This is possibly my favorite song of the 80's, and now with this and the Reel Big Fish version, I have 3 choices when I wanna hear this musical masterpiece.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
First Impressions: Google Chrome
The beta for Google's web browser was released yesterday. I figured the best way to judge whether or not it's good is to just go about my daily internet business, rather than trying to make it jump through insane hoops that don't really matter to me. Here's what I found out.
The Good:
It's pretty - A while back this company named Apple got this crazy idea that visually, less is more. A lot of people agreed, and a lot of products jumped on the minimalist bandwagon. I'm not knocking them, because I feel the same way--if you open any of my web browsers, you will see a skin more akin to Safari than whatever comes as the default. This is one of the places Chrome shines; it was the first browser I've downloaded where I haven't immediately thought, "Man, I need a skin for this thing." The animation for little things such as tab switching are sleek and add a little flair.
It's fast - I haven't bothered to look at the figures yet, though I know they're out there, mainly because Chrome is still in beta and it seems a little silly to get worked up over the numbers just yet. With that said, Chrome is fast. Maybe it's just the user's perception, but I feel like it's faster than Firefox, and around the same level as Opera.
It's stable - At least, that's what Google tells us. Since each tab is its own process, as opposed to just being part of the entire browser, if a plugin being used while you're on, say, YouTube, starts freaking out, you're going to lose your YouTube tab... and just your YouTube tab. I have yet to actually experience this, but I take Google's word for it, considering how many people are complaining about memory usage (but I'm getting ahead of myself).
It's open-source - And that means that it's only going to get better. Nerds from far and wide are going to be tweaking the heck out of Chrome. And we, the regular users, are going to reap the benefits. This means that while there isn't a lot to Chrome right now, it's only a matter of time before there's more crazy add-ons than we can shake a stick at.
The Bad:
It's lacking features - Chrome is still in beta, and that means there are a lot of things missing. For instance, fire up Firefox/Opera/IE/Safari/etc and right-click a picture. Do you see how it has an option that reads something like, "Set as desktop background"? Well Chrome doesn't. Maybe it's just because I'm something of a desktop junkie, but I couldn't believe this most basic feature wasn't included. In fact, the right-click menu in general seems severely lacking when compared to other browsers.
It uses more memory - Overall, Chrome tends to use a bit more memory than other browsers. How big of a deal is this? I guess that really depends on your computer, and whether or not you're a memory miser. Personally, I'm not, and I feel as though this isn't a major issue, considering I already listed the reason why it takes up more memory (see: stability). I don't mind if a program uses more memory than its counterparts if that means it runs better. Apparently some people do though.
It's not very customizable - Now, this could probably be grouped in with the lack of features complaint, but this is my blog and this is my way of padding my post so I seem a lot smarter than I actually am. Any way you look at it, however, you're basically stuck with the same Chrome everyone else is. There's not a lot you can customize, and the Options window only has 3 tabs with a handful of settings each. What I'd like to see most is the ability to customize the "New Tab" window. Currently, it displays your most visited websites along with your bookmarks, and recently closed tabs. The only thing I don't like is that there are websites I'd like to have listed instead of the ones I visit most. I know that sounds strange, and I'm sure many of you are thinking, "why don't you just bookmark them?" The answer is that I was a long time Opera user, and when I switched back to Firefox, I used every add-on possible to make it exactly like Opera. I'm used to my Speed Dial, and that's what I want.
The Ugly
It likes to watch what you do - There were orignally two points here: Section 11 of the EULA, which basically stated that anything you did in Chrome, Google could re-produce/re-use-/re-whatever without letting you know or paying you. It only took them a day to say that was a mistake and their EULA is currently being re-written (and it will be retroactive). The second part still warrants some concern from all those paranoid of Big Brother, and that is the power of the omnibox. If you don't know what the omnibox is, it's Chrome's address bar. If you have the auto-suggest feature enabled, Google will know what you type into the omnibox--even if you don't press enter. If that's something that scares you, you can always just... you know... turn off auto-suggest.
The Conclusion
Chrome is usable, which is to say you could download it and use it to browse the internet. But is it worth using? Not yet.
Just keep on using Firefox, Opera, Safari, or--G-d forbid--Internet Explorer. Right now Chrome is just a little baby browser, but keep your eye open, because there's an incredible amount of potential here.
I'm not a huge fan of Firefox--I basically use it because it has add-ons not available in Opera. I'm more than happy to let another browser knock it out of its "default" position. I think the best contender to the crown is Chrome. So keep it up, Google.
The Good:
It's pretty - A while back this company named Apple got this crazy idea that visually, less is more. A lot of people agreed, and a lot of products jumped on the minimalist bandwagon. I'm not knocking them, because I feel the same way--if you open any of my web browsers, you will see a skin more akin to Safari than whatever comes as the default. This is one of the places Chrome shines; it was the first browser I've downloaded where I haven't immediately thought, "Man, I need a skin for this thing." The animation for little things such as tab switching are sleek and add a little flair.
It's fast - I haven't bothered to look at the figures yet, though I know they're out there, mainly because Chrome is still in beta and it seems a little silly to get worked up over the numbers just yet. With that said, Chrome is fast. Maybe it's just the user's perception, but I feel like it's faster than Firefox, and around the same level as Opera.
It's stable - At least, that's what Google tells us. Since each tab is its own process, as opposed to just being part of the entire browser, if a plugin being used while you're on, say, YouTube, starts freaking out, you're going to lose your YouTube tab... and just your YouTube tab. I have yet to actually experience this, but I take Google's word for it, considering how many people are complaining about memory usage (but I'm getting ahead of myself).
