Google Chrome a Engineering Masterpiece ?

[CruNcher]

First thing that blow me away literaly was the start time on Windows (i couldn't belive it) it starts as fast as IE 7 if not subjectively even faster and it doesn't seem to be docked in the OS in anyway it easily beats Opera and Firefox in that point.

Tough right after the start it calls home no idea what it does yet (source code has to be checked) but it doesn't seem to be the Autoupdate (all Settings where on Private and no Search was active).


Some technical Points:
+ Really fast Startup time
+ Task Manager

Some Security Points:
+ Sandbox Concept (throughout the whole browsing except for Plugins)
+ Phising Check via Google (like Firefox)

Some usability UI points:
+ Tabs get smaller the more you add (Opera like)
+ Integrated Spell Checking
+ Most recent visited Sites visualy Displayed on ech new Tab (Opera like)
+ Maximum Screen area for Browsing (@ Default no Caption,Menus, only Adress and Tab Bar) all major functions accessable via the Adress Bar (2 popup icons)


Test: 36 Tabs + Video Playback 720p H.264

Memory Management (Video Playback not included):
http://s6.directupload.net/images/080904/rtu3js7q.png
http://s8.directupload.net/images/080904/mug532vz.png
http://s6.directupload.net/images/080904/9e2nuwef.png

Javascript execution (dromaeo.com)
Chrome = 619.40ms (Tota)
Firefox 3.1b1 = 2326.60ms (Total)
Opera = 3221.80ms (Total)

Acid3 (http://acid3.acidtests.org/)
Chrome = 79/100
Opera = 84/100
Firefox 3.1b1 = 85/100

Subjective Video Playback 720p Flash H.264 (http://somestuff.org/flashAVC/flvplayer.php?moviename=movies/BBB-1080downsized-x1280y720.mp4)
Opera = Some glitches
Chrome= Smoother
Firefox 3.1b1 = Unviewable extreme glitches

Bugs found so far (Chrome):
Doesn't paste @ the right place after copy when doing it with the right click Menu in a Text field (pastes @ end of text) ;)

Info: Chrome was the only browser running the whole time (memory leak possible) running all 3 @ once Firefox 3.1 creates random long lasting Kernel Explosions

[smok3]

i like it, but some cons

- seems like only one language is allowed thought (at the same time), this should be switched (as with firefox) at the current formarea.
- it's b**ugly
- font/html engine is not perfect.

i do see it as my default browser really soon thought.

p.s. this post written with;
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/525.13 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/0.2.149.27 Safari/525.13

[fibbingbear]

I have a couple of reasons why I don't want to use Chrome (yet):

1.) Lack of plugins.
2.) It's beta. Who knows what security holes are there (some have already been found since it uses an older build of WebKit). Other bugs have been found, like one that crashes every tab (even though Google claims it was designed to not do so).

Once these issues are addressed, it can be a serious contender. I think calling it an engineering masterpiece is a hyperbole, although it is well designed. It's also important to note that Firefox is planning an overhaul of its Javascript engine, so Chrome's speed (other than launch speed) may not be so big in the future.

One thing that I'm absolutely amazed by, though, is the DNS prefetching. I was surprised that other browsers didn't have this feature.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

I tried Chrome and it's really unstable at the moment ;)

* Click on "Options" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)
* Click on "Report bug or broken website" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)

Also the claims that Google Chrome is faster than Firefox/SeaMonkey are more than questionable:
Try "Streetview" in Google Maps. Runs pretty smooth in SeaMonkey 2.0, but runs pretty jerky in Chrome!

And why the hack does it install itself to this folder, without asking the user for the desired install location?
C:\Documents and Settings\John Doe\Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Chrome

Also any browser without Adblock Plus plugin is completely useless for my everyday work...

[smok3]

i have a problem with a process called 'google installer' which seems to call home often bothering my firewalls, however, design-wise the browser seems years ahead of firefox (didn't crash for me once yet, tested on two different machines).

p.s. about js speed, is there a sane way to benchmark this?

[LoRd_MuldeR]

i have a problem with a process called 'google installer' which seems to call home often bothering my firewalls

Delete/Rename "C:\Documents and Settings\LoRd_MuldeR\Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Update\GoogleUpdate.exe" and don't get bothered again :)

p.s. about js speed, is there a sane way to benchmark this?

