within an offscreen context (read about it here)-- I will most probably update NaviLibrary with this new back-end in the future.

lonewolff · Post by **lonewolff** » Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:20 am

Cool, I'll check it out

ajs15822 · Post by **ajs15822** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 8:26 pm

Hey yall, I've just released the source code and a demo (made with Ogre3D) for my Webkit-Chromium-embedding project, check it out: http://ajeanius.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/first-release/

Game_Ender · Post by **Game_Ender** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:23 pm

lonewolff wrote:
white tiger wrote:uh? i'm missing something? so if i compile ogre from source i don't have to accept the LGPL?
Interesting point.

The LGPL applies to the source code, a EULA applies to the binaries only. So the google EULA applies only to the binaries of Chrome they release.

Nauk · Post by **Nauk** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:47 pm

ajs15822 wrote:Hey yall, I've just released the source code and a demo (made with Ogre3D) for my Webkit-Chromium-embedding project, check it out: http://ajeanius.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/first-release/

Great news AJ

I am curious how it will turn out compared to the mozilla engine in the background.

Nauk · Post by **Nauk** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:00 pm

Ok, I tried the demo on the WinXP machine works oily fast! But it doesn't work on Win2k, just like chrome - exception coming up, entry point of "freeaddrinfo" not found in DLL "WS2_32.dll". Otherwise very slick and I like the logo design a lot.

EDIT: I just learned there are fixes for that, no support from google, but there are workarounds for Win2k.

Ogre Forums

Google Chrome

Cartoon