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

Chrome breaks the Web

tonsky.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 473 posts

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#291

Post by peterwwillis »

saas_co_de wrote: post #120
ksk wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all would like to see this "user data" and make up our own mind. Is the whole open source thing just a gimmick for Google? >Individual developers working for individual companies are rarely if ever thinking about the good of their users, except in a very narrow profit motivated sense, and never thinking about the good of the ecosystem as a whole. >Google is also "breaking the web" by not auto playing videos, not a…

> Its interesting that you're calling for a browser to not implement standards The "standards" are created by the browser makers. It is up to them to decide what the standards are by choosing what to implement. For instance, Apple can decide to not allow 3rd party cookies, which "breaks the web" and "doesn't follow standards" but it is also the right thing to do.

> The "standards" are created by the browser makers

You're half right: standards are created by W3C & IETF, which includes browser makers.

> It is up to them to decide what the standards are by choosing what to implement

Kind of like IE and ActiveX, right? Right?

............Right?

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#292

Post by dhimes »

emodendroket wrote: post #252
dhimes wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may have but I don't use it.

I use it and my passwords stick around, so perhaps enabling it would help?

Maybe that's the key, and why they don't care. I tend to stay away from that kind of service though.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#293

Post by hinkley »

pathseeker wrote: post #276
michaelmrose wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either googles solution is better or its not. If it is then google should make it the default even if it provides an option. Then even if they provide the option 99.999% will use the default rendering the option basically worthless. If its not they should probably just work how everyone else works.

>Either googles solution is better or its not. No, it's better for users who read the auto-filled boxes to make sure they are sane (which is what I do). It's not good for users that don't understand what auto-fill is (i.e. they think the website is suggesting it to them).

Or people staring at a form that is two screens long...

Easy to miss things.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#294

Post by eropple »

josteink wrote: post #246
staticassertion wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really comparable to IE. MS had a pretty explicit goal of destroying Netscape - to the extent that they were making deals with other companies to break compat with Netscape. Chrome is breaking 'autofill=false' on webforms because its really bad to have autofill=false most of the time . For example, this was breaking password managers, forcing users to have a worse experience around something as security crit…

> It's not really comparable to IE. MS had a pretty explicit goal of destroying Netscape While Chrome has the goal to destroy everything else. Example 1: Google Chrome spam on youtube, gmail, every website on the internet. I can't count the amount of times my parents called and asked why Google asked them to "upgrade their browser" (hint: It wasn't a new Firefox-build). Example 2: Sending email SPAM to all Google-use…

> Example 2: Sending email SPAM to all Google-users where they are advised to install Chrome if they ever sign in to their Google-account on a new machine using anything except Chrome.

Cite? I've never seen this, and I use Firefox regularly.

> Example 3: Installing Chrome unasked as drive-by installers when you install anything lots of freeware, because Google paid third-party developers to host Chrome as a spyware-like installation in their installer.

Again, cite? Because, again, I've never seen this.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#295

Post by builditand »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #230
kodablah wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So - what's ok to break, and what isn't? I'd say, for a start, achieving consensus before breaking is ideal. If the attempt to achieve consensus fails, at least I can see they tried (or I can disagree). Hopefully in the future users can use their leverage to make it not a judgement call on the browser developer, but a judgement call by the community of users. The myriad of features in browsers, however, makes it a…

They do have a consensus about these things among their users. Virtually no one wants their password manager to not work or for third-party marketers to be able to track them more easily. The people who disagree are third-parties who want to impose their own preferences on Chrome's users. Their opinions should not be taken into account because they are not Chrome's users.

