Back to Google Chrome page
Google Chrome free download for Mac

Google Chrome Reviews

77.0.3865.120
12 October 2019

Modern and fast Web browser.

Chas-m
05 May 2010

Most helpful

This product continues to: 1. Report every URL you input into it back to Google for correlation with the browser's unique ID that can easily be identified with you. 2. Runs a background daemon that constantly talks to Google about what you are running and what you are doing 3. Redirects erroneous pages back to Google, earning them money 4. Does not allow built-in blocking of Google ads. Bottom line: this browser is more invasive than any other browser out there, and acts (as someone else on this forum said) more like a data-mining app disguised as a browser. If your privacy is important to you, don't use Chrome.
Like (28)
Version 5.0.375.29

Read 722 Google Chrome User Reviews

Rate this app:

Derekcurrie
26 September 2019
• First, there was the emergency call to update Chrome to v77.0.3865.90 due to 1 critical and 3 high-risk security vulnerabilities in the previous version. • Then it turns out the buggy installer for v77.0.3865.90 did THIS to many Macs: *Buggy Google Chrome Update Behind Recent Unbootable Macs* https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/buggy-google-chrome-update-behind-recent-unbootable-macs/ - - We await the repaired installer. (0_o)
Like
Version 77.0.3865.90
zlazkow
28 August 2019
...btw, the new forum format is terrible. Hard to concentrate, not as compact and pleasant for viewing as the old one. I see it as the current trend, which is too bombastic, too wide, too large, to spread out. Etsy for example did the same thing with their forums too. Most users there don't like it and stopped using the forum all together. Me as well. I suggest to MU, beware. Macupade, YOU don't have to follow the trend necessarily. It is not good for everybody. Not all MU users like this for sure. And you'll experience drastic decrease in visits.
Like (4)
Version 76.0.3809.132
2 answer(s)
Macinman
Macinman
12 September 2019
I agree the former version of the comments, and reviews section was much easier to follow. Plus, with this new format, it seems like there are only review options and not simply leaving comments.
Like (2)
Version 77.0.3865.75
Derekcurrie
Derekcurrie
26 September 2019
I've aske MU to fix the stripped out formatting for comments and the cruddy little strip provided for Replies. So far, no response. But they have requested patience as they work out the bugs. - - I sincerely hope they get their web coding act together as this is a DEGRADATION from the previous interface. Quite a shame.
Like
Version 77.0.3865.90
zlazkow
28 August 2019
I'm distancing myself from everything related to G. G. only goal is money. Everything G creates is for gaining more and more money. Their advertising like Adwords and etc. are all for money. G. tracking people is for money, because G uses this information for profit. All G projects are evil in nature. No G for and no gmail for me and for millions of users who cut all their ties with G.
Like (1)
Version 76.0.3809.132
Macfool
20 June 2019
With Chrome the user is the product.
Like (4)
Version 75.0.3770.100
Demolition
18 June 2019
Chrome 75.0.3770.100 was released today: <https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2019/06/stable-channel-update-for-desktop_18.html> Available at: <https://www.google.com/chrome/>
Like
Version 75.0.3770.90
tayabshabaz
10 June 2019
Great.
Like
Version 75.0.3770.80
George6
17 May 2019
Chrome first wants access to my Keychain, then it connects to google without even having any browser window open. No other browser acts like that, constantly trying to snoop and crawl and connect to services which you never wanted or used, trying to find and report anything that can be sold on the market for ads. For me anything google or chrome is just unacceptable. This is only on my harddisk for testing browser compatibility in webdevelopment.
Like
Version 74.0.3729.157
dmu
06 April 2019
When I open a browser... I want to BROWSE. And usually, I have a destination in mind and want to get there ASAP. Every single time I open Chrome, it wants me to log in so it can track everything and sync my info. It was annoying, and I turned it off. But it doesn't really turn off. And the "remember this device thing doesn't work, so I have to do it every time. But I dealt with it. Then, they forced 2-step authentication on me. Now, I open the browser, it opens a new tab. Demands I log in. I do, but then I have to authenticate it on my phone, and check the box to "Remember this device" 60 seconds later I can finally navigate where I wanted to go. So I turned it all off. No more synching. no more 2-step authentication, no more prompting for log in. But guess what? Doesn't matter that I have them turned off. It still wants me to log in. It still needs 2-step authentication. And it still doesn't remember my device despite the hundreds of times I've done it. Now I just avoid it. Garbage software. I still need to open it for certain sites that won't work on Safari, but that's the only time I bother.
