why use chrome instead of chromium?

[TheNosh]

i get that chrome and chromium are basically the same thing. i have both of them installed, and can't find any important differences in how they work. here are the only differences i've found:


chrome has google's branding
chrome has an EULA
(and least important of all) the icons are coloured differently


my questions are as follows:


what are the advantages of using chrome over chromium?
if there are no advantages why agree to the EULA (not pressent in chromium)


i'm wondering because chrome (as far as i've observed) seems to be taken more seriously and i'm confused as to why that is.

if you vote please post

[stwschool]

Licenses ARE important. That's half the reason Linux exists. The license decides what is, and is not, permissssible for the software maker to do to you. The GPL is an excellent license. The Vista EULA is terrible. I've not read the Chrome one, but perhaps people object to elements of it. Certainly the agreements for Google Office and Gmail can be quite objectionable in parts, so maybe the browser is too? I just prefer to stick to something that I know won't contain any nasty surprises. I'm sure others feel the same.

[TheNosh]

even in windows 7, where they both work perfectly, i still use chromium. even if the EULA isn't horrible, why agree to it if you don't have to?

[moster]

even in windows 7, where they both work perfectly, i still use chromium. even if the EULA isn't horrible, why agree to it if you don't have to?

Oh, in windows it will make real difference :)

[binbash]

I prefer Chromium.I do not need a crap branding

[TheNosh]

Oh, in windows it will make real difference :)

yea, i know the windows EULA is a bigger issue, but to play some of my windows games, wine won't cut it, so i need windows. however when it comes to chrome, i can get the exact same thing (minus branding) and skip the EULA.

that being said, my main browser is still Opera which has an EULA, so i'm not too hugely worried about it. i'm just begining to wonder if chrome is taken more seriously than chromium just because it's more advertised.

[TheNosh]

i just noticed we seem to have a vote for "chrome is better (explain)" but without the "explain" part being done

[Incense]

I use chromium just because it's a step above chrome in the release cycle so more features are present. I actually never thought about the EULA.

Chrome = 3.0.196.0

Chromium = 3.0.197.0

I just wish that dude's head wasn't the close button. Kind of freaks me out.

[gnomeuser]

the biggest single difference is probably that with Chrome you get a build of Chromium that is stable for longer, Google are willing to put their might behind it and support it.

Additionally Chrome has a few things in it that aren't in Chromium. They have some identification callbacks that poke Google when you do a search, when you enable certain features, when you hit errors and on a daily basis. Nothing tied to you or that reveals personal information (at least not directly). This gives Google some insight into where to invest development time and which feautures need improving.

Chromium is likely going to be more fast paced, I also doubt that it will see proper releases unless someone sits down and does that work the releases from the Chromium tree are going to be Chrome and nothing else. This may make it harder for distributions to decide good branching points but more likely it will mean picking branches close to where Google decides to issue a new release.

[dsterry]

Chromium is a better choice to use and to develop because it supports more platforms and is the actual free software project Chrome is based on. Choose Chromium if you value your freedom to use, modify, and share your software and want to see it progress as fast as possible.

[keiichidono]

I use chromium just because it's a step above chrome in the release cycle so more features are present. I actually never thought about the EULA.

Chrome = 3.0.196.0

Chromium = 3.0.197.0

I just wish that dude's head wasn't the close button. Kind of freaks me out.

Agreed, the lack of EULA (code is under BSD) is good.

[dsterry]

Agreed, the lack of EULA (code is under BSD) is good.

It's not just about the fact that there's an EULA. Most software has some kind of restriction on its use, modification, distribution, etc. If that EULA excludes the program from being free software( conflicts with the four freedoms ) then it's best not to agree and find another program or work on developing a replacement.

[hanzomon4]

Who started chromium? :D

[keiichidono]

Who started chromium? :D

Google did.

[Tipped OuT]

"Dude, it's just an EULA, it makes no difference. Neither is better or worse. Get over it and move on."

:-\"

[keiichidono]

"Dude, it's just an EULA, it makes no difference. Neither is better or worse. Get over it and move on."

:-\"

The windows EULA is just a EULA too.

[Tipped OuT]

The windows EULA is just a EULA too.

"Get over it and move on".

:lolflag:

[keiichidono]

"Get over it and move on".

:lolflag:

Yeah, windows FTW!

[hanzomon4]

Then why the mistrust of chrome when both are (basically the same damn thing) made by the same company

[Jimleko211]

Then why the mistrust of chrome when both are (basically the same damn thing) made by the same company
Chromium is open source, Chrome is not.

[renkinjutsu]

Chromium is open source, Chrome is not.

???

that's not what their comic says :-k

[TheNosh]

Then why the mistrust of chrome when both are (basically the same damn thing) made by the same company

it's not so much a mistrust thing as a question of why chrome is needed when it's "the same damn thing" just with an EULA.

[Tipped OuT]

Chromium is open source, Chrome is not.

Wrong. They're both open source.

[TheNosh]

Wrong. They're both open source.

still sort of wrong. Chrome's source code was released as the open source project, chromium.

in other words they're are essentially the same project, however you won't find source code labeled as for chrome available to the public, only chromium. (however, as least as far as we're told, the code is identical) so chrome isn't exactly open source, as the source code is released as a separate project.

my only issue is this: if the code is identical as they say, then it's the same programme, so why agree to an EULA when it's the same damn thing you can get without it?

i ask because when the first chrome release came for linux i remember posts on this forum going crazy about how we finally had "real" chrome on linux instead of "just" chromium, as though it presented some sort of advantage