PDA

View Full Version : Google Chrome new browser



kesey
2008-09-02, 12:56
For those who like new tools, the Google Chrome Browser is here:

http://gears.google.com/chrome/

I've been playing with it for the last hour or so and it is working well. The various Tabs allow independent working and apparently one of its aims is to manage computer memory well.

So far so good, as noted by the 85 year old who said he wanted to live forever.

ezkcdude
2008-09-02, 13:34
Too bad it doesn't run on OS X yet.

funkstar
2008-09-02, 13:45
It uses the same rendering engine as Safari (Konqueror), so what works in that should work in Chrome as far as web layouts and CSS are concerned.

Mark Miksis
2008-09-02, 15:13
It uses the same rendering engine as Safari (Konqueror), so what works in that should work in Chrome as far as web layouts and CSS are concerned.

Do Safari and Konqueror really use the same rendering engine? I don't use either, but I seem to recall that Safari is officially supported by SC but Konqueror is not and has known issues. Is that not correct?

radish
2008-09-02, 17:31
Do Safari and Konqueror really use the same rendering engine? I don't use either, but I seem to recall that Safari is officially supported by SC but Konqueror is not and has known issues. Is that not correct?

Same engine, not the same exact code. Also, I believe they have different JS engines which makes a significant difference to apps like SC.

moot
2008-09-02, 18:36
I just came here to post that Chrome is noticeably much faster for browsing SqueezeCenter. Anyone who has complained about the speed of the SqueezeCenter UI (and are on Windows) should give it a go.

Linux and Mac versions will be available eventually, and being open source the snappy JS engine should make it into Firefox too (in concept if not in code).

atrocity
2008-09-02, 18:48
I just came here to post that Chrome is noticeably much faster for browsing SqueezeCenter. Anyone who has complained about the speed of the SqueezeCenter UI (and are on Windows) should give it a go.

I just get a blank page, though I get the Classic interface just fine in Firefox.

moot
2008-09-02, 19:02
I just get a blank page, though I get the Classic interface just fine in Firefox.

This is SC 7.2 (22900) on Debian, I have tried Classic and Default skins both successfully.

This what betas are for, I guess!

MeSue
2008-09-02, 21:08
The "create application shortcut" feature is nice for running SqueezeCenter.

bodajmac
2008-09-03, 01:12
I just get a blank page, though I get the Classic interface just fine in Firefox.

hmm, same here and don't really know where to go looking with chrome such a new application. given its speed elsewhere i'd really like to see how it copes with the default skin.

mherger
2008-09-03, 01:21
> I just came here to post that Chrome is noticeably much faster for
> browsing SqueezeCenter.

What browser are you comparing with? What have you been using previously?

--

Michael

JJZolx
2008-09-03, 01:29
> I just came here to post that Chrome is noticeably much faster for
> browsing SqueezeCenter.

What browser are you comparing with? What have you been using previously?

Have you seen any of this yet?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10030888-92.html?tag=newsEditorsPicksArea.0
.
.

DoomWolf
2008-09-03, 02:43
Interesting, I get a blank page when I try to open SC from Chrome installed on the same machine that SC is running, but it worked fine when opening it across the internet from Chrome installed at work.

moot
2008-09-03, 03:54
> I just came here to post that Chrome is noticeably much faster for
> browsing SqueezeCenter.

What browser are you comparing with? What have you been using previously?


Firefox 3 on XP SP2 and Ubuntu 8.04.

My comment shouldn't be read as a criticism of SC, just an endorsement of Chrome's V8 compared with the current generation of SpiderMonkey.

sebage
2008-09-03, 04:32
I concur. A much faster load time and user experience for SqueezeCenter than IE7. No issues with page rendering or formatting either. So far, so good.

lazpete
2008-09-03, 05:28
I just get a blank page when trying to acces my SC across the net. Havent tried it on the server yet.

ModelCitizen
2008-09-03, 06:31
So funny. I can't download it via Firefox or IE. Firefox does nothing at all when I click download and install (apart from grey out said button) and IE reports a javasript error on line 133.. something to do with the Eula.

