-
200803 Sep
As you can’t have failed to notice, Google released their Chrome browser today. Chrome is based on the same version of Webkit as Safari 3.1 so should in theory have the same level of CSS support, although based on the very brief usage I’ve had of it so far it seems that text-shadow and @font-face aren’t working.
Update: I should add, of course, that this is still Beta software, and these issues may well be fixed before launch.
Anyone else noticed any missing features?
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
-
Comments
-
01.
nor webkit-box-shadow, it displays them kinda weird.
-
02.
Johnny says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 2:34 am
it seems webkit-box-shadow works, it is when it is combined with -webkit-border-radius that it renders the corners poorly.
-
03.
Darren says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 2:36 am
border-radius does not seem to be aliased and has a black background when used in conjunction with box-shadow.
-
04.
Emil Ivanov says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 2:41 am
Yes, I noticed that there is no stop button!
Good that escape key works :) -
05.
[…] Me ha llamado la atención que no haga zoom de página completa como Firefox 3 o Internet Explorer 7, por lo demás no le veo nada negativo salvo que tendremos que probar nuestras páginas en un navegador más. A pesar de estar basado en Webkit, el motor de renderización de Safari, las propiedades text-shadow, @font-face y alguna más, no funcionan en Google Chrome, como comentan en CSS3.info […]
-
06.
TheBuzzSaw says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 3:17 am
Emil Ivanov, there is a stop button. You just gotta look. ;)
-
07.
I have also noticed that the PNG transparency is a bit rough around the edges. A good example is the social networking buttons below each post on my blog site: http://www.spoontwisted.com
But, for the record, this is only a Beta. Google is bound to fix these things before a final release.
-
08.
Huh, yeah – now all internet world will talk about new war opening between Chrome and FF? :) I know what’s missing – great plugin database FireFox own :)
-
09.
Tripix.net » Blog Archive » Lo que más me ha gustado de las opiniones sobre Chrome says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 8:05 am
[…] Css3.info Chrome is based on the same version of Webkit as Safari 3.1 so should in theory have the same level of CSS support, although based on the very brief usage I’ve had of it so far it seems that text-shadow and @font-face aren’t working. […]
-
10.
Brad says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 8:20 am
The text doesn’t render as well. Not only is it not anti-aliased as much (which some people may rejoice), but like IE, it is difficult to tell when a word is bold or not. Probably due to the default text-rendering on Windows, which likes to squeeze each stroke down to the narrowest number of pixels in order to avoid the anti-aliasing. It also makes all fonts look alike unless you use huge letters.
I noticed the chunky corners of border radius right away. There is no anti-aliasing there at all. I can’t explain that one. The lack of text-shadow is pretty disappointing, but I suppose that is also related to the system-provided font rendering.
-
11.
Alex says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 8:26 am
Firefox 3.1 does text-shadow fine on Windows, Google removed it for some other reason (which is odd, since they left box-shadow in)
-
12.
But Chrome supports the CSS -webkit-transform and -webkit-transition-XXX
:)
-
13.
Google Joins the Browser War…
Google launch their FLOSS (Free/Libre Open-Source Software) Browser called Google Chrome based on (FLOSS) WebKit, the same underlying layout engine of Safari 3.1. It is powered also by Google Gears and Google V8 (Google’s FLOSS JavaScript engine). W…
-
14.
Google Chrome uses a several month old build of Webkit as it’s base. Some CSS3 and webkit-team-invented (is gradient even a css module?) stuff might not be in there. There’s also a known security issue and such.
When they update their webkit build, and I’m sure they will, you’ll be able to use your declarations that only you and 5% of the browser users see.
-
15.
-
16.
-
17.
I agree Wolf, was able to confirm it as well. Apparently, Google Chrome 0.2 is using the WebKit version found in Safari 3.1.0.
The latest found in Safari 3.1.2 is not yet in Google Chrome 0.2.
-
18.
Brad says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 7:02 pm
I think that WebKit’s text-shadow is part of their font rendering engine that they ported from the Mac. FireFox does it in a different way. So, no font engine from Mac = no text shadow without extra effort.
WebKit has had text-shadow for longer than its had -webkit-transform and -webkit-transition. I also recall reading that Safari for Windows lets you choose a Window’s font-rendering if you preferred it, but that one of the side-effects was that you would lose text-shadows.
-
19.
Brad says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Wolf, I don’t think that explains why corner-radius is so blocky.
-
20.
