The best part about this announcement is that Google Chrome won't be treating user scripts as second-class extensions. Greasemonkey scripts will be treated like real extensions. The ease of creating Greasemonkey scripts plus the visibility of real extensions in the browser takes Google Chrome a huge step closer to Firefox.
I have a Greasemonkey script in FF (<a href="http://defcraft.blogspot.com/2009/02/greasemonkey-search-helper.html" rel="nofollow">http://defcraft.blogspot.com/2009/02/greasemonkey-search-hel...</a>) that'll google for the current selection in a background tab when ALT-G is pressed. And it uses GM_openInTab API call.<p>Its equivalent in Chrome seems to be chrome.tabs.create. But when I tried that, I get this error: "chrome.tabs is not supported in content scripts". It seems that these "content scripts" aren't as powerful as extensions (<a href="http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/content_scripts.html" rel="nofollow">http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/content_scripts.htm...</a>). Am I missing something here?
Is the Chromium UserScripts page[1] out of date? Or are these still issues?<p><pre><code> Chromium does not support @require, @resource,
unsafeWindow, GM_registerMenuCommand, GM_setValue, or
GM_getValue.
</code></pre>
A lot of scripts that I come across use `unsafeWindow`, `GM_setValue` and `GM_getValue.` It seems to be updated (since the last time I looked at it), since I believe it used to say that @exclude was <i>not</i> implemented, and now I don't even see a mention of it on the page (though I don't think I've come across a script that used @exclude).<p>[1]: <a href="http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/user-scripts" rel="nofollow">http://dev.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/user-scr...</a><p>[UPDATE] This should shine <i>some</i> light on the topic: <a href="http://www.greasespot.net/2009/11/greasemonkey-api-usage.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.greasespot.net/2009/11/greasemonkey-api-usage.htm...</a>
I only wish Chrome would add a second search box, like IE and FF do. I have never figured out how to get the keyword for another search engine (Wikipedia) to work satisfactorily in Chrome's combination url/search entry area.
Does not anyone else get really let down every time they read a Chrome submission that doesn't announce that Firebug has been ported over?<p>I've started using Chrome for my day to day browsing, but I'll never be able to wholeheartedly switch until Firebug arrives.
I always thought Google had a browser for the masses in mind with Chrome. Something that is easy to use, stable and fast: a good alternative for IE.<p>User scripts are something for power users, who will always prefer Firefox. Won't this create the risk that average users will accept installing all kinds of scripts without much regard for security implications? User scripts are a powerful yet low-threshold tool which could easily lend itself to purposes such as identity theft.