Only 100 days out of the fold, and 15 versions later, in a post by Google Vice President Sundar Pichai the company officially removed the Beta label from its Google Chrome browser, claiming that the first gold version boasts more speed, better stability, better video playback, better bookmark management and better privacy controls. (The official release is a free download available here).

Google promises an extensions platform to come soon — the single most-desired feature in Google Chrome apart from official versions for Linux and the Mac. The company is also working on other features such as support for form autofill and RSS feeds.

Reactions to the announcement flooded in:

• PC Magazine found a “24 percent speed improvement, bringing this released browser to the same level of performance as Firefox’s second beta 3.1 version.” They note that Google Chrome consumes more memory than Internet Explorer or Firefox and is still unsupported by a number of sites. Opera still holds the lead in standards compliance, they note.
• Clint Boulton of Google Watch compiled a set of news reports, highlighting the fact that the End User License Agreement has changed (as reported by eWeek) and the fact that Google Chrome has supplanted Firefox in the Google Pack in a clear indication that Chrome sees itself as competing with more than just Internet explorer.
• Christian Zibreg of TG Daily has a definite opinion: Just because Google says Chrome now deserves the “1.0” label and is now final, does not mean that Chrome is final. In fact, we would hope that Google would update its browser right away again and put it “back” into 1.5 beta.
• Mark Long of Top Tech News reflects on the dilemma faced by Google Chrome developers who will see a conflict between the user demand for more features and extensions versus their declared intent to keep their borwser simple, lightweight, and fast.
• The Guardian observes that taking the browser so quickly out of beta could be part of a strategy where “Google is pushing for deals with computer manufacturers, who would need a full, official release of the browser before they would consider installing it as standard.”
• ZDNet observes the generally positive reviews that accompanied the move, the improvements in browser speed over the past 100 days and notes that “a nice bonus feature is one that bundles all of the options that might impact a user’s privacy in one common place.”
• InternetNews has an interesting footnote for Google Toolbar fans: “Chrome eventually will get features from the Google Toolbar that’s available for Internet Explorer and Firefox, the company said. But the effort won’t entail a direct port of the toolbar, which offers utilities like a pop-up blocker, translation and Web-based bookmarks — instead, Chrome will just incorporate some of its features.”
• Maureen O’Gara concedes that the browser may be fast but many still find it less than stable and she calls it feature-poor and reminds Google that users are clamouring for a Hotmail fix.
• GigaOm is grumpy about the low market penetration of Google Chrome at this stage: “As we have noted time and again, Chrome is of critical importance to Google, but at its current market share, with moribund growth, the search giant isn’t going to realize many of its grand dreams anytime soon.”
• Andy Ihnatko of the Chicago Sun-Times says “I smell a greasy, Googley rat.” He calls the browser “tarnished”. This suspicious attitude seems centred on the fact the Beta label was removed fast before features were added and before multiple versions were released. He concedes, though, that: “Five years ago, the Web stopped being about webpages and became a conduit to applications and services that project themselves through the browser. And Chrome is best suited to deal with that reality.”
• Serdar Yegulalp of InformationWeek emphasises that the Open Source strategy behind the Google Chrome browser will allow multiple versions in the future rather than one all-encompassing bloated browser.