>>40
Read the comic, dude. It's not about the rendering engine.
This is the problem with a browser where the really interesting features are things like Javascript performance and threading: stupid people will never understand it.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-03 2:06
>>41
They aren't doing anything that every browser from here on out is going to be doing.
I visited http://chrome.on.nimp.org with my Google Chrome, and, oh wow, yeah, that's where safe web browsing is, yeah. Just close all these 500 processes, and your browser is usable again. yeah. You should try it too, why should I be the only one to suffer?.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-03 4:05
>>44
It limits itself to 20 processes. After that, it re-uses processes at random. (This is likely to change.)
>>63
They screwed up and copy-pasted their usual EULA to avoid having to pay too much to their lawyers. Maybe you should learn to read (scroll down on the page you linked).
Name:
Anonymous2009-03-06 6:05
The ones who get their kicks designing weird languages Befunge Bloop etc and the pedobear icon grows in size as the wipe.