RSSGoogle Chrome 4 goes live with extensions: How much closer to Firefox now?
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published January 26, 2010, 7:16 PM
After a few months' development time, supporters of Google's Chrome browser -- based on the open source Chromium platform -- have had only a narrow window to produce a full library of extensions and add-ons for the grand opening of Chrome's new gallery. That apparently didn't weigh too heavily on developers' minds, as yesterday's ribbon cutting on the first stable Chrome 4 release featured a very well-stocked gallery.
As I've stated here before, it's Mozilla Firefox's adaptability that gives users who work on the Web -- as opposed to just browsing -- the functionality they need to do their jobs. In the absence of a "professional" Web browser that caters to those of us who make the Web their virtual offices, not only Firefox's extensions but its extensibility -- as a JavaScript interpreter that runs on JavaScript itself -- enables others to fill in the functionality gaps. That fact may be the only thing that binds me to Firefox, since the underlying chassis of Chrome has proven itself in my tests to not only be faster but more stable.
Up to now, it's Chrome's lack of extensibility that denies it a place on the online workbench. That may begin to change now that Chrome's extensions emerge beyond the beta phase. Officially, Microsoft Internet Explorer has add-ons as well, but IE hasn't garnered nearly the same degree of support and enthusiasm in the community as Firefox. If the early going for Chrome is any indication, Google is applying the lessons it's learned from Android, and is well on its way to achieving at least par with Firefox in the extensibility category.
Browser extensions as "apps"
With Chrome, unlike Firefox, an extension is like an "app" on a handset. It has an icon and an assigned place on Chrome's main bar, to the right of the address box -- what Google calls the "Omnibox." That's Chrome's single text box, which pulls double-duty as an address box and a search box; if you type something into the Omnibox that doesn't translate as a Web address, Chrome sends it to Google (or your default search engine of choice) for processing there. Since Chrome is already a blazingly fast browser, there doesn't appear to be any time lost while a search query defaults over to the search engine.
That said, I've never really taken to this double-duty approach, as efficient as it seems on paper. Perhaps I've just become accustomed to every function in its own place, and maybe in time, I'd grow out of that habit -- I expect other users out there not to be as set in their ways as I am.
So the first add-on I began searching for from Chrome's new Extensions library is something that could give me an exclusive search box. What I found was a third-party extension that, in the spirit of Google (straightforward with no gimmicks), is called Search Box. It adds a magnifying glass icon to the Chrome toolbar; click on that, and Search Box pulls up a separate search text box, not only for Google but for other general and specific search engines as well, including Bing and Wikipedia.
A more convenient option would be to simply add a permanent, separate search box -- at least for me. But that's not Google's development model for Chrome: It wants extensions to be single-button icons, located in one row, that do discrete things. At one level, this simplifies things: Even Google itself has chosen to produce single apps, like Translate, on a one-click icon rather than enable a separate toolbar. With a modicum of fiddling around with third-party add-ons in Firefox, you could clutter the entire screen with separate, custom toolbars, hanging along every frame imaginable. Chrome steers developers away from that nightmare with the one-click approach, so even though it ends up adding a click to extensions like Search Box, it does help developers maintain their focus on single tasks.
Chrome also disables the ability for search engine competitors to claim large chunks of real estate in the browser, as all the major ones -- Bing, Yahoo, Ask.com, and most successfully of all, Google itself -- have a tendency to do. Quite a bit of freeware downloadable through Fileforum, for example, is supported through the inclusion of Yahoo Toolbar as a default download option; Google chokes off that chain of possible competition in Chrome. Independent developers appear to have come to competitors' rescue here; for instance, there's buttons for Yahoo Mail, Amazon, eBay, Facebook, and many of the Web's other major brands.
Breaking free from the one-click model
Already, some of the first Chrome extensions have found a way to make their mark outside of their designated parking spaces in Chrome's lone toolbar. One of them is a transport (not quite a direct port) from the Firefox world: Called FastestFox (previously known as SmarterFox, no relation to FasterFox), the developer's first effort at moving this to Chrome not only pre-loads portions of pages from other hyperlinked pages into a separate cache, but it also can augment the content of certain pages, especially Google. For instance, FastestFox adds links just above Google's search results, containing buttons for continuing your search on other folks' search engines; and through options, you can control designate which ones.
FasterFox amends Chrome's Google search pages with links to other search engines.
Chrome doesn't give third-party developers much on-screen real estate to signal their presence, so FastestFox's approach is not only direct but beneficial. On occasion, when conducting long searches on very technical topics, I'm not always certain Google has the most complete index. More often than not, I'm wrong, but when I'm up late trying to figure out why Exchange 2010 has installed more than one virtual directory for the Autodiscover feature, for instance, and whether other admins out there have the same problem, there are times when I simply need reassurance.
Also, if you highlight any text on any page anywhere, FastestFox will pop up a little "speaking bubble" that lets you search for more information on the highlighted text, from any of the search engines inside the bubble represented with icons.
This is some of the useful stuff that Chrome has been missing -- the level of functionality that has made testers wish they could move over to Chrome, "if only." Right now, there are a few flies in the ointment still (for some reason, you can't control the search engines that FastestFox adds to your Google page). But throughout an entire day of testing, none of the most-wanted functions we saw actually crashed or presented so much as a cosmetic blemish -- the first extensions we've played with today are pretty solid, even the ones with version numbers earlier than 1.0.
Next: Overcoming the too-many-tabs problem...
Good post. I love Chrome but I am one of those loyal Firefox fans who is skeptical to switch over. The real thing that is pulling me is Chrome's speed. Besides there seem to be too many good extensions - Mouse stroke, click and clean, google reader, smooth scroll, xmarks and so on.