It's open-source - And that means that it's only going to get better. Nerds from far and wide are going to be tweaking the heck out of Chrome. And we, the regular users, are going to reap the benefits. This means that while there isn't a lot to Chrome right now, it's only a matter of time before there's more crazy add-ons than we can shake a stick at.
The Bad:
It's lacking features - Chrome is still in beta, and that means there are a lot of things missing. For instance, fire up Firefox/Opera/IE/Safari/etc and right-click a picture. Do you see how it has an option that reads something like, "Set as desktop background"? Well Chrome doesn't. Maybe it's just because I'm something of a desktop junkie, but I couldn't believe this most basic feature wasn't included. In fact, the right-click menu in general seems severely lacking when compared to other browsers.
It uses more memory - Overall, Chrome tends to use a bit more memory than other browsers. How big of a deal is this? I guess that really depends on your computer, and whether or not you're a memory miser. Personally, I'm not, and I feel as though this isn't a major issue, considering I already listed the reason why it takes up more memory (see: stability). I don't mind if a program uses more memory than its counterparts if that means it runs better. Apparently some people do though.
It's not very customizable - Now, this could probably be grouped in with the lack of features complaint, but this is my blog and this is my way of padding my post so I seem a lot smarter than I actually am. Any way you look at it, however, you're basically stuck with the same Chrome everyone else is. There's not a lot you can customize, and the Options window only has 3 tabs with a handful of settings each. What I'd like to see most is the ability to customize the "New Tab" window. Currently, it displays your most visited websites along with your bookmarks, and recently closed tabs. The only thing I don't like is that there are websites I'd like to have listed instead of the ones I visit most. I know that sounds strange, and I'm sure many of you are thinking, "why don't you just bookmark them?" The answer is that I was a long time Opera user, and when I switched back to Firefox, I used every add-on possible to make it exactly like Opera. I'm used to my Speed Dial, and that's what I want.
The Ugly
It likes to watch what you do - There were orignally two points here: Section 11 of the EULA, which basically stated that anything you did in Chrome, Google could re-produce/re-use-/re-whatever without letting you know or paying you. It only took them a day to say that was a mistake and their EULA is currently being re-written (and it will be retroactive). The second part still warrants some concern from all those paranoid of Big Brother, and that is the power of the omnibox. If you don't know what the omnibox is, it's Chrome's address bar. If you have the auto-suggest feature enabled, Google will know what you type into the omnibox--even if you don't press enter. If that's something that scares you, you can always just... you know... turn off auto-suggest.
The Conclusion
Chrome is usable, which is to say you could download it and use it to browse the internet. But is it worth using? Not yet.
Just keep on using Firefox, Opera, Safari, or--G-d forbid--Internet Explorer. Right now Chrome is just a little baby browser, but keep your eye open, because there's an incredible amount of potential here.
I'm not a huge fan of Firefox--I basically use it because it has add-ons not available in Opera. I'm more than happy to let another browser knock it out of its "default" position. I think the best contender to the crown is Chrome. So keep it up, Google.
Monday, September 1, 2008
First Impressions: Force Unleashed
Over the weekend I finally jumped onto X-Box Live and downloaded the Force Unleashed demo. I haven't regularly played a video game in quite some time, but the fall/holiday lineup of X-Box titles looks mighty impressive, so I figured I'd get a jump start.
The demo, which took me maybe 15 minutes to complete, was... boring, to be frank. Maybe LucasArts didn't want to give away too much, but even after a quarter of an hour I became rather tired of the "hack, slash, repeat" gameplay. Don't get me wrong, the Force powers were cool, and you feel really badass charging up a Force push and just leveling a door and whatever is behind it. But in the heat of battle, I found it was a lot more effective to just hack your way through the enemies, perhaps using some lightning to immobilize them when they started to swarm.
Maybe the KotORs spoiled me, because the thought of being Darth Vader's secret apprentice should send me into waves of fanboy extacy, yet I find the thought of being forced to play one side rather dull. In any video game where I'm given a choice, I will always be a cold-hearted killer--that's just what's fun for me. Yet with so many new titles letting us see the concequences of our choices, the idea of a cut-and-dry Star Wars game just doesn't thrill me.
Hopefully my doubts will prove unfounded once the title drops. There certainly was potential in the demo for this to be a fun game, but ultimately I feel it can be nothing better than God of War with a lightsabre; something light and playable with some "Oh shi-"' moments of badassery, but ultimately a game that you can't really sink your teeth into. There's nothing wrong with that, but I have a feeling I'll have to wait until Fable 2 in order to really get my game on.
The demo, which took me maybe 15 minutes to complete, was... boring, to be frank. Maybe LucasArts didn't want to give away too much, but even after a quarter of an hour I became rather tired of the "hack, slash, repeat" gameplay. Don't get me wrong, the Force powers were cool, and you feel really badass charging up a Force push and just leveling a door and whatever is behind it. But in the heat of battle, I found it was a lot more effective to just hack your way through the enemies, perhaps using some lightning to immobilize them when they started to swarm.
Maybe the KotORs spoiled me, because the thought of being Darth Vader's secret apprentice should send me into waves of fanboy extacy, yet I find the thought of being forced to play one side rather dull. In any video game where I'm given a choice, I will always be a cold-hearted killer--that's just what's fun for me. Yet with so many new titles letting us see the concequences of our choices, the idea of a cut-and-dry Star Wars game just doesn't thrill me.
Hopefully my doubts will prove unfounded once the title drops. There certainly was potential in the demo for this to be a fun game, but ultimately I feel it can be nothing better than God of War with a lightsabre; something light and playable with some "Oh shi-"' moments of badassery, but ultimately a game that you can't really sink your teeth into. There's nothing wrong with that, but I have a feeling I'll have to wait until Fable 2 in order to really get my game on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)