Like (1)
Version 73.0.3683.103
1 answer(s)
carb
carb
01 May 2019
Did you try Firefox?
Like
iHAMIDREZA
13 March 2019
It's the BEST browser...!!!
Like
Version 73.0.3683.75
Scott-Salbo
13 March 2019
Well, it's fast. But it's Google, which also means that they are mining everything you do and everywhere you go and selling that info to everyone who wants it. Google used to be the "don't be evil" company. Now it's the "Fuck user privacy" company. Go with Firefox or stick with Safari.
Like (1)
Version 73.0.3683.75
arimatheia-otto
07 February 2019
Very slow and completely incompatible with the visual pattern of the operating system.
Like (2)
Version 72.0.3626.96
1 answer(s)
Scion777
Scion777
22 February 2019
LOL - your Mac OS installation is damaged in some way
Like
mmburke33
06 February 2019
worked fine for years then suddenly stated reffreshing itself without stop twice a second
Like (1)
Version 72.0.3626.81
TVieceli
04 December 2018
Easy and a little safer than Safari.
Like
Version 70.0.3538.110
1 answer(s)
rzoy
rzoy
05 December 2018
Easy? And how is it safer than Safari? Can you share some details? From what I know it's not Open Source and comes from Google, which is known to have aggregating user data as their main business model.
Like (7)
tomtomklub
29 September 2018
This browser is so ugly and users are forbidden from customizing away its ugliness. Important privacy-related settings are hidden deep. All the cruft it installs across the user's home directory makes it incredibly annoying to uninstall and get rid of. Auto-update? No thanks. Uggghhh.
Like (1)
Version 69.0.3497.100
rcqy
25 September 2018
Every person with Chrome installed should read this blog article: https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2018/09/23/why-im-leaving-chrome/
Like (9)
Version 69.0.3497.100
1 answer(s)
ylluminate
ylluminate
14 February 2019
One comment was especially interesting:
Why not stop using Google altogether instead? It’s not just Chrome, it’s all of this Google spying. It was a lot of work, tbh, but I’ve left Google completely:
• Google Search -> Duckduckgo, Startpage, Searx
• Gmail ->Tutanota
• Google Maps → Openstreetmap
• Youtube -> Bitchute, peerTube, LBRY, Newpipe(android)
• Google Calendar -> Lightning Calendar, Nextcloud
• Google+/Facebook → Minds, Diaspora, Mastodon
• Google Photos -> Cryptee
• Chrome → Brave, Tor, Firefox
• Play Store → F-Droid, Aurora
• Google Drive → Nextcloud, Syncthing
• Android OS/ iOS → LineageOS, PureOS (soon)
Like (1)
kolkataroy
22 September 2018
excelent
Like
Version 67.0.3396.87
Pdandyk
15 September 2018
Tired of being tracked & harassed!
Like (3)
Version 69.0.3497.92
evert-2
04 September 2018
Get all kind of dirty commercials not safe and not able to manage it
Like (1)
Version 68.0.3440.106
Derekcurrie
16 August 2018
v68.0.3440.106 is the current version. It is a CRITICAL update as it repairs CVE-2018-6177: Chrome Bug Allowed Hackers to Find Out Everything Facebook Knows About You https://thehackernews.com/2018/08/google-chrome-vulnerability.html
Like (2)
Version 68.0.3440.84
guoqingzhen
13 August 2018
fatasitk
Like
Version 68.0.3440.106
ashishcompuiting
20 July 2018
Chrome is best
Like
Version 67.0.3396.99
1 answer(s)
elinarobin982
elinarobin982
02 August 2018
I also thoroughly agree with this statement that Google chrome is the best browsing website which is able to provide all the necessary features for the users. You may any other information from <a href=" https://printerssupport.org/dell-printer-support/"> Dell support number </a> that helps you to get more details.
Like
MHerndz
23 June 2018
Chrome is a beautiful browser - fast (really fast), clean, secure, organized and lots of options. BUT, it is such a memory/CPU hog that on every Mac I've ever used it on (home & work, 6 altogether), ever since version 1. This week was no exception. Redownloaded/reinstalled after a long hiatus from use. My Mac came to a C R A W L. It was really bad. So it seems I'll never get to use it again. Google doesn't seem to address this issue.
Like (2)
Version 67.0.3396.87
3 answer(s)
Andy-Hewitt
Andy-Hewitt
28 June 2018
Yes, I agree, I did some testing recently, running the three big browsers on the same website (MacUpdate as it happens) with no extensions. Chrome was the worst, using 1.2GB of memory immediately, but Firefox isn't so far behind, getting to just over the 1GB. Safari was best at 600MB.