Score: 0
|I'm not to thrilled with the idea of having toolbar icons be the point of access for interactive with extensions. In Firefox i have 90 enabled extensions and 98 disable extensions. Some do little things, others do big things but the point is I have 188 extensions. Heck I have extensions that hide the stuff other extensions add so my interface is less cluttered; and I regularly disable those which provide functions I do not use but I still use allot of add-ons. Even if only half of those have icons thats still an unmanageable number. Sorry but this isn't enough to entice me.
Score: -1
|4.0 and it still looks and feels like a beta, google still has a long long way to go, speed is not everything especially when your talking fractions. Why would anyone use this as a main browser!
Score: -1
|Has anyone noticed the amount of information using chrome sends back to big brother it is scary plus the security risk plus memory leaks try and do some research before using something that has not been tested properly at least IE and FireFox you can lock it down you cant with chrome to risky for me oh but its fast it loaded up a page in 0.3 secs LOL
Score: -1
|Do you have any demonstrable examples of security risks? Do you realize that the information being transmitted has a lot to do with simply making search suggestions as you type in the address bar? I suspect that the answer to both of these questions is no.
Score: 1
|I swapped to Chrome as my main browser about a year ago, but I had to keep FireFox around for some of the development extensions that it offers. Now that these extensions are available for Chrome, FireFox's days are numbered on my installs. I have nothing against FireFox... it has served me well for years. However, Chrome's speed and stability have won my bid in the browser market.
Score: 1
|All this BS about how much faster and better Chrome is means NOTHING to most people with a brain, my browser (Firefox) is opened once in the morning and runs all day, never to be closed, until I leave. All browsers are still compared to Firefox because it's a peoples browser and can be configured to their own taste and style. It may not be the fastest browser out there but it sure the heck is the most user friendly, most configurable and dependable browser out there. Chrome, in my opinion, is horrible because it is not configurable enough, especially in the tab opening department and would most likely use Opera or IE over chrome if Firefox was not in the picture.
Score: -1
|And Chrome is still faster rendering web pages, it's not just on launch. Chrome is still better than Firefox.
Score: 0
|I think IE is still the people's browser since more user it for now :-)
Really, all our opinion don't matter one bit, because people will pick the browser that suits their need the best.
Some people like me could care less about all the "crap" that is offered with the other browsers. I use it to browse the internet and that's it. Now only if Chrome would add Aero Peek, then it might be the best...
And yes, on my computer, I actually do notice a difference between firefox, chrome, and IE and for me chrome is the fastest, just doesn't work yet on every website yet...
Score: 1
|The add on https://chrome.google.co...ekmjfkfjpbkbammjbdenadd, should help with working on every site :-)
Score: 0
|Chrome is a good beta test (version 4.0 = 0.4.0) browser and is becoming better with every iteration. I'll stick to Firefox for my essential browsing and use Chrome where I would normally use Safari. There may come a day when I'll switch for everything but today isn't it, especially since the Linux and Mac OS X versions aren't at the same level of features.
Score: 0
|If only it didn't have such a horrible interface... Using Firefox is still a far more pleasant experience.
Score: 0
|Couldn't agree more. Personally I refuse to do without my drop down address bar!!! Also I can't live without my RSS feeds!
Score: 0
|Who needs a drop down? For history? Just hit Ctrl-H then click a link. There is an RSS extension if you can't live without RSS.
Score: 3
|The UI is a subjective issue. I personally prefer it.
Score: 3
|RSS Feed extension: https://chrome.google.co...jkiekmobleogjc?hl=en-US
Score: 1
|Actually I tried chrome, didn't like the interface either (looked cheap, well duh, it is free, lol) but it crashed a lot. I uninstalled it, went back to Firefox, and my computer is happy again. Will try again in another year to two, maybe it will be more stable by then.
Score: -1
|chrome is a great browser, and I have it installed but not using it currently as my main browser.
My biggest beef with it is that extensions don't work on every page, due to their "security restrictions". More specifically, mouse gestures doesn't work on blank tabs, gmail, hotmail, and a couple of other https sites (chrome.google.com/extensions doesn't work either). If an addon that's important to me doesn't work for all webpages, I'm not going to be able to use that addon at all, and thus not going to use that browser. So sticking to Maxthon and Firefox still for now.
Score: 2
|i still dont see a bookmark sidebar anywhere. it's a deal breaker for me.
Score: 1
|The closest thing to one I've found thus far is called Quick Bookmarks (hopefully if you search for "Quick Bookmarks," the extensions library will actually pull it up). It brings up the contents of the Bookmarks bar by default, then to go through the directory, you'd click on "Other bookmarks" and proceed from there. I find that slower than simply having the bookmarks bar turned on.
The problem for now is, Chrome as a browser cannot be attached to -- it'll run functions, but it won't let you add _features_ to the browser like a built-in Bookmarks bar. And yes, that's still one big missing feature.
-S" "3
Score: 2
|Outside of the geek world, how many really worry about all those gadgets and extensions in firefox... Think about it, consider all the people who are still using IE6 especially those Okie rednecks... heck, until my wife and I got engaged, she still was running service pack 1 on Windows XP with IE6...
What the tech community values as a good browser and what the average person values as a consumer, is different.
Many stick with IE because in their mind 'It just works"... and IE8 does... I've had more crashes with the other browsers over the last year with all the other browsers than I have with IE8 which is a change from the past...
Score: 1
|I have had a fairly good experience using Chrome 4. I thought it was fairly useless without the extensions that make Firefox my default. The major extension that I'm still waiting for is "flashgot" for Flashget 1.73. Sure it has it for Flashget 3, but only through IE tab. YUCK!
Score: 0
|