Well, try one of those fancy Aajax applications. For example use Google Maps and test the "Street View" feature. Move the camera around.

Performance in SeaMonkey 2.0 is much better than in Chrome! Same should apply to Firefox 3.0/3.1 ...

[smok3]

ah, i see there is dromaeo.com

this is what i got;

http://dromaeo.com/
614.00ms.......chrome
3071.00ms......ff 3.0.1
3190.80ms......opera 9.52
----...........ie7 stoped responding after 1st test

so this is actually a significant improvement.

---

i have nuked the google updater, will see if thats it. :)

---

some things noticed:
- open a fat pdf in one tab, you can still click around the others (try that with ff)
- there is built-in drag-drop ability for the upload forms (you would need a plugin for that in ff)

[LoRd_MuldeR]

Here are my results:

Chrome 376.00 ms
SeaMonkey 2.0* 1182.00 ms
SeaMonkey 2.0 1574.60 ms
Opera 9.5 1468.40 ms
Safari 3.1.2 1665.80 ms
IE 8.0 2634.60 ms

(*) with JavaScript JIT enabled

Well, Chrome seems to be very well optimized for this kind of synthetic benchmarks. But what does it tell us about the performance on "normal" web-sites ??? :confused:
As sad said before, Chrome performance drops significantly on Google Maps StreetView (for example), while SeaMonkey is fine...

[smok3]

yes, i guess it does not tell much, however don't confuse ajax with javascript, slow ajax performance is much more than only js to blame.

[cyberbeing]

Firefox 3.1b1pre with JIT enabled beats out Chrome in the Sunspider JavaScript benchmark by 21% overall yet Chrome is somehow 270% faster in Dromaeo...

Firefox 3.1 JIT enabled (1725.8ms Total) (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B57,57,55,57,57%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B36,37,37,36,36%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B79,77,77,90,79%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B59,60,60,82,57%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B160,156,156,159,159%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B41,42,43,41,42%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B14,15,16,16,16%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B1,2,1,1,1%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B12,12,8,14,9%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B11,11,11,11,12%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B29,29,28,29,28%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B57,59,57,56,57%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B39,39,37,38,38%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B35,35,36,34,35%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B13,13,13,13,12%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B121,121,123,120,117%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B95,93,94,95,95%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B40,40,40,40,40%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B19,19,19,19,19%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B8,8,8,9,8%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B234,232,237,240,239%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B18,18,18,17,18%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B91,92,91,95,92%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B117,118,118,114,122%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B274,260,268,261,281%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B66,63,64,61,63%5D%7D)
Google Chrome (2192.0ms Total) (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B32,30,31,31,34%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B62,59,59,57,61%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B42,43,43,43,43%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B7,7,7,5,8%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B38,37,37,37,37%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B31,33,34,33,32%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B25,26,25,25,26%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B5,5,4,5,5%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B10,11,9,11,10%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B25,27,29,30,27%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B32,32,33,32,31%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B3,3,3,3,3%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B26,25,24,24,26%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B19,19,19,20,19%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B17,18,18,18,19%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B278,279,277,279,266%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B325,365,329,360,313%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B74,65,65,73,74%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B49,40,41,42,40%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B18,16,18,17,17%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B464,463,463,463,466%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B73,72,73,77,75%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B67,69,68,63,61%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B165,174,163,175,162%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B215,213,217,218,222%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B82,83,83,87,85%5D%7D)

Firefox JIT enabled (1247.80ms), Google Chrome (463.40ms) (http://dromaeo.com/?id=26298,26306)

[LoRd_MuldeR]

yes, i guess it does not tell much, however don't confuse ajax with javascript, slow ajax performance is much more than only js to blame.
That is right of course. But I care much more about the overall performance on Ajax sites than I care about the results for JavaScript-specific benchmarks...

These JavaScript-implemented games might be another test for JS performance:
http://www.nihilogic.dk/labs/javascript-games/

[lucassp]

* Click on "Options" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)
* Click on "Report bug or broken website" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)


Well...I reported a few broken web sites and it didn't crash.

I use Meebo all day long while I'm at work and it's very smooth on Chrome while on the other browsers isn't.

Of course, there's still lots of work to be done. But the Java Engine is great!