Bit of a shame really, as overall it's not actually a bad browser.
Like
Mcr
Mcr
26 July 2018
Some comments, none of which is meant as a vote for or against any of browser, but how one goes about evaluating.

1) CPU usage and memory usage or two distinct metrics, but often lumped together. An app can have low CPU usage and high memory, or visa versa, or both high, or both low. Depends on CONTEXT (doesn't everything?)
2) People often misinterpret higher memory usage as a negative sign or performance detriment; again it's about context. There is a saying, and it's true for the most part "Unused memory is WASTED memory". If one has 16GB of system memory and only running one app, if a browser uses 1.2GB of memory, that isn't necessarily bad (provided it's not due to a leak or poor programming); but if it's memory used for caching data or pages, that's okay. Remember, unused memory is not being utilized.

The PURPOSE of using memory is to store data and code that is or will be accessed frequently. You COULD write a browser that never caches any info in memory, only on disk drive or has to reload from the internet constantly. A performance test would should very small memory footprint and if one only looked at that, might conclude the browser is exceptional, but the performance impact would be large, having to constantly reload from disk, or worse, the web. So if you just look at memory usage, one could be mislead and say that is a better browser. Again, context.

Some say doesn't matter if data is reloaded from disk because these days with SSD drives, caching to disk is no big deal; not so, although SSD are much faster than trad. hard drives, system memory is still much FASTER than any disk storage at least for now. Maybe in a few years when storage memory and active memory are essentially identical access times on the bus it won't matter, but for most of us still system memory is still a better option for caching info than disk drive, and definitely better than having to reload a page from web server.

So hypothetically (not talking specifically) Chrome using 1.2GB of memory versus FF using 1.0 has to be taken in context. If the extra 0.2 GB is memory that is caching info the user is just about or most likely to access in the near future (e.g. the entirety of a very LONG web page versus just the portion being viewed), then the 0.2 memory usage improves performance at the price of a small amount of memory (and AGAIN if you have 16GB RAM and only running a browser, and you already have 10 GB FREE, an extra 0.2 is NO big deal.). User does a page down to read next chunk of the web page and Chrome grabs it straight from memory, while FF has to contact the web server because maybe that data is in the extra 0.2 that FF decided NOT to cache in memory (for whatever reason). This is just an example of HOW you can view these results; all depends on the programming and the caching algorithms.