Oh well. The world needs another browser like it needs a hole in the head.

MC

simbo
2008-09-03, 06:34
So funny. I can't download it via Firefox or IE. Firefox does nothing at all when I click download and install (apart from grey out said button) and IE reports a javasript error on line 133.. something to do with the Eula.

Oh well. The world needs another browser like it needs a hole in the head.

MC

I had that initially using the URL I found, but then found that this link (http://www.google.com/chrome) worked fine. Personally I wouldn't bother, nothing above what Firefox offers IMO.

radish
2008-09-03, 06:35
> I just came here to post that Chrome is noticeably much faster for
> browsing SqueezeCenter.

What browser are you comparing with? What have you been using previously?


I've never really considered SC7 to be slow, but it's certainly exceptionally fast under Chrome (compared with FF3 or IE). Works perfectly as well, far as I can see.

atrocity
2008-09-03, 08:39
Interesting, I get a blank page when I try to open SC from Chrome installed on the same machine that SC is running, but it worked fine when opening it across the internet from Chrome installed at work.

My Squeezecenter is running under Ubuntu 8.04 and Chrome under Windows XP. When I request http://192.168.0.105:9000 (that is, only connecting through my local network), I'm prompted for the name and password, which apparently are accepted, but then I just get a blank screen.

SadGamerGeek
2008-09-03, 09:01
To do some vaguely repeatable test to compare browsers, I've tried to find a really javascript intensive web page. I think this takes some beating:

http://labs.flog.co.nz/raytracer/

Chrome absolutely trounces FF3. IE7 doesn't want to play nicely at all with it for me....

Khuli
2008-09-03, 10:15
One thing I notice.. opening the same tabs in Chrome as I have open in IE:

IE memory usage 305mb, Chrome memory usage 16mb

radish
2008-09-03, 10:28
One thing I notice.. opening the same tabs in Chrome as I have open in IE:

IE memory usage 305mb, Chrome memory usage 16mb

That's wrong, Chrome runs many processes (one per tab) you need to add them altogether. If you open the same tabs in each browser and then go to "about:memory" in Chrome you'll see a comparison. In fact, Chrome typically takes more memory than other browsers (as it runs a full blown process per tab) - the trade off is better security and reliability.

Khuli
2008-09-03, 12:32
That's wrong, Chrome runs many processes (one per tab) you need to add them altogether. If you open the same tabs in each browser and then go to "about:memory" in Chrome you'll see a comparison. In fact, Chrome typically takes more memory than other browsers (as it runs a full blown process per tab) - the trade off is better security and reliability.

Ah yes, forgot about a tab for each.. still only totals 58mb though. I would expect that having a process for each will avoid the bloating memory leaks that IE has.

ModelCitizen
2008-09-03, 12:39
Coincidental that Google's Chrome browser should come out at virtually the same time as Firefox 3?

Since installing Firefox 3 Firefox has failed to open on my machine (XP Pro) so guess what, I'm going to have another go at getting Chrome to work!
:-(

MC (Mista Conspiracy)

BTW. Using IE is out of the question here.

Khuli
2008-09-03, 12:47
It's still lower than I was getting with Firefox 3 - that was about 100mb.
Maybe it'll increase when I keep it running longer.. will be interesting to see.

One thing it doesn't seem to have is the google toolbar... unless I'm missing how you get it.

Pale Blue Ego
2008-09-03, 12:47
Chrome does run SqueezeCenter nicely, so I may keep it around, but after reading the Terms Of Service, I blocked Chrome from connecting to anything outside my own LAN.

radish
2008-09-03, 13:12
One thing it doesn't seem to have is the google toolbar... unless I'm missing how you get it.

It doesn't have the toolbar itself, but it should have pretty much all of the toolbar functions built in. What are you looking for specifically?

andynormancx
2008-09-03, 13:38
It doesn't have the toolbar itself, but it should have pretty much all of the toolbar functions built in. What are you looking for specifically?