Brad says:Comment » September 3rd, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Oh, but your Twitter link does explain it, I think.
-
21.
Alex says:Comment » September 4th, 2008 at 5:48 am
WebKit on GTK (at least) also has text-shadow, so it should have been abstracted away a while ago.
And box-shadow made it across.
-
22.
Pradeep.k.r says:Comment » September 4th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Hey Peter,
I have also checked that Chrome is not supporting the CSS clip: rect(auto auto auto auto) property properly….
-
23.
-
24.
-webkit-box-shadow is fine, but as other mentioned when used with -webkir-border-radius you get black patches in the corner.
the only problem i’ve found with -webkit-box-shadow is if you have the blur amount set at 0px (ie a solid shadow) then no shadow renders.
by the way, this has been reported to google via http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1047&sort=-id&colspec=ID%20Pri%20Area%20Mstone%20Type%20Owner%20Status%20Summary%20Modified
as are all of the other issues people have posted
MaFt
-
25.
Emil Ivanov says:Comment » September 5th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
“Whoa! Google Chrome has crashed. Restart now?”
I am wondering how the browser could crash, if all tabs are in different processes.
-
26.
Yeah, I am wondering myself, but I know some who experienced that.
Had an experience myself, almost crashed. They claim that it will not lock-up all the other tabs and such, but blah, Chrome locked-up to me for a minute or so, then it was able to recover. Now that ‘recover’ thing is a rare thing in many Windows-based applications.
Only happened once tho. I’m using Core2Duo, 2gb RAM btw :p with only Chrome opened when that occurred.
-
27.
paziek says:Comment » September 8th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Google products leave beta stage? Where? When? What?
When I login to my gmail acount I still see that beta sign on its logo. And how long has it been?
They won’t ever make it final/stable or whatever, cause they won’t be able to blame any mistakes on ‘beta phase’ anymore.
-
28.
-
29.
Michael "Reinventing the wheel" Howel says:Comment » September 12th, 2008 at 2:22 am
Why doesn’t Chrome just use the Win32-based WebKit like everyone else, instead porting WebKit to a Google-specific API? They ought to have known that it would result in bugs, and problems upgrading to a newer WebKit.
-
30.
This is totally great. The web development future looks bright. :D
-
31.
there are so many advantages and features with Chrome, such as it’s speed, for example; now if only they would take care it’s quirky cookie management…
-
32.
Yes Safari renders BOLD differently than IE – this I could live with.
What is insane is that Chrome does it like IE, not like Safari.
-
33.
Gemma Weirs says:Comment » November 2nd, 2008 at 6:38 pm
I don’t like the way Safari renders text at all. For normal weight text, it looks bold in Safari.
I haven’t tried Chrome yet but I have just installed it so I’ll see how it goes.
-
34.
Brad says:Comment » November 2nd, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Gemma,
That’s because you are used to having Windows reduce the thickness of every stroke down to a single pixel. What you see in Safari is actually closer to what the designer of the typeface intended. The upside is that when text IS bold, it is a much more noticeable difference from non-bold. -
35.
Geoff says:Comment » December 17th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Just installed Chrome. I like most of it, though it will have an uphill battle getting techno-illiterate users to sign on, due to the very different GUI.
Huge fan of the “sandboxed” tabs. Large fan of the speed.
Small quirks that will hopefully be fixed:
Zoom currently only works on text. I’m a graphic and web designer and I like to be able to pull out and see the whole thing.
(This is sort of an irrational want, but here we go). I’m a big fan of add-ons in Firefox (SteepandCheap.com, Chainlove.com, my RSS aggregate, etc.), so while the purpose of Chrome was to go no bells and whistles, I do sort of miss those.That’s my initial assessment. I need to do more research into it’s web standards/CSS/compatability/etc.
-
36.
David John Mead » Blog Archive » Was Google Chrome released a little too early? says:Comment » January 6th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
[…] Some missing CSS3 support […]
-
37.
I’ve also noticed that -webkit-border-radius-topleft/topright does not work. Even when I add the 0px value to both topleft and topright in Chrome, the rounded border still shows on the top left and right. However, in Firefox and Safari it seems to work fine. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Conner -
38.
khmer delveloper says:Comment » June 29th, 2012 at 7:14 am
Dear every one. I am learn to code css3 and i can do very friendly with Mozilla Firefox but other browser not effect. any suggestion for Chrome, IE8,9 and opera….I need you have. Thanks
-
01.