3) So it's not so much about how much memory an app uses by itself, it's what happens when the user launches more apps and other apps request system memory and existing memory needs to be FREED up. This is where operating system memory management comes into play, and ALL modern operating systems (Win, Mac, Linux, Unix) have come along way and use sophisticated algorithms, fine tuned over DECADES of observation, testing and tweaking, to free up memory, for it to be reallocated. In general, memory gets tagged and the OS keeps track of what is/has been accessed most frequently and less. If more memory is needed elsewhere, the OS will free up or request an app to free up memory, and typically it will be the oldest data or data that hasn't been accessed in the longest amount of time, hence most likely not needed anymore.

4) This is where many lay people actually get way too concerned about 'freeing' up memory and actually work against themselves, when these guys run these Memory 'cleaner' apps. It defeats the purpose if the system and apps have to simply turn right around and RELOAD the same data that was already cached, that the user just freakin' cleared out of memory from overly aggressive memory 'cleaning'. User "thinks" he is improving system performance by keeping memory usage low, but actually causing more net traffic, extra CPU cycles, reloading of data that was already there to begin with.

5) Let the OS do its job, it can manage memory better than you. Now, there ARE some apps that are true hogs and won't release memory even when requested because they only care about making their app look good and hell with anything else running on the system. These apps will grab whatever they can and hold on to it with a death grip; in my experience, modern day browsers do NOT fall in this category; partly by design, and partly because the data that browsers deal with has HIGH turn over; that's why it's called 'surfing' the Internet, users jump around from site to site and within a site. Data gets turned over frequently. Conversely Adobe Photoshop might deal with same photo file for the entire computing session, or Word will be editing the SAME document for hours at a time.

6) I've got some older Minis from 2009, 2011, with only 8GB system RAM, even with multiple browsers open, running VMWare Windows virtual image, MS Word, Excel, simultaneously, I rarely exceed 6GB total RAM use, so you know what? Whether one browser uses 0.2 or 0.6 more ram than another, I don't loose sleep over, if the system never falls below 2GB available anyways, then whatever. New mac models all come with at least 16GB, so unless you are a pro or pro-sumer user running heavy apps like Adobe apps or like Final Cut pro., spreadsheets with thousands of rows, memory usage is not something I think most people need to worry about. When memory is needed, macOS will do its thing, let it do its job.

Lastly, the observation that Safari used the least amount of memory in the example sited, MAY be misleading. Safari is tightly integrated with macOS, it utilizes components and system services that lowers its own memory footprint and the cost of maybe slightly increasing system footprint, which most users would not notice at all. There are a lot of 'trick's programmers can use to 'hide' usage in the system metrics. Same thing with Windows and Internet Explorer/Edge; they take advantage of integrating with Windows and so sometimes their memory usage metrics can be deceiving.

Anyways, YOUR MILEAGE MAY VARY, so take my comments as they are comments. I personally use Chrome/Chromium, FF Quantum AND Safari, often times simultaneously, with Quantum being the main one. All have strengths and weaknesses.

I use Chrome because it can still utilize the pepper flash plugin for those rare times I still need Flash and I don't have to load the system wide Flash plugin. I use Quantum because i find it has best balance of speed AND availability of useful plug ins that help my work flow, and ability to configure the UI, but Quantum sucks when it comes to printing, often what you see on screen is not what comes out on paper.

When I really need to print something that looks as close as possible to what's on the screen, Safari often is the best, most likely because as mentioned before, its tight integration with macOS. Safari in terms of useful extensions, is the worst.

Peace.
Like
Andy-Hewitt
Andy-Hewitt
26 July 2018
Understand what you're saying Mcr, and agree with it a lot (and wow, what a reply). However, we have to start somewhere to judge the software we choose to use.
Like
kend-1
14 June 2018
Installation of this release completed with no errors, but the application crashed on attempted execution, after considerable navel contemplation. Trying installation direct from Mozilla...
Like
Version 67.0.3396.87
andystenn212
06 June 2018
good
Like (1)
Version 67.0.3396.62
1 answer(s)
czgv
czgv
07 June 2018
How so?
Like (1)
Marlo-R
22 May 2018
I've seen "One Tab" mentioned as an extension that can help keep track of tabs instead of keeping them all open and using so much memory. I've used it and enjoyed it. Does anybody have any other suggestions for the most useful extensions available for the Chrome browser?
Like
Version 66.0.3359.181
4 answer(s)
Lvdoc
Lvdoc
30 May 2018
I use one called "The Great Suspender." I don't know the technicalities of how it works. Basically, if you don't visit a tab for awhile, it treats the tab as if you had closed it. When you go back to the tab, you'll see a message saying "click," and it opens the page back up. (And pretty quickly. Also, you can click anywhere on that page; you don't have to navigate to some button.)

