Chrome version 6 annoyances

Firefox is my favorite Web browser, but ever since I read about Chrome doing a better job of internally sandboxing websites, I use it more and more.

There are multiple benefits to the internal isolation Chrome provides. For one thing, it makes it harder for malicious code in one page/tab to gain access to other pages in other tabs. Also, a looping script in one tab, does not lock out the entire browser. And, crashes in plug-ins are dealt with cleanly and don't crash the entire browser, something Firefox just started to implement.

As with all Windows software, my preference is for the portable edition, available at portableapps.com, because, as a rule, I much prefer portable software.

However, Chrome is the worst behaved portable application I've ever used. The biggest issue is that it doesn't self-update, a problem that is not new with version 6 (two other problems, confined to the portable edition, are described below).

Update: According to the reader comment below from John T. Haller of PortapleApps.com, "Chrome's updater is not a part of Chrome itself, but rather an OS-level piece (unlike Firefox's) and it's closed source..."

The failure to self-update prompted a recent posting on this blog when a portable edition of Chrome continued to use an older version of Flash after a new version was installed.

Chrome 6 was released at the start of September and I was in no rush to jump into it. This is not meant as a knock on the browser, if years of experience teach you anything, it's to always be wary of new versions of software. But, in the last few days I started kicking the tires on Chrome 6 and ran into a number of annoyances.

I used two copies of Chrome on two different XP machines. One was a normally installed copy of 6.0.472.59, released on September 14, 2010, the other was a portable edition of 6.0.472.55, which is all of two weeks old. The normally installed copy had no extensions, the portable edition had only one, AdBlock.

The first annoyance came when updating the normally installed copy of version 5 to version 6 - the process is modal. That is, while the update is in progress, you can't use the browser to view websites. Firefox, in contrast, self-updates without locking itself up.

Updating the portable edition is annoying because you have to start with a clean slate. A newly installed instance of Chrome can import bookmarks and settings from a handful of other browsers, but it can't import from an older copy of itself.

The biggest issue, for me, is saving passwords.

The portable edition of Chrome 5 saved Web site passwords, but as noted on portableapps.com, it does so in a way that is tied to the computer. Thus, saved passwords are not portable. In contrast, the portable edition of Firefox does have portable passwords, it's a feature I use many times a day.

Chrome 6 introduces a new password problem, it doesn't save them for certain websites. I tried two websites in both the normally installed and portable editions and not once did the browser offer to save an entered password.

Saving passwords is optional, but it's enabled by default (Tools -> Options -> Personal Stuff -> Passwords) and both browsers that I tested with were configured to save passwords. Chrome 5 happily saved the passwords for the same two websites.

Password entry is either on a form embedded in a Web page, or in a pop-up window. The two sites I tested, both asked for passwords in pop-up windows. A third site, where the password was embedded in the page, worked fine.

Another big issue, for me, is Print Preview. Chrome 6 still doesn't do it.

It also doesn't let you configure an email client to handle mailto: links. Internet Explorer lets you configure the system-wide default email client, but this is useless to me as it can't find portable software. Firefox works great in this regard. 

Being a Defensive Computing type of guy, I sometimes copy and paste URLs into the browser address bar so that I can see the full URL before following it. In version 5, I would paste the URL and click on the black triangle (see below) that is the "Go" button (not sure the official term) in the theme that I use. Version 6 eliminated the Go button.

But, in playing with this, I noticed that when a URL is in the Windows clipboard, both versions 5 and 6 have a "Paste and Go" option when you right click on the address bar. This pastes the URL into the address bar and then goes there. If text other than a URL is in the clipboard, right clicking on the address bar shows "Paste and search" instead. Cool.

Speaking of right clicking, I often right click a link and hit the letter T on the keyboard to open it in a new tab. Thankfully, this works in Firefox, Chrome and Internet Explorer. But it stopped working in the portable edition of Chrome 6.0.472.55. Not sure if it's a bug with Chrome or an issue specific to the portable edition, but it works in the normally installed copy of the newer version (6.0.472.59).

I always set my browsers to open with a blank page. The Chrome 5 address bar started out with "Type to search" displayed on the far right (see above), a handy reminder to newbies that the address bar does double duty. I guess Google considers this old news as they eliminated this text in version 6.

As previously mentioned, I started with Chrome because of the sandboxing, but I continue to use it side by side with Firefox in large part simply because it starts up fast. For years now, Firefox has opted to do a bit too much computing when it first starts up. Thus, it takes, what feels like, a long time before the browser UI is responsive. It's annoying to have clicks on the menu bar ignored and to be unable to type a URL into the address bar as soon as it appears. Many, if not most, articles that compare Web browsers talk about performance after the software is up and running. This doesn't concern me nearly as much as the out-of-the-gate startup time.

Taking a step back, I'm very thankful to have both Firefox and Chrome to chose from, and for free no less. Windows users running Internet Explorer should, without question, convert to one of them, for two main reasons:

1. Mozilla and Google will continue to support Windows XP because they have no vested interest in selling new operating systems

2. Both companies release bug fixes when the bugs are fixed, not on a set schedule that caters to large corporations. This is reason enough to permanently avoid Internet Explorer.