Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Chrome

Chrome 100 Has Arrived (googleblog.com) 54

The Chrome team: The Chrome team is delighted to announce the promotion of Chrome 100 to the stable channel for Windows, Mac and Linux. Chrome 100 is also promoted to our new extended stable channel for Windows and Mac. This will roll out over the coming days/weeks. Chrome 100.0.4896.60 contains a number of fixes and improvements -- a list of changes is available in the log.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chrome 100 Has Arrived

Comments Filter:
  • Chrome made version numbers meaningless.

    • by Dracos ( 107777 )

      Microsoft started it with Windows 95. Chrome made browser version numbers useless with a too-rapid release schedule which other vendors felt obliged to copy.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Yes, the rapid release cycle has been a disaster for Chrome. It's only got 80% of the market, and every other major browser copying them.

        • It's only got 80% of the market, and every other major browser copying them.

          Well in fairness the HTML5 spec is mostly what Google wanted in there. The vast majority of those making the HTTP standard and HTML standard work for Google. So pretty much Google is now the standard as opposed to an independent group of people. At the protest of plenty, the organizations have mostly turned a deaf ear, so pretty much everyone except Mozilla saw the writing on the wall and caved.

          The Web is exactly what Google sees fit and everyone just copies because playing catch up is pointless (except

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Windows 95 was the version of Windows released in 1995. So it makes sense at least as a time reference (similar to Ubuntu 22.04 being the version that will be released this April). I think the internal versioning Windows scheme was fscked only because MS had to deal with the transition to the NT architecture in XP. The public version skip from 8 to 10 is rumored to be because "nine" sounded the same as the German word for "no" (nein).
        • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          I think the internal versioning Windows scheme was fscked only because MS had to deal with the transition to the NT architecture in XP. The public version skip from 8 to 10 is rumored to be because "nine" sounded the same as the German word for "no" (nein).

          No, it's because of the insane way people checked version numbers on Windows. Many NT programs, especially installers would only do simple checks for the version number because that's all the installer allowed - basically substring searches.

          So an installe

          • I think the internal versioning Windows scheme was fscked only because MS had to deal with the transition to the NT architecture in XP. The public version skip from 8 to 10 is rumored to be because "nine" sounded the same as the German word for "no" (nein).

            No, it's because of the insane way people checked version numbers on Windows. Many NT programs, especially installers would only do simple checks for the version number because that's all the installer allowed - basically substring searches.

            So an installer might query windows and get back "Windows 9" thinking it was Windows 95, Windows 95 OSR2, Windows 98, Windows 98 SE, and refuse to install.

            Apparently it wasn't much of an issue for Windows 2000, because Windows 2.x was pretty much sucky and few programs were available for it. But it's obvious ther'es enough software out there that checks to see if it's running Windows NT series or Windows 9x that it's checked for as well.

            Microsoft probably found a number of programs failed in that way because they were braindead, and unlike Apple, Microsoft does want to make sure apps still work so rather than write those malfunctioning apps as buggy, Microsoft just bumped it to Windows 10.

            Lame excuse: like I said "rumored". However, I was assuming that the public version numbers didn't correspond to the internal versions, which would be what installers checked. So MS could put any version number for marketing purposes.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Microsoft started it with Windows 95.

        Windows 95 is just a name on the box like Ubuntu - Focal Fossa.
        Windows 95 has version number 4.00.950 for the RTM release. 4.00.950A, 4.00.950B and 4.00.950C denoted the service packs. It isn't meaningless at all.

        Microsoft has always followed {Major} . {Minor} . {Build} . {Revision} and continues to this day. And in over 2 decades they've only got the major release up to version 10 (yes open system information on your Windows 11 machine and check the version number)

    • by antdude ( 79039 )

      Yeah. I miss the old version numberings with major and minor numbers. :(

  • Using major / minor / patch-level version numbers at least allows users to have a reasonable expectation of whether big / small / invisible changes are ahead.

    But almost no user will be able to point out the differences between Chrome X and X+1, because they use the first digit already for just anything unimportant.
    • The point of the change was to convey that there are no major/minor/patch versions anymore. A new feature may be thrown in any time they think it's ready, they won't be held back to release as a group, because Google was sick of browsers evolving too slowly or their taste and things like the HTML 5 and CSS 3 specs couldn't be implemented all at once.

  • Google has retired all uses of HTML, XML, URLs, javascript, http, https, text, all image formats, any method of displaying pages, the concept of the page itself, and all known forms of encryption in preference of their new technology that will save the world, Data User Node Graph Hypertext Expression Adaptation Protocol. Google will all of its services and any services that depend on any Google technology to this new combined technology tomorrow.

  • Who fucking cares.

  • Google hasnâ(TM)t done anything for any of us, and has proven to take our privacy as their own. When will we stop supporting this rubbish? It is like we flock as mindless fools to make Google more powerful so they can hurt us more.
  • Don't want it or need it !
  • Banks used to compound interest quarterly. Then, to compete they started compounding it monthly. Then, daily. Some now even compound continuously.

    That is where Chrome and FF updates are headed.

It is not best to swap horses while crossing the river. -- Abraham Lincoln

Working...