This has significantly reduced memory use for me while leaving the browser very functional.
Like (1)
Marlo-R
Marlo-R
31 May 2018
I've installed that extension. It seems like extensions add to the memory used by each tab. I'm hoping that if this one more extension can even stop just one of my tabs from running when I'm not using it then this may be worth it. Thanks!
Like
Marlo-R
Marlo-R
01 June 2018
I just went to install "The Great Suspender" on my work browser and I saw the permissions asked to be allowed to "Read and change all your data on the websites you visit" and "Read and change your browsing history". Should I be wary of this tool?
Like
Lvdoc
Lvdoc
01 June 2018
I hadn't actually read the fine print on that, so now I'm wary as well. I actually decided to go back to Safari. They have an extension like Great Suspender, but you have to manually opt to suspend a page; it won't happen after a time of inactivity. I'm assuming (always a bad idea, I suppose) that if it's a Safari extension, Apple's okay with it. I think Google will allow just about anything.
Like (1)
wlad-2
17 May 2018
Though Firefox is more handy, especially if proper plugins are attached, Chrome remains the quickest one on Mac. Rare freezes should not distract common user from working with these browser.
Like (4)
Version 66.0.3359.139
nickysanmartin97
13 April 2018
muy bueno
Like
Version 65.0.3325.181
flavien
11 April 2018
good
Like
Version 65.0.3325.181
prestonlittle
19 February 2018
Perfect browser, better than the rest on market.
Like
Version 64.0.3282.167
3 answer(s)
Scion777
Scion777
15 March 2018
oh, that's utter rubbish!
Firefox is far, far more adaptable and renders pages more accurately.
Like (5)
Michael-Vilain
Michael-Vilain
21 March 2018
Chrome is a memory pig. Tabs grow to as much as 1 GB/ea. At least FF limits the amount of memory en-toto.
Like
JamesHarrisPhoto
JamesHarrisPhoto
20 April 2018
Chrome is terrible. Period.
Like (1)
yungparkloo88
12 February 2018
Great
Like
Version 64.0.3282.140
1 answer(s)
JonThaler
JonThaler
26 July 2018
Is someone being paid to submit all these one-word "reviews"?
Like
dirdesmett
13 January 2018
Think I'm going to stop using this browser. Used to be fast and stable, but nowadays it really doesn't work well with text expansion software. Keeps hanging, garbling stuff and screwing up formatting. I still download and try each update in case they've improved it, but am constantly disappointed. Maybe it performs better on Windows / Google platforms?
Like (2)
Version 63.0.3239.132
1 answer(s)
LeroyMorrison
LeroyMorrison
30 April 2018
What text expansion software are you using? I am using Typinator and it has been working great for me!
Like
jostaMalcolm
13 October 2017
Installed Chrome on my Mac and I think that it's the best browser ever. It's user-friendly and simple, that's why I like it. I can't say the same about Safari, unfortunately.
Like (2)
Version 61.0.3163.100
1 answer(s)
Scion777
Scion777
15 November 2017
what differences are you experiencing with Safari? very strange . . .
Like (2)
cig0
25 September 2017
There's little to no doubt that Chrome is Google's specialized bot net as Windows is the same for Microsoft -- both applications sports all sorts of nasty invasive telemetry impossible to disable without losing usability or downright break them.

As some other users tell here the GoogleSoftwareUpdate daemon is also totally disgusting stuff.
F*ck you Google, I'm moving away from your sticky tentacles!!!

