[wplug] Google Chrome?

[Patrick Wagstrom]

Neal Sofge wrote:
>> Wow, the web is like a crappy version of times square now.
> 
> As is the current meatspace Times Square.

Maybe the web is a bit more like the 1980's version of Times Square.
They've really cleaned up a lot of the smut in the meatspace.  Unlike the
internet which obeys Rule 34 (see: http://xkcd.com/305/ for context)

>> It's the first multi-process browser, which means that single apps  
>> don't block everything else.
> 
> You can see why Google's interested in this -- they don't want other  
> webapps screwing up Google Docs/Mail/whatever, and so their new  
> process manager lets users blame resource-intensive apps rather than  
> just giving up on the "web operating system" idea when their browser  
> locks up.

One of the really neat things about this multi-process model is not only
the no blocking, but also how tabs can't take down other tabs.  Flash seems
to be particularly excellent at taking down an entire firefox instance
under Linux.

Under Chrome what is neat is that not only is each tab in its own process,
but the plugins even within that tab run in their own process.  That means
that if flash dies, it doesn't even take down the whole web page, it just
crashed the plugin -- that's a real advantage in terms of getting around
crappy code.  It also means that, at least in theory, an entire web page
shouldn't block when a Java applet is doing something stupid.

I also like the typical Google nerd features on this.  Right click on the
window border->task manager, then select "stats for nerds" to get an idea
of memory usage and how much processor each task is taking up.

Also, when a tab crashes or a plugin crashes, you get a little sad face
graphic.  Reminds me very much of the sad mac graphic.

--Patrick