Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chrome browser for businesses

enterprise.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 282 posts

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#101

Post by alkonaut »

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #88
alkonaut wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amusing how we see web apps as the solution to deployment woes. I miss proper custom desktop apps with horrible looking cluttered interfaces. Soo productive compared to any web based interface for almost all tasks.

>I miss proper custom desktop apps with horrible looking cluttered interfaces. Soo productive compared to any web based interface for almost all tasks. You mean where everything runs on the UI thread? Gotta pass on that. :)

Not necessarily - although that's usually fine. I prefer a non responsive UI when waiting for io/db, to a poorly implemented background execution where you aren't sure anything is actually happening.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#102

Post by kijin »

lee wrote: post #98

I don't see a Linux version on there. Does anyone know when/if Google will provide one?

They will, if and when there is demand for a Linux version of Enterprise Chrome from large Enterprises with deep enough pockets. Which might or might not ever happen.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#103

Post by alkonaut »

Pica_soO wrote: post #87
alkonaut wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amusing how we see web apps as the solution to deployment woes. I miss proper custom desktop apps with horrible looking cluttered interfaces. Soo productive compared to any web based interface for almost all tasks.

Eh, yes, and the yells of "Over budget, we can not afford new machines for the whole team, just because your app is not 386 backwards compatible." And the partial rollouts, with teams being split into and stuck- and demanding you hack together tooling on the fly to allow for work to continue anyway. And the horrible cross-application databases, which would went inconsistent if you didn't include basically a reduced d…

You wouldn't have to use antiquated tools and practices just to use desktop apps. I'm not arguing to use the old apps, I'm arguing that a lot of new development should be desktop when it's often made as web apps without thought.

We threw all the good stuff with desktop out at the same time as we moved to intranets. You can still have centralized deployment, thin clients etc, but have the niceties of proper native apps (good multi screen/multi window support, better, good support for complex interactions like shortcuts, ctrl-clicks etc).

Even on mobile where native has fewer benefits than on desktop we can't make web based apps that are better than native ones.

A clean understandable web UI is good for a seldom used app, but a lot of the intranet apps are "constant use" and were faster to use in their legacy dos implementation than the newer web version. Browser hell just makes the problem worse.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#104

Post by majewsky »

alkonaut wrote: post #85
roblev wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many organisations there is a real risk that a browser update will unexpectedly break a key internal application, which could have a catastrophic impact on operations. The vast majority of large companies will control and test key software updates, balancing the various risks (security patches, obsolescence, operational incidents..). Not allowing auto-updating to be controlled basically means that the software is…

Couldn't orgs just use multiple browsers to reduce risk? With some monitoring of which clients are used, one could remove e.g ie8 support once it's established that every internal product has been used long enough with ie10

This works reasonably well for applications that are used daily or weekly (deprecation notifications help). But then, after you phased out IE8 after months of no problems with IE10, during the holiday period the accountant tries to close the yearly accounts, finds that the form does not work with IE10, and hell breaks loose.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#105

Post by majewsky »

ZenoArrow wrote: post #53
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree. It's re-enforced with Chrome's supplied dev tools which are really, really nice (I always found them far better than Firefox's built-in or Firebug). It's going to be harder to unseat Chrome. IE 6 wasn't so difficult due to an increase in competition who offered features that IE wasn't even working on (standards, tabs, etc). How would you even unseat Chrome?

>"How would you even unseat Chrome?" I won't directly mention the project that's best placed to do that, as it's not yet ready for primetime, but let's just say Chrome may not have the performance crown in the next 5 years. Also, aside from on the Mac, what's holding back Firefox? I accept that the Mac version seems to have more problems than the Windows or Linux versions (I have no technical explanation for this, it…

> let's just say Chrome may not have the performance crown in the next 5 years.

Servo?

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#106

Post by Nexxxeh »

TwoBit wrote: post #45
notgood wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, no; most times when you test in Firefox it works just fine with no changes; specially when you already tried on mobile, because if it works in mobile it works on desktop Firefox. The other thing is that major libraries (CSS, JS: jQuery, bootstrap, React) make sure they work on all browsers so you don't have to worry about that part. The winXP-IE6 was hell because that never happened, you always had to changes t…

I use Firefox on Android and often run into web sites that don't work right because they are dependent on some Chrome or Webkit behaviour, and I need to switch the browser to desktop mode to resolve the problem.

It's rare for me to find one, although the highest profile annoyance for me is textboxes break on m.facebook.com. The caret refuses to move from the current line without deleting or adding a character.

Known issue and I'm yet to see a fix (other than "mbasic" which you have to use for messenger anyway).

Almost everything else seems to be fixed with uBlock Origin and/or Reading Mode.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#107

Post by donatj »

alkonaut wrote: post #103
Pica_soO wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, yes, and the yells of "Over budget, we can not afford new machines for the whole team, just because your app is not 386 backwards compatible." And the partial rollouts, with teams being split into and stuck- and demanding you hack together tooling on the fly to allow for work to continue anyway. And the horrible cross-application databases, which would went inconsistent if you didn't include basically a reduced d…

You wouldn't have to use antiquated tools and practices just to use desktop apps. I'm not arguing to use the old apps, I'm arguing that a lot of new development should be desktop when it's often made as web apps without thought. We threw all the good stuff with desktop out at the same time as we moved to intranets. You can still have centralized deployment, thin clients etc, but have the niceties of proper native app…

> A clean understandable web UI is good for a seldom used app, but a lot of the intranet apps are "constant use" and were faster to use in their legacy dos implementation than the newer web version. Browser hell just makes the problem worse.

This. Click, wait, click, wait, click, wait is in no way better than how quickly you can fly with a well memorized set of keyboard shortcuts in a native app.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#108

Post by brongondwana »

Quenz wrote: post #90
technion wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got a medical application that only works in Firefox running IETab. Interestingly, it doesn't work in any version of IE. It's an odd product.

How the hell did this app manage to get developed?

By somebody running IETab, duh

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#109

Post by Nexxxeh »

satysin wrote: post #51
krzyk wrote: post #18

Is this about replacing one monopoly with another? It is slowly starting too look like in the early 00's, most developers are starting to support only chrome, with no testing in Firefox or latest IE. On Android it is even worse, no one is testing with Firefox Mobile (Fennec) - this is WinXP-IE6 all over again.

I was a long time Firefox user until the start of this year. I think I started using Pheonix as my main browser around 0.5 or 0.6. However over the years Firefox has got heavier and slower and taken way too long to evolve. It sucked when I realised I hadn't opened Firefox for a whole month. Now I just stay in Chrome as it is, for me, the best browsing experience. It is fast and looks good. It might be a large program…

Assuming we're talking on the desktop, have you tried Firefox multithreaded? It's a relatively new change.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#110

Post by PakG1 »

ENGNR wrote: post #31
krzyk wrote: post #18

Is this about replacing one monopoly with another? It is slowly starting too look like in the early 00's, most developers are starting to support only chrome, with no testing in Firefox or latest IE. On Android it is even worse, no one is testing with Firefox Mobile (Fennec) - this is WinXP-IE6 all over again.

They seem pretty good about using the open specification. Also they're starting to phase out -webkit tags for experimental chrome only features. They're hidden behind flags so you basically can't use them in production unless it's endorsed as part of the spec. Not to derail but safari mobile is the real IE6, plus lock in so users can't even get away from it.

From a vendor strategy perspective, that's true. From a web browser market share perspective, that's not true at all.
Post reply on HN