Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Google Chrome 13 Now Available to Preload Your Pages

Tags:
  • Chrome
  • Browsers
Last response: in News comments
Share
August 4, 2011 5:31:36 PM

Cool feature I guess, but I wouldn't want to use someone's bandwidth if I'm not actually going to click a link. To disable it, go to options in Chrome, "Under the Hood", and uncheck "Predict network actions to improve page load performance".
Score
13
August 4, 2011 5:42:42 PM

I think this feature is pretty useful. Unless you're accessing the internet through a 3G adapter the extra bandwidth that is uses is negligible. I've already noticed the the difference on several occasions.

The only issue that I've had is that chrome 13 doesn't seem to show the loading bar in YouTube. Anyone else having that problem?
Score
0
Related resources
August 4, 2011 5:55:08 PM

This won't bode well with AT&T data plan. I hate AT&T :[
Score
7
August 4, 2011 6:15:42 PM

el Goog, you never cease to amaze me
Score
5
August 4, 2011 6:37:17 PM

Hmm, that's actually pretty useful! Maybe I'll give Chrome a try once again. Mozilla, if you're reading this, you better have that in your next FF, even if just for the sake of it!
Score
3
August 4, 2011 6:49:54 PM

So....what if it pre-loads a virus, from a page you were NEVER going to click? I mean, even legitimate sites have been hacked before.


Essentially all this does is background load while you browse on your current page.
Score
3
August 4, 2011 6:56:41 PM

soccerdocksI think this feature is pretty useful. Unless you're accessing the internet through a 3G adapter the extra bandwidth that is uses is negligible. I've already noticed the the difference on several occasions.The only issue that I've had is that chrome 13 doesn't seem to show the loading bar in YouTube. Anyone else having that problem?
happens to me too, on every other version of chrome not just 13. no big deal.
Score
0
August 4, 2011 7:01:36 PM

Besides security risks in pre-loading pages, doesn't Google know about monthly bandwidth limits?
Score
-4
August 4, 2011 7:16:08 PM

phatbuddha79Besides security risks in pre-loading pages, doesn't Google know about monthly bandwidth limits?


Yes, that's why in the settings they give you the option to turn it off ;) 

although i currently have it enabled (just updated today) and so far i see no difference.... maybe it requires a little bit of time to see the results......

Score
2
Anonymous
August 4, 2011 8:03:08 PM

Also bad for people whose work keeps track of your web surfing habits simply by web loads and doesn't care as long as you aren't hitting a billion sites a month. If a visit to one site actually loads the pages for 15 more pages in the background, you are going to look like you never work.
Score
0
August 4, 2011 8:34:10 PM

I'm sure I had a plugin for firefox that did this years ago, it was even configurable for how many links deep you wanted it to preload. This is not new, maybe first time built into a browser (and I'm not sure of that either) but not new.
Score
0
August 4, 2011 8:41:02 PM

I remember that feature back in the dialup days (web accelerator programs)
When you load a page or search results, it would in the background begin loading data from the first few links.
Score
2
August 4, 2011 8:57:41 PM

just a thought, but I dont search for stuff much. I have my favorites, and I have my most often viewed pages. How about pre-loading those? It would make Netflix and Kongregate work much faster for me
Score
2
August 4, 2011 9:14:15 PM

Doesn't Google block people for preloading multiple pages of search results? I know they used to. Would seem hypocritical to waste someone else's bandwidth while complaining about people wasting yours.

And that's what I worry about this doing... wasting lots of bandwidth for pages that aren't viewed. Not a good strategy for the Internet.
Score
2
August 4, 2011 9:28:01 PM

well after playing around for a bit i think i figured out what it suppose to work (or at currently operating at my end).

1. it's so far only working when your doing searches. when i've typed in my web sites, clicked on favorites, or clicking on a link in the site i've selected, i've notice no difference in speed. Only in searches i've notice a difference (and looking at task manager networking to see my connection active for a short time.

2. it seams to only speed up the first link in the searches. one of the test i did was type in "runescape" and the main page of that opened instantly, while the "runescape wikia" link (just a few links below the runescape" did not open up instantly.

Although when i did the same test except changed the searched to "runescape wikia", the same thing happened above. instantly open but none of the lower links on the search page were instantly loaded.



So there my observation. only the 1st link on a search page will load. Maybe the results will change as time goes by. maybe not.

Good news is, (atm) it wont load every page in the search.
Score
3
August 4, 2011 9:39:05 PM

I wonder how long I will keep loyal to FireFox when I see sweet features like this coming out of Google.
Score
0
August 4, 2011 10:48:18 PM

As long as it doesn't preload malware through bad links then I think its good. I don't think that loading websites is going to affect bandwidth usage enough to make a difference.
Score
1
August 4, 2011 10:54:55 PM

ThunderfoxAnd that's what I worry about this doing... wasting lots of bandwidth for pages that aren't viewed. Not a good strategy for the Internet.

That's actually a really good point.

I also wonder how its going to affect site statistics. Will those preloaded pages show up as hits to the website? I don't see how they wouldn't unless google is just caching the data.
Score
1
August 5, 2011 4:02:53 AM

Not exactly a revolutionary feature, Opera browser has been doing this for years.
Score
0
August 5, 2011 4:03:19 AM

Not exactly a revolutionary feature, Opera browser has been doing this for years.
Score
0
August 5, 2011 5:07:55 AM

warmon6Yes, that's why in the settings they give you the option to turn it off although i currently have it enabled (just updated today) and so far i see no difference.... maybe it requires a little bit of time to see the results......

Not everyone is going to 1) know that this feature has been enabled and 2) know how to turn it off. This is the kind of thing that should be off by default and then enabled by the user if wanted.
Score
0
August 5, 2011 6:13:23 AM

Not a new feature by any standards (Firefox has autopager) but this may consume a lot of bandwidth, you know.
Score
0
August 5, 2011 1:47:55 PM

warmon6Although when i did the same test except changed the searched to "runescape wikia", the same thing happened above. instantly open but none of the lower links on the search page were instantly loaded.So there my observation. only the 1st link on a search page will load. Maybe the results will change as time goes by. maybe not.Good news is, (atm) it wont load every page in the search.



That's a nice way to check, but i'm just wondering, if you clicked on the wikia thing the first time, then it would have stored it in chrome's history/cache, which is why it may have loaded faster the second time.

Maybe you should clear history before doing the second test?
Score
0
August 5, 2011 9:41:15 PM

ojasThat's a nice way to check, but i'm just wondering, if you clicked on the wikia thing the first time, then it would have stored it in chrome's history/cache, which is why it may have loaded faster the second time.Maybe you should clear history before doing the second test?


Well i guess i should of mentioned that... but after you mentioning that, i retest it, with not clearing cache, it still the same. I still notice the difference between it instantly loading in search than and just opening another way.
Score
0
!