[smok3]

i have found some really obvious things borken, (try 32 bit png and set the CSS trasparency property to say 70%). Other than that png seems fine;
http://somestuff.org/png/png_test2.htm (my really old png test page)

http://somestuff.org/png/logo.png
(8bit rgba png - which is not something very usual)

[Sharktooth]

works here. even the png tests works.

[smok3]

those do work, try the transparency via css (on 32 bit png).
edit: quick and dirty example http://somestuff.org/png/png_test2_change.htm (varies transparency onmouseover)
it basically kills the original alpha, if transparency (other than default) is defined via css.

[Sharktooth]

ah, got it.

[Bigmango]

I tried Chrome and it's really unstable at the moment ;)

* Click on "Options" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)
* Click on "Report bug or broken website" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)

I don't have these problems. Chome has been rock stable here for several days now, on vista x64.


Also the claims that Google Chrome is faster than Firefox/SeaMonkey are more than questionable:
Try "Streetview" in Google Maps. Runs pretty smooth in SeaMonkey 2.0, but runs pretty jerky in Chrome!


I also don't have this problem, streetview is the same in firefox 3 and Chrome on my system (core2duo 2.13 ghz)

[Bigmango]

But what does it tell us about the performance on "normal" web-sites ??? :confused:


In my experience Chrome is MUCH faster with web applications. I.ex for me gmail, goodle docs, etc.... are real time with Chrome. Things are just there as soon as I click, it feels like I'm not connected to the internet, like these apps are installed on my PC. With firefox 3 it takes much longer to load things.

For normal websites it's about the same as firefox; some heavy forums are loading and refreshing faster with chrome.

[Blue_MiSfit]

I noticed a speed difference right away, even on doom9.

The javascript performance is nothing short of phenomenal :)

It feels surprisingly polished overall and quite usable.

Now, if only the ctrl+F popup could be relocated to the bottom (for firefox workalikeability :)), and if plugins could be ported (stumbleupon is all I care about ATM)

Also, they should lose the whole pokemon / simon hybrid icon concept. It's dumb.

Oh yeah, and they need to modify middle mouse click / drag scrolling behavior to mirror firefox / I.E.

I like feeling like the latency of my internet connection is more of a bottleneck than my PC / browser!

~MiSfit

[tetsuo55]

I have a couple of reasons why I don't want to use Chrome (yet):

1.) Lack of plugins.
2.) It's beta. Who knows what security holes are there (some have already been found since it uses an older build of WebKit). Other bugs have been found, like one that crashes every tab (even though Google claims it was designed to not do so).


1.) Plugins are provided through Gears, there hardly are any though
2.) All reported security holes are either already fixed, about to be fixed or non-working because of the sandboxing
the chromium source is being cleaned up for a merge with the WebKit bleeding edge

I tried Chrome and it's really unstable at the moment ;)

* Click on "Options" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)
* Click on "Report bug or broken website" causes "Woah! Google Chrome has crashed" (100% reproducible)

Also the claims that Google Chrome is faster than Firefox/SeaMonkey are more than questionable:
Try "Streetview" in Google Maps. Runs pretty smooth in SeaMonkey 2.0, but runs pretty jerky in Chrome!

And why the hack does it install itself to this folder, without asking the user for the desired install location?
C:\Documents and Settings\John Doe\Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Chrome

Also any browser without Adblock Plus plugin is completely useless for my everyday work...

-You are probably running a 64bit os, there is a know bug about that.

-Some users are having performance problems, you should report that with as much extra information as you can.

-Chromium can be installed anywhere

-Complain to the creator of adblock plus, Chrome(ium) supports plugins through the Gears interface

i have a problem with a process called 'google installer' which seems to call home often bothering my firewalls, however, design-wise the browser seems years ahead of firefox (didn't crash for me once yet, tested on two different machines).

p.s. about js speed, is there a sane way to benchmark this?


-Chromium does not have this

Firefox 3.1b1pre with JIT enabled beats out Chrome in the Sunspider JavaScript benchmark by 21% overall yet Chrome is somehow 270% faster in Dromaeo...

