Google Chrome 17 Pre-Renders Pages You May Visit

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,400
If you don’t mind your browser second guessing your next move, the upcoming release of Google’s Chrome 17 should make you quite happy, since it incorporates pre-rendering to speed up the loading process. The new version of Chrome also offers increased security against known malware sites.

As Chrome watches what the user types and starts to auto-populate the result, it will choose to pre-render the most likely choice.
 
Only concerns I will have about this is if it chose to pre-render a site that one didn't want to go due to it being shady and probably illegal and you're being flagged because you have something that already "visited the site" thus putting you in hot water.

Beyond that - it'll be nice but I hope this can be disabled for some who doesn't want to waste bandwidth or are on such limited cap.
 
they better let us shut this off or will be the last time chrome is installed on any of my computers
 
they better let us shut this off or will be the last time chrome is installed on any of my computers

same. I will try it out but likely be shutting this feature off or removing chrome. I LOVE chrome, too.....
 
It's already in the bleeding-edge development builds, and it can be disabled.
 
So if the browser guesses wrong, then it's even slower than the competition, since it's needlessly busy rendering a site you are not going to ? I'll pass on that....
 
i think most of you are being a bit paranoid....sheesh...im all for it if it's relatively accurate
 
guys.....from the article

"Google now starts to pre-render pages as the user types them into the address bar"
 
Another reason to stay away from chrome, if ads within browser were not enough, they now want to prerender pages for you, this is a waste of an internet's bandwidth. I can see this this way, prerendered pages = browser making more page hits, running more ads scripts, websites mining more data off of you (cookies, referer tag & user-agent tag from http header, cache), they make more money, you loose privacy. F*ck google, spies, and big brother. My hosts file currently has 9533 domains that I redirect to 127.0.0.1, you can't browse the web these days peacefully. What a disaster. I want to browse a 1 website, and not making 15 fetches to 3rd party scripts and making 30 other DNS requests for other crap.

Firefox is such a better choice.
 
guys.....from the article

"Google now starts to pre-render pages as the user types them into the address bar"

This is [H]. You are not supposed to read the article before commenting on it. Shame on you.
 
This is [H]. You are not supposed to read the article before commenting on it. Shame on you.

well lets give credit where it's due, the [H] sensationalist way of presenting the story by giving you just enough to incite fury but leaving enough ambiguity to remain a "third party" has a hand in it ;)
 
lmao you guys are way the hell too paranoid.

zomg oh noes teh googuhl iz watching my every move and even activatez mai webcam and records my actionz on behaff of teh govahmintz
 
Hm, which country do you live that flag you for visiting "wrong" sites in the internet?

I would guess america.

Only concerns I will have about this is if it chose to pre-render a site that one didn't want to go due to it being shady and probably illegal and you're being flagged because you have something that already "visited the site" thus putting you in hot water.
From the article...

"For instance, a frequent visitor of this site will simply have to type “D” and watch the Digital Trends address autofill in the omnibar as well as watch the site start loading."

Why can't you people read?

sp_1501_clip08.jpg
 
lmao you guys are way the hell too paranoid.

zomg oh noes teh googuhl iz watching my every move and even activatez mai webcam and records my actionz on behaff of teh govahmintz
This. People think so highly of themselves that they think others care about what they are doing.
 
i see no problem with this update.


What i have problems with his places like google, tinkering with how search results are displayed now. Two people can search for the exact same thing and get different results, based on their location, and other data it snagged about you. In other words why should google decide what search results it thinks i want?


I use Chrome, i prefer it over IE, or Firefox. However i wouldn't call any of them perfect, or even close. They find a way to sell information about you, they all find ways to display adds to you, and lastly, they want to filter the information you search for. I liked the internet when it was looking at it with my two eyes. Now days, i am looking with my eyes but in front them are filters, covers, and blocks which all alter the information coming to me.
 
guys.....from the article

"Google now starts to pre-render pages as the user types them into the address bar"

So, it uses Apples tricks, then shows the page as complete before the final objects are actually downloaded?
 
What i have problems with his places like google, tinkering with how search results are displayed now. Two people can search for the exact same thing and get different results, based on their location, and other data it snagged about you. In other words why should google decide what search results it thinks i want?
.

That is returning results it thinks are more suitable for you. It is a search engine afterall...
 
Things like this have been done before, Firefox years ago, and webmasters got up in arms about the bandwidth utilization on the server side. So they were killed off.