Safari + DuckDuckGo <3 way to go!
Like (8)
Version 61.0.3163.100
4 answer(s)
Dana-Sutton
Dana-Sutton
13 November 2017
Replying to both you and Josta above, I share your doubts about Chrome. But there are a several things about Safari I can't stand. One is the general dearth of extensions, and the lack of an equivalent of Speed Dial in particular. Another is the fact that you are locked into Apple's paternalistic one-size-fits all philosophy so you get the interface look that Jony Ives wants you to have rather than the one of your own choice. The third is that after all this time Safari still can't render CSS style sheets with complete accuracy. Add these things up together with a couple I could mention and i. m. h. o. Safari is a second-rate browser.
Like (3)
Aargl
Aargl
03 February 2018
It's the first time I come to this page and I'm surprised to find so many bad reviews here! :-o
I would advise everyone to try Chromium, if they're fed up with Chrome: it's Chrome without Google's stuff and telemetry, and now there's a version with all codecs following the same build numbers as Chrome.
Like (1)
fiery12
fiery12
10 March 2018
@Aargl
In my opinion Chromium has the same or more telemetry than Chrome, but on the bright side it lacks the forced software updates.
I can't find any info for added codecs in Chromium. This page lists what's supported only in Chrome:
https://www.chromium.org/audio-video
- MP4 (QuickTime/ MOV / MPEG4) [Google Chrome only]
- MP3 [Google Chrome only]
- AAC [Main, LC, HE profiles only] [Google Chrome only]
- H.264 [Google Chrome only]
Like
Aargl
Aargl
10 March 2018
@fiery12
You can find various builds of Chromium there: https://chromium.woolyss.com/#mac-64-bit
and read their privacy policy.
About telemetry: https://chromium.woolyss.com/#features
If you want codecs, use the "Marmaduke" builds (the stable one should be delivered pretty soon — usually they follow Chrome's build number).
There's also plenty to read in the comments of MU's Chromium page, so you can make up your mind. ;-)
I've been using Firefox for years and switched to Chromium for my main browsing since last summer with no issue. (I generally have 2 or 3 browsers running at the same time, depending on what I do).
Like
Prince-Isaac
16 August 2017
For all you Google / Chrome fans out there: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/bank-fraud-malware-not-detected-by-any-av-hosted-in-chrome-web-store-twice/
Like (5)
Version 60.0.3112.101
Wunderhorn
05 June 2017
1. User who use a lot of tabs will notice that the memory usage is just skyrocketing, the "Google Chrome Helper" processes are just piling up and never reduce their footprint even after closing lots of tabs and or windows. I call this a major memory leak.
2. The activity of the Google Software Update Daemon borders on malware characteristics. How many outgoing connections this things wants to establish is just beyond anything remotely reasonable. I wonder what this software is actually transmitting so feverishly.
3. When restarting Chrome it automatically loads all previously opened tabs instead of incrementally as you click on them as Firefox does - which is way smarter.
4. Power users will miss the convenient bookmark bar on the left. I find it cumbersome without.
That said, it works fast and stable - for a while - until it has to be restarted because of issue #1 (see above).
Like (4)
Version 58.0.3029.110
1 answer(s)
Bumbleb
Bumbleb
07 June 2017
Agreed, and why I haven't installed Chrome or any other Google products on my just freshly reinstalled macOS Sierra:)