Firefox 3.1 JIT enabled (1725.8ms Total) (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B57,57,55,57,57%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B36,37,37,36,36%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B79,77,77,90,79%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B59,60,60,82,57%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B160,156,156,159,159%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B41,42,43,41,42%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B14,15,16,16,16%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B1,2,1,1,1%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B12,12,8,14,9%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B11,11,11,11,12%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B29,29,28,29,28%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B57,59,57,56,57%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B39,39,37,38,38%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B35,35,36,34,35%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B13,13,13,13,12%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B121,121,123,120,117%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B95,93,94,95,95%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B40,40,40,40,40%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B19,19,19,19,19%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B8,8,8,9,8%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B234,232,237,240,239%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B18,18,18,17,18%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B91,92,91,95,92%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B117,118,118,114,122%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B274,260,268,261,281%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B66,63,64,61,63%5D%7D)
Google Chrome (2192.0ms Total) (http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B%223d-cube%22:%5B32,30,31,31,34%5D,%223d-morph%22:%5B62,59,59,57,61%5D,%223d-raytrace%22:%5B42,43,43,43,43%5D,%22access-binary-trees%22:%5B7,7,7,5,8%5D,%22access-fannkuch%22:%5B38,37,37,37,37%5D,%22access-nbody%22:%5B31,33,34,33,32%5D,%22access-nsieve%22:%5B25,26,25,25,26%5D,%22bitops-3bit-bits-in-byte%22:%5B5,5,4,5,5%5D,%22bitops-bits-in-byte%22:%5B10,11,9,11,10%5D,%22bitops-bitwise-and%22:%5B25,27,29,30,27%5D,%22bitops-nsieve-bits%22:%5B32,32,33,32,31%5D,%22controlflow-recursive%22:%5B3,3,3,3,3%5D,%22crypto-aes%22:%5B26,25,24,24,26%5D,%22crypto-md5%22:%5B19,19,19,20,19%5D,%22crypto-sha1%22:%5B17,18,18,18,19%5D,%22date-format-tofte%22:%5B278,279,277,279,266%5D,%22date-format-xparb%22:%5B325,365,329,360,313%5D,%22math-cordic%22:%5B74,65,65,73,74%5D,%22math-partial-sums%22:%5B49,40,41,42,40%5D,%22math-spectral-norm%22:%5B18,16,18,17,17%5D,%22regexp-dna%22:%5B464,463,463,463,466%5D,%22string-base64%22:%5B73,72,73,77,75%5D,%22string-fasta%22:%5B67,69,68,63,61%5D,%22string-tagcloud%22:%5B165,174,163,175,162%5D,%22string-unpack-code%22:%5B215,213,217,218,222%5D,%22string-validate-input%22:%5B82,83,83,87,85%5D%7D)

Firefox JIT enabled (1247.80ms), Google Chrome (463.40ms) (http://dromaeo.com/?id=26298,26306)

-Chromium SVN should beat those scores

i have found some really obvious things borken, (try 32 bit png and set the CSS trasparency property to say 70%). Other than that png seems fine;
http://somestuff.org/png/png_test2.htm (my really old png test page)

http://somestuff.org/png/logo.png
(8bit rgba png - which is not something very usual)

This is a known bug, maybe you could help fix it?

[LoRd_MuldeR]

-You are probably running a 64bit os, there is a know bug about that.

Yes, WinXP x64. But x64 Windows is fully compatible to x86 Windows. 32-Bit versions Firefox, SeaMonkey, Opera and Safari have never complained ;)

-Some users are having performance problems, you should report that with as much extra information as you can.

How? It will crash every time when I try "Report bug or broken website" and I cannot find a similar link on their web-site... :D

-Chromium can be installed anywhere

How? Once you double-click the installer.exe, it will start to download/install. Never asks the user for anything, except for accepting the license... :rolleyes:

-Complain to the creator of adblock plus, Chrome(ium) supports plugins through the Gears interface

Well, we will see how good the "community support" for Chrome will be. At the moment Firefox/SeaMonkey has got the most active community...

[tetsuo55]

Its a bug that only occurs when the user has a 64bit os, they will fix it eventually.

-------

You can report bugs manually here:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/list

-------

You can download chromium as a zip file here:
http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-xp/

Unzip wherever you want

-------

Im guessing comunity support will eventually be huge:

-Gears plugins work on ALL browsers
-All the internet pioneers are working on Chrome(that includes the guys who made firefox)
-Chrome beats every other browser on the market even in its 0.2 beta state.