It appears to have very little of the toolbar functionality, in particular:

- no drop down list of past searches
- no keyword buttons to search the page for the keywords you searched for
- no single click to search maps, news etc
- no auto fill
- no builtin links to other Google services
- no way to search within the current site

radish
2008-09-03, 13:59
It appears to have very little of the toolbar functionality, in particular:

- no drop down list of past searches
- no keyword buttons to search the page for the keywords you searched for
- no single click to search maps, news etc
- no auto fill
- no builtin links to other Google services
- no way to search within the current site

Some of those features are built into the URL bar, for example type "maps<tab>" to search google maps. Search histories are indexed in the auto complete. I do miss the quick keyword buttons though (ctrl-f is fast but you still have to retype).

Khuli
2008-09-03, 14:08
It doesn't have the toolbar itself, but it should have pretty much all of the toolbar functions built in. What are you looking for specifically?

Specifically the little search box. A highlight function would be nice too.

andynormancx
2008-09-03, 14:15
Some of those features are built into the URL bar, for example type "maps<tab>" to search google maps. Search histories are indexed in the auto complete. I do miss the quick keyword buttons though (ctrl-f is fast but you still have to retype).

So we have:

- type maps<tab> (four keystrokes)
- in some cases you need to then click in the URL bar
- click on the "go" button
- now type in your search
- now click on "Search maps"

vs:

- type your search
- select maps from the search dropdown

Hmmm, I know which I prefer ;)

You can't even appear to short cut it by typing your search, in the toolbar you could type "maps:blah" into the toolbar search and go straight to the map search result. In Chrome instead you get the normal Google search result page which you then need to click through to get to the map.

ctrl-f doesn't even come close to the toolbar functionality, even if it lets you search the page it doesn't do things like multiple keywords each highlighted in its own colour.

andynormancx
2008-09-03, 14:19
Search histories are indexed in the auto complete.
That doesn't serve the same purpose really, you have to start typing your old search term before you get to see it, there is no drop down until you do and if you have lots of old searches that start with the same keyword(s) you have a fair bit of typing to do.

pfarrell
2008-09-03, 14:52
I'm failing to see what the Google tool has to do with SlimDevices,
Logitech or music.

Can we let this thread die and have it continued in slashdot, or a
developer forum?

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

radish
2008-09-03, 14:59
So we have:

- type maps<tab> (four keystrokes)
- in some cases you need to then click in the URL bar
- click on the "go" button
- now type in your search
- now click on "Search maps"

vs:

- type your search
- select maps from the search dropdown

Hmmm, I know which I prefer ;)

Or:

- type "maps<tab>search string<enter>"

I know which I prefer :) If I'm typing it slows me down to have to grab the mouse to click something.

sebage
2008-09-03, 17:11
I have spent a little longer using Chrome. At work most of today. It really is a much faster and smoother web experience than IE7 (I haven't fiddled with FF for many iterations though).

You can only move playlist items in IE7 by clicking and dragging the artwork of files (using SC7.2). You can click anywhere on the playlist item in Chrome to move them within a playlist, which is how I believe it should work.

Only other thing I have spotted is if you pop the player out of the main web window, the address bar appears on the top of popout window (attached). Perhaps there is a way to disable this? Doesn't happen using IE7.

Khuli
2008-09-03, 17:11
I'm failing to see what the Google tool has to do with SlimDevices, Logitech or music.

The fact that it runs SqueezeCenter nicely.

Has anyone tried it with an ftp site? I can't see any way that you can upload files.

pfarrell
2008-09-03, 17:19
Khuli wrote:
> pfarrell;336359 Wrote:
>> I'm failing to see what the Google tool has to do with SlimDevices,
>> Logitech or music.
>
> The fact that it runs SqueezeCenter nicely.

Every browser runs the SqueezeCenter UI.

Can we please kill this thread?

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

Khuli
2008-09-03, 17:28
Every browser runs the SqueezeCenter UI.
Some better than others.


Can we please kill this thread?]
You don't have to read it.

JJZolx
2008-09-03, 17:35
I have spent a little longer using Chrome. At work most of today. It really is a much faster and smoother web experience than IE7 (I haven't fiddled with FF for many iterations though).

