Google Chrome 4 now natively supports Greasemonkey user scripts
Feb 11th
One thing that got lost in the commotion of the extensions launch is a feature that is near and dear to my heart: Google Chrome 4 now natively supports Greasemonkey user scripts. Greasemonkey is a Firefox extension I wrote in 2004 that allows developers to customize web pages using simple JavaScript and it was the inspiration for some important parts of our extension system.
Installation is quick and easy, just like installing an extension. That’s because under the covers, the user script is actually converted into an extension. This means that management tasks like disabling and uninstalling work just like they do with extensions.
Also keep in mind that some user scripts won’t work in Google Chrome yet, because of differences between it and Firefox. Based on some analysis that the current maintainers of Greasemonkey did, I expect between 15%-25% of scripts to not work in Google Chrome. If you find such a script, you should consider letting the author know. There may be something he or she can do to easily fix the problem. In the meantime, we’ll keep working on bugs on our side to bring our implementation closer to Greasemonkey.
[ via google]
Why Web Developers Should Switch to Google Chrome
Feb 11th
All these tools make a heaven for web-developers:
- Web Inspector (aka Developer Tools)
- Accessing the Web Inspector/Developer Tools
- JavaScript Console
- Elements Panel
- Resources
[Via tutsplus]
finally Google Chrome 4 hits beta, includes lots of extensions
Feb 11th
The latest Windows version of Google Chrome, version 4.0, is now in beta. It’s reportedly a scorching 30% faster than the current release, and it includes a bookmark syncing feature that’s been floating around in the developer preview version of the browser for some time.
Activate bookmark syncing on each of your computers, and Chrome will automatically synchronize any changes to your bookmarks across all your machines. It’s made possible by the magic of XMPP, which also powers Google Talk. Sound good? Go ahead and download Chrome 4.0 Beta.
This beta version of Chrome is also notable for what it leaves out: extensions support. According toStephen Shankland at CNET, Google is reworking the extensions interface for Chrome, so that feature is disabled for now. Shankland also tracked down some news on the upcoming Chrome Mac Beta. The team working on it has been instructed to fix all their high-priority bugs by the end of the week, and it looks like getting the Mac version out is near the top of Google’s to-do list.
[via CNET]
[via downloadsquad]
SIFR vs Cufon vs Typeface.js
Feb 10th
Typeface.js
Advantages:
- User doesn’t have to have Flash plugin installed on their browser
- Easier to create with just a few lines of Javascript
- For page loading it just needs to load the Javascript
Disadvantages:
- Text is not selectable because it outputs it like an image. I looked at some examples, right clicked on a word and had to view as an image. Every single word had this behaviour. Big thumbs down.
- Usage for body copy will slow down loading time, so it is recommended to use only for headlines.
- Cannot be read by screen readers
- Visual looks blurry
- Not all browser compliant and still has a lot of development left to be done
sIFR
Advantages:
- Can be read by screen readers as a normal headline because it is a behaviour layer on top of the markup and styling.
- Text is selectable
- SEO friendly
- Displays text as is like any other web font. Crisp and not blurry!
- Has addons like jQuery sIFR Plugin!
Disadvantages:
- Requires Javascript to be enabled
- Flash plugin must be installed in the browser
- Need Adobe Flash Studio to create it BUT there is a pretty nifty sIFR generator that creates the file for you!
- For page loading, it has to request for Flash, Javascript and CSS files attached to it, which can potentially get bogged down if you are using sIFR in too many places.
- Cannot display on an iPhone. Yet…
Cufón (similar to Typeface.js)
Enter Cufón, the Javascript-based font replacement solution which makes heavy use of canvas and VML. This offers a great alternative to other solutions out there – no Flash or images required.
There are some issues with using Cufón on a live site, the most notable being the inability to highlight and copy/paste text, which is really the biggest issue for your site’s users.
Combine that with the EULA issues, which prevent you from being able to legally embed fonts in Javascript files for most fonts on the market today.
The other issue is knowing what fonts can be used with Cufón. For sIFR, most fonts are fair game, since the font is embedded in a Flash movie, which is typically an approved usage by most font foundries for most fonts. With Cufón, the Javascript files used for the font can be easily “stolen” and either used on another website or reverse engineered.