Google Chrome 5 Debuts
The stable version of Google Chrome 4 was released to the public a short time ago and we mentioned in the review that Google was now targeting both Internet Explorer and Opera version-wise with the possibility that Google Chrome would outpace both browsers in the next 18 months.
Today the first developer version of Google Chrome 5 was made available to the public which adds weight to that prediction.
The changelog for that first Google Chrome 5 release does not reveal many changes which can be attributed to the short time span between the final release of Google Chrome 4 and the first release of version 5 of the web browser.
One very handy change is that Google Chrome 5 now uses the default download directories in Vista and Windows 7 (before it was using MyDocuments/ Downloads/ instead of /Downloads/.
A content settings dialog has been added to the options which you access by opening chrome://settings/ directly in Chrome or by clicking on the menu icon and selecting settings from the options listed in it. There you need to click on the "show advanced settings" link at the bottom of the page to display more settings and among them the content menu.
It displays settings on how to deal with cookies, images, JavaScript, Plugins and Pop-ups. It can for instance be used to disable all JavaScript on all sites but on the sites listed in the exception list.
- Cookies: Modify how cookies and other site date are saved on your computer (Allow local data to be set, ask me when a site tries to set data, block sites from setting any day (with an exception list provided). Can also be used to block all third party cookies without exception and to clear cookies and other site data when the browser is closed. Does contain a link to Adobe Flash Player storage settings.
- Images: Show all images, or do not show any images but for sites on the exceptions list.
- JavaScript: Allow all sites to run JavaScript or do not allow any site to run JavaScript except for the sites in the exceptions list.
- Plugins: Allow all sites to use plug-ins or do not allow any site to use plugins except for the sites in the exception list.
- Popups: Allow all sites to use popups or do not allow any site to use popups except for the sites in the exception list.
Version 5 of Google Chrome comes with the address bar separator which hides the extension buttons in the toolbar when activated.
Google Chrome 5 is available on the official early access page at the Google Chrome website.
Addendum: While the Content Settings window is accessible in Google Chrome 5 it does not currently contain any functionality.
Previous Post: « Tabbed Browsing Extension TabJump [Google Chrome]
Next Post: NoScript Might Come To Google Chrome: Eventually »
Martin ,link to early access page missing in the post, in the last sentence !! link referring to text instead of URL, check it out.
fixed, thanks for letting me know.
As expected this is still a half cooked product. The settings that you select under the “Content Settings” is not displayed again the next time you try to see.
But again, the developers will solve this very shortly.
Really liking the way how Chrome is spearheading into this browser war.
The problem with those Content Settings are, not one of them have been activated yet. Ckick on them and click OK to exit. Then go back in and you’ll find them unchecked. The Cookies exceptions option window doesn’t even open up. Another problem is the themes keep messing up and you have reset them. version 4 was way better.
I had used Chrome, the week before this release. A seven day week. Eight out of ten times it could not open my Yahoo home page from my desk top.When it worked, I found many things to like about Chrome. The fact that it could not open my home page was enough for me to uninstall and go back to *cough* IE8… I think a seven day trial was fair. I may at some point give it another look,
i like
You lot /do/ realise this is about an unfinished product, right? The “early access” page is called that because the programme is still being developed, and at this point is meant for testing only. Primarily for people working on the project.
Although…I do admit that this article does a shoddy job of distinguishing between beta versions (ones still being worked on prior to release, chock full of bugs) and polished releases (which should be generally usable, few bugs).
We should expect loads of glitches in this until an official release is out (as opposed to a developer release).
Still no bookmarks side bar, and no ad blocking.
There are multiple ad-blocking extensions. Some of them work better than others.
They are not blocking ads, they are hiding them, that is a difference.
That’s their reputation, yes. Let me check the code of the one I have enabled right now…
Yeah, it does the same thing. It mainly uses CSS rules to change the ads’ addresses to invalid URLs, or to delete HTML elements entirely. I expect that on a slower machine than mine, there would be noticeable delay between when Chrome starts to render the raw HTML source of a page and when the extension edits the ads out. So some ads may still be downloaded to cache or the page might flicker as an ad shows and is then removed.
I’ve used some other extensions that show the ads for 0.15 to 6 seconds before managing to hide or delete them. Some would make Flash ads invisible but still loaded, leaving them to suck resources or play annoying sounds. These extensions were totally unacceptable.
The AdBlock variation I’m using now seems to do alright.
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/gighmmpiobklfepjocnamgkkbiglidom
But I understand that needing a “fast enough” computer to let ads be edited out before they can display is not good enough for most people. Actually, I’m usually one of the people griping about modern software and operating systems being slower to perform basic tasks like opening or closing a folder window.
I’m fortunate to have a system that can edit the ads out before they even display and a fast internet connection, so lack of true ad-blocking is not a dealbreaker to me. I agree that true ad-blocking would be much better than simply throwing more CPU cycles at it.