I am a Chrome user, I totally agree that the browser should fill the password for me and not accept third party cookies. And yet I don't want the fields in my intranet app to be filled with garbage.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#296

Post by hinkley »

laumars wrote: post #244
FussyZeus wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not really comparable to IE. MS had a pretty explicit goal of destroying Netscape - to the extent that they were making deals with other companies to break compat with Netscape. Netscape is irrelevant. The fact is Chrome is using it's market dominance to affect the implementation of standards and in doing so, is breaking numerous websites. That IE is famous for but because Chrome is made by Google, it gets a p…

> Netscape is irrelevant. Netscape is entirely relevant. The question was raised about how different Google / Chrome are compared to Microsoft / IE and the answer is Netscape. Microsoft tried to tie the internet into their own platform, Windows + IE, due to them pushing non-standard rendering and ActiveX. Whatever your opinion of Chrome's break from standards might be, Google simply are not trying to lock people into…

If we don’t want to repeat the 90’s we have to complain a lot sooner.

If your litmus test is “as bad as Microsoft” then that’s exactly what we will get.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#297

Post by _9hey »

This sort of thinking is not "moving the web forward." It's the same thinking that created the IE6 problem — favoring browser-specific features over web standards.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#298

Post by josteink »

eropple wrote: post #294
josteink wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not really comparable to IE. MS had a pretty explicit goal of destroying Netscape While Chrome has the goal to destroy everything else. Example 1: Google Chrome spam on youtube, gmail, every website on the internet. I can't count the amount of times my parents called and asked why Google asked them to "upgrade their browser" (hint: It wasn't a new Firefox-build). Example 2: Sending email SPAM to all Google-use…

> Example 2: Sending email SPAM to all Google-users where they are advised to install Chrome if they ever sign in to their Google-account on a new machine using anything except Chrome. Cite? I've never seen this, and I use Firefox regularly. > Example 3: Installing Chrome unasked as drive-by installers when you install anything lots of freeware, because Google paid third-party developers to host Chrome as a spyware-l…

> Example 2 cite

I don’t have articles to link to, but I’ve experienced this on numerous occasions.

Me working with manual testing where we regularly set up clean environments from scratch probably has helped me notice the problem more than a regular webdev.

Because this is absolutely a problem.

> Example 3 cite

I’d say Google it, but it really is a known and documented problem:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=google+chrome+bundled+installers&t...

Goggle is in no way playing fair.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#299

Post by Klathmon »

gw wrote: post #277
Klathmon wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but not all breaking changes are equal. The church down your street was extremely unlikely to even be impacted by this change let alone have functionality broken by it. This only affected websites which were using blocking scrolling event listeners. Scrolljacking, some mapping websites where you were able to tap and pan around, and some sticky headers, and only on mobile devices using chrome. And of those feature…

> The church down your street was extremely unlikely to even be impacted by this change Why do you say that? Let's say, for example, that they use Discourse [1] to provide a web forum for churchgoers on their website. Oops! Mobile scrolling is completely broken for them [2] until they manage to update Discourse to the latest version. Is this the flu shot you were talking about? [1] https://www.discourse.org/ [2] http…

No, mobile scrolling wasn't "broken" for them, scrolling via their "timeline" feature was broken.

And while they would need to update, if they were using the hosted discourse plan it would have been fixed for them, and if they were using the self-hosted plan, they are running that on a linux server which needs updates and maintenance periodically anyway or a broken timeline will be the least of their problems. Luckily Discourse will email you when there is an update with a link to the admin page that lets you one-click upgrde the Discourse install on your server from the web UI.

So yes, this is exactly the flu shot I'm talking about. A product was broken in a fairly minor way with this update, and a fix was developed within 24 hours which consisted of 2 lines of CSS (both the same, but in 2 different spots). And now the product and the web as a whole (on chrome) are less laggy and janky on mobile devices.

Re: Chrome breaks the Web

#300

Post by ksk »

CydeWeys wrote: post #110
mcv wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the question becomes what's less bad: for website developers to break their own site, or for Chrome to break other people's site. I'm all for empowering browsers to override abusive behaviour from websites, but using bad defaults and breaking innocent websites as a result is not the solution.

Chrome is a program that I run on my computer. It protects my interests, not the interests of random crappy website developers doing horrible things like hijacking clipboard events. I'm all for the defaults being whatever is best for me. The browser is the agent of the user.

How is breaking websites good for the user?
Post reply on HN