Google Chrome claims to be fastest web browser

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Google Chrome claims to be fastest web browser but this claim does not hold water, as far as my tests are concerned. The fastest browser that I have found is Opera and NOT Google Chrome. Chrome takes 10x longer to load than Firefox and also IE, and I found it to be very unstable and unreliable.

Firefox also tends to freeze, especially some of the recent builds, while, so far, Opera has remained stable. I do prefer Firefox, however, because of the many add-ons and the way it organizes the bookmarks.

While you find many Downloaders recommending Google Chrome, over Firefox even recently, and definitely over Opera, both of which are free in the same way as Chrome, Chrome really, at least not as far as I have found in use, does not stand up to their claims.

Chrome is also, and we must remember that, and thus it makes it no better, on Mozilla Firefox and, as is Opera.

There are people that I have encountered who claim that Google Chrome works great and is very fast (in comparison to what? Internet Explorer?) in my experience that has not been borne out and not just one one operating system and machine.

Firefox and Opera beats Chrome hands down in speed and reliability with Opera being faster to start and connect than even Mozilla Firefox.

Google Chrome now also claims aside from being the fastest web browser the safest and I would be very suspicious there with the latter as the former, as we have just discussed, does certainly not live up to findings.

I have never experienced as may false starts and issues with any other browser as I have with Google Chrome. From taking ages to start up, insisting to load the home page. Blank page is not an option, it would seem.

Whatever one may try loading pages on Google Chrome, as far as my systems are concerned, takes up to a minute to two – if it does not crash – and that with a high-speed broadband connection. Even Internet Explorer works better and faster than does Google Chrome.

As in so many fields, whether in the green one or the IT one, not every claim is true and lives up to its promises.

© 2011

Is Google intent on buying Twitter?

by Michael Smith

It sounds like one of those deals that's too big - or at least too obvious - to be true; Google in talks to buy Twitter, though, as far as I see it as someone with a rebellious streak and as someone who always questions “who benefits” that this may actually not be good at all if true.

According to some reports acquisition talks are under way, though details are not all that clear, especially the price. The assumption is that it would be more than the company's internal valuation of $250m, and a more secure figure than the $500m in stock deal that Twitter turned down from Facebook last year.

But talks for what? Would this be an outright acquisition, part acquisition or a search deal?

It would be sad to see Twitter lose its independence, though it is perhaps inevitable. Twitter is backed by some extremely influential investors who, despite their apparently unwavering support for the firm, will want a meaty return on their investments at some point. What could be more reliable in the web world than hard Google cash, with some shares thrown in for good measure?

It could be for just a stake in the firm, which would mean Twitter retained control and that precious independence or, then again, it could be an outright buy and that would not be too good, in my opinion. Real-time communication and search, along with social media context, are going becoming crucial to the web - as Google knows. It's not inconceivable, you could argue, that those dynamics could push Twitter to same heights as even Google one day, and then they will wish they had that precious autonomy.

Though much of the recent media buzz around Twitter has been outside its control (Twitter has only just stated recruiting a PR...), it has also created intense interest in the site and no doubt helped bolster its valuation claims.

What else does this say about Twitter? With the big 'if' caveat - if this is true - it vindicates Twitter's regular assurances that there really is money in them there hills. Google clearly sees where the money lies, and it will be fascinating to see what unfolds.

The problem, yet again, as I see it, could be that the loss of independence could lead, as so often, to a loss in control of say as to what goes and what not and, do we really want to have the site full of Google ads and such like.

Also, as we all know, Google's policies towards some countries and their demands to be given access and information of users is way to open handed. Once again, as so often in these cases, the freedom of the Internet is as stake.

This is the same as with the talks of IBM to acquire Sun Microsystems and with it a chunk in the Open Source software market, including the every more popular Open Office suite.

Anyone like me with a mind that questions everything like that probably will come to the same conclusion and that is that this is not a good sign, for the independence and freedom of applications such as Twitter, which is basically the CB Radio of the Internet, as well as for Open Source software.

© M Smith (Veshengro), 2009
<>