You can only move playlist items in IE7 by clicking and dragging the artwork of files (using SC7.2). You can click anywhere on the playlist item in Chrome to move them within a playlist, which is how I believe it should work.

That sounds like a bug in the skin, not necessarily a plus for a new browser.

So far I haven't really found Chrome to 'feel' significantly faster than Firefox with the SC7 Default skin, but both are running on a fairly fast PC. Firefox still seems to render pages faster. I wouldn't be surprised if the difference was more significant on a slower machine.

MeSue
2008-09-03, 18:38
Only other thing I have spotted is if you pop the player out of the main web window, the address bar appears on the top of popout window (attached). Perhaps there is a way to disable this? Doesn't happen using IE7.

You can copy and paste that address into a new tab, then go to the little page icon that brings up a menu, and choose to save as application shortcut. That will put an icon on your desktop which opens the player in a stand-alone window.

Personally, I have not found Chrome any faster than Fx3 for running SC, but I kinda like the application shortcuts for some stuff when I don't want it cluttering up my Firefox tabs.

Nonreality
2008-09-04, 01:46
It's a bit faster than firefox on my machines. But the scroll up doesn't work on my laptop or desktop. Isn't this the General discussion forum? Why is pfarril so upset on this? This is as general as it gets I think. :)

Heuer
2008-09-04, 03:06
Can we please kill this thread?

--
Pat Farrell

You don't have to read it.

Agreed. Thread proving to be interesting and relevant so why on earth would you want to close it?

ModelCitizen
2008-09-04, 05:57
Ha ha ha....

Anyone seen Chromes "Stats for Nerds" section?

PS. Anything that helps the SlimCenter web ui render faster is useful content for the general forum.

MC

chill
2008-09-04, 06:11
Chrome does run SqueezeCenter nicely, so I may keep it around, but after reading the Terms Of Service, I blocked Chrome from connecting to anything outside my own LAN.

Looks like you can unblock it now:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7597699.stm

Pale Blue Ego
2008-09-04, 07:58
Looks like you can unblock it now:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7597699.stm

I'll keep it blocked, since it acts as a keylogger for anything you type into the "AwesomeBar".

I also use the SSL version of Scroogle for all my Google searches. Without this, Google keeps a record of all your searches, forever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scroogle

amcluesent
2008-09-04, 10:46
>it acts as a keylogger<

Interesting. I used Chrome to create an 'application' which contacts 127.0.0.1:9000 and the firewall only allows access to 127.0.0.1. Used that way, Chrome is fine & fast.

pfarrell
2008-09-04, 11:51
Heuer wrote:
> Agreed. Thread proving to be interesting and relevant so why on earth
> would you want to close it?

Because Chrome is the main topic on literally hundreds of development
oriented forums/usenet groups, etc. Where it is covered with much less
redundancy.

Its in beta, works only on Windows, and has nearly nothing to do with
SqueezeBoxes, Duets, Transporters, Booms, or SqueezeCenter.

Its just a request, but clearly there is not much agreement here.

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

mherger
2008-09-04, 14:21
> Its in beta, works only on Windows, and has nearly nothing to do with
> SqueezeBoxes, Duets, Transporters, Booms, or SqueezeCenter.

Pat - you should really take a break instead of reading this thread :-).

As you can imagine I am interested in knowing what people think about this
browser and SC. If already I have to accept bugs opened against IE8(!),
I'm happy to see others have done their homework and just work as
expected. And even much faster than that.

And then this discussion is even more interesting than the color of the
next Boom or whether to include a pony with it or not.

Michael

ModelCitizen
2008-09-04, 14:37
Chrome is now my default browser on home laptop and workserver. It renders SlimCenter noticeably faster that other browsers and weirdly, these forums render considerably quicker too.

Pat. Stop being so curmudgeonly. You've only got the hump because it's not been released for Linux.

<dives for cover>

MC

JJZolx
2008-09-04, 14:39
As you can imagine I am interested in knowing what people think about this browser and SC.

