Chrome 22 Stable

They have updated Pepper Flash. I'll test it tomorrow, see if it's usable now

 

thanks

i'm using right now Chromium Version 24.0.1284.2 (159713) and i'm thinking to use chrome instead chromium

but may i ask a question ?
is chromium safe like chrome?
is the same code?

thankss

 

It's the same code.

Chrome only differs from Chromium in these ways:
1) Chrome includes the open source updater
2) Chrome includes crash reporting to Google
3) Chrome includes the closed source PDF viewer (based on Foxxit SDK)
4) Chrome includes the closed source Flash Player

 

@HM,

I notice under chromelugins both the PPAPI and NPAPI flash types are enabled. Is it okay or even beneficial to disable one of them, especially the NPAPI type?

 

Yes, you should disable the NPAPI version as it runs in a much weaker sandbox. The sandbox details for Linux aren't there though but on Windows the difference is significant.

 

Good, thanks!

 

thanks a lot
but the last chrome version is 22.0.1229.94 ,Chromium 24.0.1284.2
why?

 

Chrome has three channels. Stable, Beta, and Development.

Chromium is always the bleeding edge build, it's whatever gets commited by developers.

Chrome 22 is considered by Google to be stable. Chrome 23 is Beta. Chrome 24 is Development.

 

thanks Hungry Man

really don't know which is more safe stable or development version ,in short chrome or chomium

thanks!

 

Yep for using the 1806 trick you need to switch it on and off with reg tweaks provided in an old tread. Chrome22 downloads file, but removes it when downloaded. IE prevents download, Chrome does download and remove and FF downloads zero bytes file (not using it but reported by others using the 1806 trick).

 

On the latest update of 22, NPAPI isn't even installed it looks like, only Pepper.

 

Yeah, the old included NPAPI plugin is no longer included but if you use the NPAPI plugin that worked for Firefox, Chrome, and Opera it wouldn't be removed.

 

How is this data used, and what is sent back to Google?

When you browse the web using Google Chrome, the hash of each URL is computed, and the first 32 bits of that URL's hash is compared against the list of suspected phishing and malware websites. This includes the URL of the website you are visiting, as well as the URL of any included resources (such as included JavaScript or Adobe Flash movies). If the first 32 bits of the hash match an entry in the list, it is likely that the URL is on the list of suspected phishing or malware websites. At this point, we can only say likely, because there is still a reasonable chance of hash collisions in the 32-bit space - two distinct URLs with distinct 256-bit hashes where the first 32 bits of those hashes are the same. To confirm that the URL is suspected as a phishing or malware website, and not just a 32-bit hash collision, the 32-bit hash is sent to Google. Google then returns the full 256-bit hashes suspected of being phishing or malware and starting with those 32 bits. The full 256-bit hash of the URL in question can then be compared against the 256-bit hash(es) returned by Google, to make a determination of whether in fact the URL in question is or is not on the list of suspected phishing or malware websites. This looks like it could be Ruff on the HD. I would rather use a Extension and Uncheck the Phishing and Malware Filter..

 

may i ask a question ?
how can i set the disk cache size ?
for example

doesn't work with Chromium because sadly it's portable

thanks