But Google's doing it now so it's ok? Not directly related, but at this point I don't know how anyone could trust using any google product over MS or Apple alternatives. It almost sucks that they are so much better.
 
Things like this have been done before, Firefox years ago, and webmasters got up in arms about the bandwidth utilization on the server side. So they were killed off...

That's what I was thinking about this. Isn't it a potential waste of bandwidth? This could be bad for someone with a capped limit. :(
 
guys.....from the article

"Google now starts to pre-render pages as the user types them into the address bar"
And as you're typing in hardocp it's rendering all sorts of other pages. I can't imagine how many other urls would cause the same thing. Now, do these pre-renders show up anywhere the old lady/man might find them like the addy bar, history or temp files? I so, just try proving your innocence. :(
I think he means things like terrorism or child pictures etc.
These days I'd almost be more worried about torrent sites being cached. You know the **AA's rule...guilty until proven innocent.

I can also see the inherent problem for people with bandwidth caps. Now if Google would just pre-render all overage charge payments it'd solve one problem. :p
 
My hosts file currently has 9533 domains that I redirect to 127.0.0.1, you can't browse the web these days peacefully. What a disaster. I want to browse a 1 website, and not making 15 fetches to 3rd party scripts and making 30 other DNS requests for other crap.

Firefox is such a better choice.

Mind sharing a good source for up to date blacklisted sites for adding to hostfile
 
Things like this have been done before, Firefox years ago, and webmasters got up in arms about the bandwidth utilization on the server side. So they were killed off. But Google's doing it now so it's ok?
A case of missing the forest for the trees. Fast load times only benefit site operators — especially those whose sites you frequent, which is exactly the kind of sites this feature constrains itself to. Fast load times means you're less likely to have a user bounce off over the frustration of having to wait and results in users spending more time on your site and visiting it more frequently.

Bandwidth is as cheap as chips anyway.
 
A case of missing the forest for the trees. Fast load times only benefit site operators — especially those whose sites you frequent, which is exactly the kind of sites this feature constrains itself to. Fast load times means you're less likely to have a user bounce off over the frustration of having to wait and results in users spending more time on your site and visiting it more frequently.

Bandwidth is as cheap as chips anyway.

You sure? I mean, that whole half a kilobyte of wasted bandwidth could have been used for something more important.
 
So if the browser guesses wrong, then it's even slower than the competition, since it's needlessly busy rendering a site you are not going to ? I'll pass on that....

Unless you're running a single-core CPU or have an extremely slow connection, no slowdown should be noticed from a wrong guess...
On the whole, it should be faster, since most of the time, it will guess correctly.

However, at least in my case, there will be very little time for it to preload anything. For example, to visit Hardocp, I type "ha" then tap arrow down and Enter. To visit the local newspaper, I type "un" and hit down arrow+enter. The whole thing takes a fraction of a second. I don't use bookmarks, because it's faster to just type out 2 or 3 letters of the URL.
 
they better let us shut this off or will be the last time chrome is installed on any of my computers

Lol, what? Honestly I think this is a nice feature. I tend to visit a lot of the same sites regularly ([H] for example, obviously) and this just seems like it will speed it up. RAM usage isn't an issue for me either, since I've got way more than necessary.
 

i followed that link and was reading the info, under the shock example there is an interesting entry as it pertains to this topic

As well by specifying the ipaddress of a server, you can gain access
# to some of your favourite sites with a single letter, instead of
# using the whole domain name
# It is perhaps a better solution to use Favourites/Bookmarks instead.
#216.34.181.45 s # slashdot.org
#74.125.127.105 g # google.com
 

I always thought that adding ad sites to your hosts file slowed down your browsing experience as it tried to resolve multiple add's to yourself with no web server running. Along with "don't have to many entries in your host file" are these both just problems from long ago that are fixed now?
 
Lol, what? Honestly I think this is a nice feature. I tend to visit a lot of the same sites regularly ([H] for example, obviously) and this just seems like it will speed it up. RAM usage isn't an issue for me either, since I've got way more than necessary.

^^ This. I frequent about 12 websites daily and I do not see this being an issue. I am yet to see it in action but I think it would be nice to know that one out of those 12 websites are already drawn when typing in part of the URL.

I guess this all goes down to browsing habits. If persons access questionable websites are are doing things online that might cause harm to them (think journalist in communist/war torn countries) then they would take the necessary precautions which may include not using the Chrome browser.
 
Back
Top