One thing I see in Chrome, as I've seen reported elsewhere for other browsers, is the way the left-hand side of the Default skin is rendered. Seeing the dark status (library stats) bar crunched up against the first part of the page as it begins to render, then get pushed down the page to the bottom where it belongs, is a little klunky. It would be smoother if that bar could always stay glued to the bottom. Could it be just a matter of the order in which the page content is written?

The other thing that's a bit annoying is the appearing/disappearing "Waiting for 192.168.x.x" that appears in Chrome while it waits for server content. I'm not sure if it always does this, or if it's just during AJAX type updates.

mherger
2008-09-05, 06:30
> One thing I see in Chrome, as I've seen reported elsewhere for other
> browsers, is the way the left-hand side of the Default skin is
> rendered.

change 23050 (7.2.1) - please give it a try: the default height of those panels was too small. I've now made it huge, so at least you won't see the footer while the page is loading. IMHO this is less disturbing. Thanks!

> The other thing that's a bit annoying is the appearing/disappearing
> "Waiting for 192.168.x.x" that appears in Chrome while it waits for
> server content. I'm not sure if it always does this, or if it's just
> during AJAX type updates.

Yeah, don't like this neither.

--

Michael

kesey
2008-09-05, 06:48
Heuer wrote:
> Agreed. Thread proving to be interesting and relevant so why on earth
> would you want to close it?


Its in beta, works only on Windows, and has nearly nothing to do with
SqueezeBoxes, Duets, Transporters, Booms, or SqueezeCenter.



Pat, do you recommend not playing with products in beta? If yes, I will immediately remove all beta copies of Squeezencenter from my computers.

Seriously though, creating Squeezecenter as an application on Chrome makes for a very pretty and tidy instance of Squeezcenter. With Squeezecenter open on Chrome, click on the "Page" icon in Chrome (top right hand corner beside the Tool icon) and select "Create application shortcuts.."

lrossouw
2008-09-05, 08:47
My Squeezecenter is running under Ubuntu 8.04 and Chrome under Windows XP. When I request http://192.168.0.105:9000 (that is, only connecting through my local network), I'm prompted for the name and password, which apparently are accepted, but then I just get a blank screen.

me too. enter password and then blank screen.

ModelCitizen
2008-09-06, 02:34
Seeing as how this thread has the attention of Michael Herger...

In Chrome the player setting pages (all of them as far as I can see) have two right hand scroll bars, jammed up against each other.

7.2, XP, default skin.

MC

kesey
2008-09-06, 05:33
MC: "In Chrome the player setting pages (all of them as far as I can see) have two right hand scroll bars, jammed up against each other."

That is not happening on my systems MC, in either 7.2 or 7.3. The screens are behaving correctly.

DeVerm
2008-09-06, 13:04
Well, tried it and love it. I get a Skype feeling with the color-scheme but really like the performance and application-icon for SC on my desktop. I'm using a Pico-ITX for SC and local Chrome front-end makes a huge difference.

cheers,
Verm.

auronthas
2008-09-06, 14:52
There is auto-spelling check equipped with Google Chrome when i am writing this post, check it out. :)

yocky
2008-09-07, 03:30
Finally I can use the default skin.

On a 2.5Ghz dual core XP SP3 machine IE was slow, Firefox unusable.

Chrome and an Application Shortcut...lovely.

mherger
2008-09-07, 05:13
> In Chrome the player setting pages (all of them as far as I can see)
> have two right hand scroll bars, jammed up against each other.

Heh... bad behaviour inherited from Safari :-). The latter had this issue before. Will have to investigate. Feel free to open a bug so I don't forget. Thanks!

--

Michael

ModelCitizen
2008-09-07, 06:09
Feel free to open a bug so I don't forget.
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=9426

MC

martinpolley
2008-09-07, 23:11
I get the blank page problem too.

