Anyone else testing their pages on chrome yet?

Though it only very recently released; chrome's user base is growing relatively rapidly. Since it released late fall of last year, almost 5% of users who visit w3c schools are using chrome to get there.
W3C browser stats

And just recently I saw a commercial for it on the telly, which I would assume is going to help it's popularity grow quite rapidly.

It does have quite a few rendering differences than IE or firefox. alot having to do with border/padding/margin declarations in css.

An annoyance I've found is that while testing a page it will cache the current look, so if you update the code too frequently the site won't update in the browser. Personally I like to switch back and forth a lot while adjusting my css. But alas, once it's cached it won't display the changes (even after clearing the browser history, cookies, and cache).

Anyway, what do you guys think of the browser? Worth taking the time to add it to the list of browsers you want consistency in? Currentlt my list includes (as I'm sure it's not too dissimilar to most )

IE6
IE7
IE8
Firefox
Safari

and as of 2 months ago I added chrome to the list as well.

Have you guys done the same?

Umm... Should I? I don't have it installed on my computer and I'm really tired of keeping my site compatible with 4 different browsers (IE6, IE7, IE8, and Firefox).

As am I. Honestly (though this could probably be a thread all it's own) I think the specifications for W3C standards should be more strict. Things like whether or not borders should be rendered outside the padding (inside the margin), inside the padding (before the margin), or split between the two; a standard on this would be absolutely life saving to designers. Or perhaps a standard on rendering of text elements (h1, h2, h3, h4, etc.) and the size/font/etc. of the text within these elements. Why in gods green earth do all browsers have to render differently? just set a standard and have all of them show the same bloody thing. Then instead of browsers competing over who's renders accurately, they could focus on who's renders the fastest (which would surely put IE in a pickle, now wouldn't it?)

I test my websites in IE7 (I have vista so I have problems testing IE6 as vista will not allow me to install both) Firefox,safari and opera as well as chrome.
One thing that bugs me about chrome is that is has this thing that will let you change the size of <textarea> tags which can mess up the site layout.

Also I have noticed that some google thins wont work in chrome! And I thought that was Microsoft's party trick

I wish that all browsers used the same rendering engine... better yet, remove all browsers and keep Firefox... seriously, how many browsers to people need to browse the web???

I actually don't test for IE6... IE6 is a horrible mess up.

I have the same list of tests, plus Chrome and Opera. I don't mind doing the testing. I don't think it's too much energy or time to hit Alt+Tab, CRTL+R several times. Plus, I've been doing it that way since IE 3 and Netscape 3.02 Gold were the standard browsers.

//If all browsers did everything identically, that would be one browser known by different names. Not much in the way of competition and innovation to be had there, IMO.

I test in IE7/8 and Firefox. The only thing I watch out for in IE6 is transparent PNGs. Safari is not too much to worry about, and Chrome... useful but at the same time useless. Just another browser with it's "revolutionary" multi-process generation for each tab.

Personally... just get Firefox. PLEASE WORLD, JUST GET FIREFOX!

http://spreadfirefox.com/

I did a little test a while back to see how different browsers rendered different code. I came back with the conclusion that the rendering engine that each browser uses had its own interpretation on what code was suppose to do, mainly in the padding/margin area. Should a margin be counted toward the height or should it be an extension? If you give something a defiant height, should adding a padding increase the overall height to keep the inside the default height or should it just constrict whats already there and reduce the the height.

I find that since Chrome uses the Webkit engine it's rendering is very similar (although not the exact same) as what Safari does. So its worth a quick look in Chrome but if you already test Safari as I do its probably not a huge difference.

I would of thorght that increasing the height to allow for the padding would be the best way afterall the word padding gives the impression some thing is been added...

@dM
If all browsers rendered the same look, the companies creating these browsers could focus more on the user expereince (a.k.a. speed). I love chrome for the fact that it renders websites incredibly, incredibly fast. Even when comparing to firefox it still wins in most cases. And the look is something to be excited about IMO. It's so clean and well organized.

I don't understand why browser have to identify themselves by how they render the exact same code different than any other browser; it just doesn't make sense.

HTML - programming language.
If html is a programming language then each tag, attribute, syntax should be written and rendered the same. Programming is a science, not an art. You can't get an Associates of Computer Art in Programming. No, you get an Associates of computer Science in Programming. If it's a science, than it's definitive. If it's definitive, than why is there so much disagreement on how the code should be interpreted by the browser?

The W3C spec doesn't specify exactly how a given element must be treated. For example the specification for border simply states that a color of a specific width and line style be applied to an element. It does not state if that border should added to the width of the element, subtracted from the width of the element, floated over the top of the element, etc. Its up to the browser maker to determine how it will render that content.

If your not happy with the lacking detail in the specification your not alone, but remember that the W3C is essentially design by committee so they can't just "make it one way".

HTML is not a programming language. There isn't logic involved.

Browsers don't make the internet faster. They may render elements faster (i.e. before the page is downloaded completely), but that doesn't make the internet faster. That would be the ISP.

A user experience is defined by the web developer, not the browser.

MSIE was the defacto standard before there was a dialog about "standards".

//btw: heavy handed standards ENFORCED on everyone are for communists.

take a look at the difference between chrome and IE. Obviously they can have elements render faster. Why not make that the competitive edge?

Well according to browsershots I'm going to be ok in Chrome. Just a couple of obscure Linux browsers I have to worry about.