A couple interesting links I came across while browsing the net at school. I would elaberate but I don't have time

http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/12/15/google-turns-its-back-on-firefox/
http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/11/11/google-drops-staroffice-from-pack/
http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/12/12/google-chrome-leaves-beta/

Bad title. Firefox is still supported, it just isn't the default in the Google pack. Which only surprised complete retards.

I did a presentation predicting this last September. The only surprise is how much money Google gives to the Mozilla foundation.

Still, I think this will lead to some interesting outcomes. Google very rarely supports or produces bad products.

Title fixed. I knew someone was going to complain about it

I changed it three times but couldn't think of anything because I was in a hurry

Everyone knew it was going to happen, just some interesting stuff to read is all

@jbr: This is true. Though, they tend to leave allot of their projects in "Beta" and never really work out the bugs before adding new stuff. This is definitely not smart on their part because if you continue to build on top of a buggy system then you'll eventually have to completely recode what you built on top of the buggy system if you're planning on fixing the bugs. And if you don't fix the bugs then... well, they're still there...

I wouldn't necessarily call their programs buggy, but they're not in as good of shape as they could be compared to the thousands of other programs that are released annually.

At least they don't subscribe to the "bigger (number) is better" business model, through which some companies release the first versions of their software as 5, 6, 7, or higher.

You are dumb. Just because it is called a Beta doesn't mean it is inherently buggy. The entire point of a Beta is to fix bugs, and you can be a sure that Google is fixing bugs as they crop up. You said yourself that Google's sites aren't buggy, which begs the question of why you would contradict yourself across two short paragraphs. As for "not in as good of shape ... compared to thousands of other programs ...", can you name an email client (online or offline) that is better than GMail? Of course you can't, one doesn't exist, yet gmail is still in "Beta"

My point exactly. What I'm trying to say is its taking so long to take it out of Beta what is the point? I mean seriously, they have the record for the longest an active project has ever been in beta. It would be better if they got it up to specs and then actually took it out of Beta and released it instead of leaving it in beta.

Personally I can't remember the last time I used GMail, just cause I don't really like it all that much. Its not very efficient. Sure it has loads of features but the thing is: its buggy. Not it might be that the "browser are behind in technology" but if you're going to make a program you might as well make it compatible with the current technology until everyone else catches up (or make it compatible with both old and new technology).

Who cares if it has the Beta title? Just because it's called Beta doesn't mean it has bugs. It just means it hasn't been officially released yet.



If efficiency is your big thing, you can always use the html version or the mobile version (m.gmail.com). Those both work fine over breaks when I'm on my dial-up. If you have a decent connection, however, the regular gmail app is extremely efficient. There are keyboard shortcuts for about everything (hell, they'll even snail mail you free stickers to put on your keyboard). Plus, it gives you crazy amounts of storage. You can archive all of your crap so it isn't in your inbox, but it's still searchable. Then the labeling system adds even more efficiency to your searches.

And what bugs did you find troubling? I can't load gmail if I'm in a download on my dial-up (but the html and mobile versions work for this task). I honestly haven't noticed any other ones.

[quote="foamy3"]

FREE STICKERS!? WHERE WHERE WHERE!?!?!?

http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2008/12/get-your-gmail-stickers.html

Yeah I just finally tried chrome and I must say it may be fast but I can't stand the UI, it hurts my eyes and just doesn't seem complete. I may use it on slower comps that could use the speed but FireFox will still be my main browser for the time being.

I can't stand it when it isn't maximized, so I'll probably stop using it when I get my second monitor back up. And they really picked an ugly blue... I wish the main browser was the colour of incognito mode.

I does seem to have a good speed advantage to FF and Opera on slower comps, and the startup speed in much faster than either of them. But you can tell its unfinished and not ready for everyday use.