When I look at the page source, it is not blank. But it is truncated, like this:



<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>SqueezeCenter</title>



<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/html/ext/resources/css/ext-all.css" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/slim-ext.css?r=22170" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/slimserver.css?r=22170" />
<style>
html { background: #666666; }

#loading-mask {
width: 120%;
height: 100%;
background-image: url(html/images/background.png);
position: absolute;
z-index: 20000;
left: 0;
top: 0;
}

#loading {
position

What on earth is going on here?

lazpete
2008-09-08, 23:27
I get this with a blank page. Also tried standard skin, same thing happens:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Frameset//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/frameset.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>SqueezeCenter</title>
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="/favicon.ico" type="image/x-icon"/>
<link rel="icon" href="/favicon.ico" type="image/x-icon"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/Fishbone/slimserver.css"/>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/Fishbone/skin.css"/>


<link rel="alternate stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/tan.css" title="Fishbone_Tan" id="Fishbone_Tan" >

DoomWolf
2008-09-09, 03:09
I get the blank page problem too.

When I look at the page source, it is not blank. But it is truncated, like this:



<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>SqueezeCenter</title>



<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/html/ext/resources/css/ext-all.css" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/slim-ext.css?r=22170" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/slimserver.css?r=22170" />
<style>
html { background: #666666; }

#loading-mask {
width: 120%;
height: 100%;
background-image: url(html/images/background.png);
position: absolute;
z-index: 20000;
left: 0;
top: 0;
}

#loading {
position

What on earth is going on here?

That's exactly what I get when trying to run SC from Chrome on the machine where SC is installed.

mherger
2008-09-09, 05:14
> I get this with a blank page. Also tried standard skin, same thing
> happens:

Is there anything in the server.log file about http requests failing?

--

Michael

lazpete
2008-09-10, 00:36
Cant find the file server.log Using XP.

mherger
2008-09-10, 05:12
> Cant find the file server.log Using XP.

Go to Settings/Status to get a link to the file.

--

Michael

lazpete
2008-09-12, 00:35
> Cant find the file server.log Using XP.

Go to Settings/Status to get a link to the file.

--

Michael

Thx, did a check now, and the log doesnt log anything when trying to view the SC in Google Chrome, tha last row is this one:
[08-09-12 09:19:03.1767] Slim::Networking::SqueezeNetwork::PrefSync::_syncD own_error (359) Sync Down failed: No such player: b9:bf:e6:2c:9c:97, will retry in 2940

10 min after this one, i tried to use chrome, but nothing is logged as a chrome related action...

lrossouw
2008-09-17, 15:32
same here:
1) password prompt
2) blank page after that
3) the source is also chopped off
4) no errors in the log

lrossouw
2008-09-17, 15:36
deactivated password on my squeezcenter and then something loads on chrome.
problem though is that the default skin is garbled
other older skins work fine.

ChrisNY
2008-09-20, 09:14
I was getting a blank screen as well until I disabled password protection. Once password was disabled screen was garbled. I cleared the cache and all seems to be fine now.

lazpete
2008-09-21, 23:30
Yes, it is obviously something with the PW protections that doesn't work.
Thx guys.

Paul Shields
2008-09-25, 14:18
Anyone know what could be causing this? I'm very happy with Chrome for majority of my browsing, but it's a pain that it doesn't work with Squeezecenter when password protection is enabled.

mherger
2008-10-01, 13:09
> Anyone know what could be causing this?

Seems to be due to a bug in Chrome which is already fixed: I just
downloaded Iron (a browser based on Chrome, without the Google data
sniffing stuff) which uses a slightly newer version of Chrome's rendering
engine.

http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_chrome_vs_iron.php

This does work just fine with SC and password protection. Either the newer
rendering engine or the removed sniffing features fixed Chrome ;-).

I'd assume a later Chrome version will be fine.

Michael

Paul Shields
2008-10-05, 13:09
> Anyone know what could be causing this?

Seems to be due to a bug in Chrome which is already fixed: I just
downloaded Iron (a browser based on Chrome, without the Google data
sniffing stuff) which uses a slightly newer version of Chrome's rendering
engine.

http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_chrome_vs_iron.php

This does work just fine with SC and password protection. Either the newer
rendering engine or the removed sniffing features fixed Chrome ;-).

I'd assume a later Chrome version will be fine.

Michael

Ah - hadn't heard of 'Iron'. Looks to be a good compromise in order to get the performance as well as the privacy. I'll check this out, thanks.