Indeed, that Google Demon (sic) is ever-present, everywhere. What ARE they transferring, that IS the question.
Like (4)
Bob Jacobson
01 February 2017
Before I download the new Chrome, is it creating boxes around search findings? The reason I ask is that Google apparently was and still is testing, randomly among users, the "boxed" design. I finally got rid of it -- actually, someone else removed it for me (thanks, Google) -- and don't want to have to experience it again. Thanks for your tips.
Like
Version 56.0.2924.76
the hooks
30 January 2017
I've never seen a browser more comfortable than Chrome, I'm a big fan of it! There is nothing extra buttons users don't need. I think, the simplicity is the main feature the browser should have and Chrome has got it in the best way. That's why I appreciate this app and glad to have it installed on my mac.
Like (2)
Version 56.0.2924.76
carmenroberson28
24 January 2017
It's hard to distinguish one browser from the other for me but I've never had issues with Chrome
Like
Version 55.0.2883.95
pvdg75
03 November 2016
The best browser I've ever tried. It takes few minutes to get used to it. Chrome is very simple, quick and intuitive soft. Additionally, there are many nice themes so you can customize it to your personal needs.
Like
Version 54.0.2840.87
Prlab
15 October 2016
Yet again McUpdate links to its insidious installer. This is deceptive conduct and it pisses me off.
Like (4)
Version 54.0.2840.59
2 answer(s)
Graphic-Mac
Graphic-Mac
03 December 2016
Yet again someone tells you that you simply need to log-in to avoid getting the adware installer.

If you refuse to create a free account and log-in, then STFU about it or find somewhere else more convenient to get your software updates that's run by an independently wealthy person who doesn't need income.
Like (2)
Dana-Sutton
Dana-Sutton
03 December 2016
I agree about the questionable ethics of MU's upgrades. There's a simple workaround. Whenever I want to download something posted on the MU site I follow the link they provide to the developer's site and download directly from there.
Like (5)
NotUsed
19 September 2016
Can't they fix the issue that causes click events to stop working?? Seems to be a MAJOR issue with v53... all releases. So annoying. Nothing works... reload the page, everything suddenly works.
Like
Version 53.0.2785.116
1 answer(s)
rvbeauchamp
rvbeauchamp
24 October 2016
I am having the same problem. I have gone back to Safari to get around the problem.
Like
ottoarimatheia
18 September 2016
Slow. Ugly. Strange tabs style. Good for kids.
Like (2)
Version 53.0.2785.116
Sgginc
15 September 2016
Why can't Google SW engineers fix Error 12 when updating. I've tried everything.
Like
Version 53.0.2785.116
abababa320
15 September 2016
While searching for offline installer for google chrome I found this website very helpful and easiest: http://www.chromeofflineinstaller.com
Like
Version 53.0.2785.113
Lonewolf1
03 September 2016
Worst update ever... Hangs on startup almost everytime. Interrupt other applications network connection.... Back to Safari again. Can´t use this one...
Like
Version 53.0.2785.89
Bousozoku
02 September 2016
It works well enough as a secondary browser. Unfortunately, for me, it is lagging on Blogger and YouTube, in contrast to Firefox. Does that make sense that it works poorly on Google-owned sites? It doesn't. (It's really not bad on other platforms.) It seems, with all of its processes, to require more resources. Using it on a MacBook Pro 2.6 GHz i7 with 16 GB of RAM and SSD, I would think that it would perform extremely well. I use it for a few downloads where Firefox isn't happy, and places where Safari might be better than Firefox. (I don't use Safari.)
Like
Version 53.0.2785.89
Dm9999
02 September 2016
I can not use Chrome, because the colors are too saturated on a monitor with a large gamut. Chrome does not use the monitor profile for objects without ICC profile. Safari and iCab are the only browsers that I know, which displays colors corroct in sRGB on all monitors as far as possible. In Firefox you have to change preferences, or use the add-on Color Management..
Like (1)
Version 53.0.2785.89
Morgan-Freeman
13 August 2016
!! I cannot find any difference with safari. It did all that safari does.
Like
Version 52.0.2743.116
Scion777
12 August 2016
offline installer: https://dl.google.com/chrome/mac/stable/GGRO/googlechrome.dmg
Like
Version 52.0.2743.116
Jeff-Nailen
30 July 2016
Version 52.x is a great update, the best version yet. The smaller icons are great for optimizing screen space. Chrome keeps getting better!
Like
Version 52.0.2743.82