29 replies to this topic

[Paul Ferson]

MrGaius, on 19 June 2011 - 13:03, said:

Comodo Dragon has no source code available, has an ugly theme that can't be changed, and has a built-in updater I don't trust.

ChromePlus? It might be the only fork I can think of at this point apart from RockMelt, which I can already tell you're not big into, due to the process it needs for updating.

[MrGaius]

Ferson, on 19 June 2011 - 13:11, said:

ChromePlus? It might be the only fork I can think of at this point apart from RockMelt, which I can already tell you're not big into, due to the process it needs for updating.

Again, neither of these have published their source code, which makes them just as likely as Google to be nefarious.

Funny how all of these companies use something open source and then make them closed source isn't it?

[Paul Ferson]

MrGaius, on 19 June 2011 - 13:18, said:

Again, neither of these have published their source code, which makes them just as likely as Google to be nefarious.
Funny how all of these companies use something open source and then make them closed source isn't it?

Haha, you have a point there! Unfortunately, that's my knowledge of Chromium development forks completely used so I have no idea what else to recommend except for Mozilla Firefox, or perhaps the Windows optimized derivative of it known as Pale Moon.

[Deo Domuique]

The guy is asking a simple thing, and some of you suggesting whatever... Why not Chrome, Why not Iron, Why not Comodo... Why not disable this, that... You've certainly to be kidding him.

By the way, nice and interesting question.

Try to follow up on the "Chrome Releases Blog" the version numbers. When they release a build in beta/dev/stable channel, usually on "Chromium Trunk Tree" they update the version number too, the same or next day.

There is an entire build just with updated number version, for example from 794 to 795, like this

http://build.chromiu...hots/Win/89588/

It's not so easy process to follow up. But at least you get the point.

The latest numbers right now for example are:

Stable 742.x

Beta 782.x

Dev 792.x

The easiest is to get the latest beta build which probably will be fairly stable and that's because in Chromium's trunk tree you don't see low numbers such as "742". In Chromium tree all versions treated like dev versions.

My main browser is Fx Nightly but also use IE9 and only Chromium. From all Chromium-like browsers, Chromium is undoubtedly the best, no matter what they say. Also the lighter and cleaner. The point is what you're asking... To find a good stable one and stay with. Personally I don't mind to blindy update 2-3 times a week. If I face a serious problem, I wait some time till I get new, with the specific problem fixed.

It's easier than you might think while seeing what complicated message I wrote above.

[MrGaius]

Thanks but there doesn't seem to be a way to match the build numbers with the stable releases?

[Dashel]

I just pull the ones from the Chromium Authors off Softpedia.

[monkeylove]

I went to Softpedia, searched for "Chrome," and looked at the version number of the latest Win stable build.

Then, I went to

http://omahaproxy.appspot.com/revision

and entered the version number. After it returned the revision number, I went to

http://build.chromiu.../snapshots/Win/

and looked for the revision number closest to the one I got.

[chrisdoland]

http://chromiumupdater.pcriot.com/

This site has the latest continuous build & snapshot build available in both .exe & .zip for Windows. For noobs: Continuous build is like a "beta" & is stable. Snapshots builds are released almost hourly & are not to be considered stable.

[Pierre771]

Hello
your topic is not recent but it was a very good question

the answer is :

It does not exist !

Why ?

Because Google (which directs the Chromium project) does not want to do it !

Thye want people to use Google Chrome, not Chromium !

Sincerely

[bypasser]

It does not exist => probably true.

But it is not because of what Google wants. It is because nobody did it yet, while the source code is freely available.

[z0phi3l]

bypasser, on 10 December 2011 - 17:38, said:

It does not exist => probably true.

But it is not because of what Google wants. It is because nobody did it yet, while the source code is freely available.

It hasn't been done because the type of paranoia the OP shows is very rare, so no one feels the need to cater to an unnecessary segment

I swear all these people supposedly so scared of companies and auto updaters, yet I bet they post every little bit of their lives on FB and Twitter.

To the OP that I'm sure is not reading this anymore, get over it, use Chrome and let it update, there's nothing you do that Google will want to steal that you haven't already given them

[Pierre771]

z0phi3l, on 11 December 2011 - 15:17, said:

It hasn't been done because the type of paranoia the OP shows is very rare, so no one feels the need to cater to an unnecessary segment

I swear all these people supposedly so scared of companies and auto updaters, yet I bet they post every little bit of their lives on FB and Twitter.

To the OP that I'm sure is not reading this anymore, get over it, use Chrome and let it update, there's nothing you do that Google will want to steal that you haven't already given them

It is no use to be so agressive. Some people are looking a Windows Chromium stable version, the same they have in Linux, it's their right.
I answered them is didn't exist apart from some forks.

That's right Chrome exists but it's not exactly what they are looking for.

[sngx1275]

I know this is old. But like a couple others (out of the 27 posts before me) have pointed out, very few addressed the real question. If you google for chromium stable, you will find downloads for Linux and OS X. You do not find them for Windows. (You can bing them too if you like, same result).

I too would like to run the latest stable version of Chromium, but for Windows, everything pushes you towards Chrome. Now maybe the majority is right in this thread, and the only difference is that Chromium doesn't have google's auto updater. But maybe, in the real Chrome google adds a bit more tracking - I think its foolish to think otherwise. Sure, most people are already putting out all kinds of identifiable information when they do other things online, but that isn't the point. The point is the OP was asking if anyone knew a source for stable versions of Chromium, not Chrome.

Softpedia does come up for a Chromium dl, but as of this posting its version 20.x, latest stable as of now is 18.x.

[Singh400]

2 seconds to Google this, came up with four links for you guys:-

• https://commondatast....html?path=Win/ (give it a second to load, TONS of directories - snapshots)
  
• https://commondatast....html?path=Win/ (give it a second to load, TONS of directories- continuous)
  
• http://www.getchromium.org/
  
• https://download-chromium.appspot.com/

[sngx1275]

First link is snapshots, I don't think those would be the stable builds.
Second link might have stable builds, but I tried matching any portion of the stable build number found here with that list and was unable to find it. So not sure if they have stable builds there or not.
Third and fourth links are for the latest canary, which is not what I want. I don't want the developer build, I don't want a canary build, I just want a stable build.

So it isn't quite as simple as it seems.