I personally don't care about ad's and i don't feel the browser is responsible for blocking them.

[CWR03]

One thing I noticed right away is that the mouse wheel scroll is inverted and ignored my "full page at a time" settings.

[Sharktooth]

latest chromium builds can be found here: http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-xp/
remember they're testing builds. remove google chrome before installing those ones.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

latest chromium builds can be found here: http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapshots/chromium-rel-xp/
remember they're testing builds. remove google chrome before installing those ones.

The latest Chromium build fixed the Options crash for me :)

[tetsuo55]

The latest Chromium build fixed the Options crash for me :)

Cool accidentally fixed :D

[Sharktooth]

firefox 3.1 alpha 2 is ready too.
windows (http://download.mozilla.org/?product=shiretoko-alpha2&os=win&lang=en-US), mac (http://download.mozilla.org/?product=shiretoko-alpha2&os=osx&lang=en-US) and linux (http://download.mozilla.org/?product=shiretoko-alpha2&os=linux&lang=en-US)

[smok3]

if it is a known bug, then what exactly should i do to get it fixed? (the png thingy i mean)

tnx for the chromium builds.

[Sharktooth]

wait for a fix or code it yourself possibly sending the patch to the chromium devs

[smok3]

and i'am a browser developer since when? :)

[Sharktooth]

you asked "what exactly should i do..." and i answered what you should do. maybe you missed the OR between "wait for a fix" and "code it yourself..."

[smok3]

yes, there is a difference between or and and, i'll wait, the bug was reported via the chrome.

[Astrophizz]

As for blocking ads in Chromium, this supposedly works: http://www.privoxy.org/

[buzzqw]

i prefer proxomitron , with sidki rules ( http://www.geocities.com/sidki3003/prox.html ), and it's working too with chrome

BHH

[Sharktooth]

in ver 2105 the png bug is still NOT fixed.
i guess this is a problem in webkit (can anyone with konqueror test it?) so the fix may require a while.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

This free tool is able to kill your personal Chrome ID and thus will prevent Chrome from sending user-specific info to Google servers:
http://www.almisoft.de/?cont=kchrome

[Sharktooth]

german...

[LoRd_MuldeR]

german...

Click the "Kill-ID" button on the left side and then "Alles deaktivieren" (disable everything) on the bottom and you are done :)

Things that will be disabled:
* Browser-ID
* send autocomplete suggestions to Google
* send none-existing (invalid) URL's to Google
* send user-statistics and crash logs to Google
* Google Updater

[smok3]

in ver 2105 the png bug is still NOT fixed.
i guess this is a problem in webkit (can anyone with konqueror test it?) so the fix may require a while.

there is no bug in safari.

[Sharktooth]

uhm... im downloading webkit

EDIT: ok, it's not a webkit issue

[tetsuo55]

Chrome uses a very old version of webkit (safari 3.0 ish)

There are a bunch of bugreports about the image problems. I saw one commit that fixes some of them. but obviously not the problem you are having.

They are trying to fix the bug and are going to upgrade webkit to TOT (which is even newer than the Safari 4 beta)

[Sharktooth]

build 2264. still the png problem, so obviously webkit was not updated...

[tetsuo55]

build 2264. still the png problem, so obviously webkit was not updated...

I guestimate the merge might take a lot of time.
They have reached a lot of milestones but they are not quite there yet (they changed to much to simply copy and paste over webkit)

[mr soft]

Just reading this, thought it was worth sharing .

Chrome is a security nightmare, indexes your bank accounts


http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/39176/108/

[tetsuo55]

That bug/feature has been fixed in chromium for some time now

[smok3]

arh well, just went to sp3 and it wont start anymore :/

[Sharktooth]

reinstall it... works here with SP3.

[Sharktooth]

that damn thing is getting faster and faster...
there's still the png problem but rev. 2584 is outperforming every other browser i tried.
anyone knows if there is a developers blog or journal?

[LoRd_MuldeR]

I noticed a rendering bug in Chrome, which might be related to the PNG bug:

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/601/chromebugpe4.th.png (http://img510.imageshack.us/my.php?image=chromebugpe4.png)http://img510.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

[Sharktooth]

definatly a rendering bug. the image didnt get resized before being displayed.
you can send bugreports at dirhael AT gmail DOT com.