I love it when people say things like this without providing specifics. Not sure what you guys are talking about. The UI is the same and it seems to work just as well or better for me.
It doesn't upset me when people notice a fact of reality, if it actually is the case. If Chrome was slow, it would be slow and a valid thing to point out, and we could discuss it.
But when someone makes a claim without giving any examples at all, that's kind of annoying. That's what leads to popular conceptions based only on accusation and rumors. But A+ for passive aggression.
Flash and sync are features that have been in Chrome for a really long time. So they're not an example of Chrome "getting bloated." If Chrome is slower now than it was in the past, it isn't because of these, since previous versions of Chrome that you'd be using for the comparison also had these features.
You might just want to check your system for laggy spyware. It's always possible that Chrome could get worse over time and slower than before, but it's not something that's showing up in CPU or memory usage like it clearly was for Firefox when it started to get worse.
So I believe it might be slower for you, but if it is, it's probably not because of feature creep or "bloating." An anecdote isn't a trend.
