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

Chrome is Not the Standard

chriskrycho.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 465 posts

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#251

Post by ta87786554 »

anonemouse145 wrote: post #80
yarrel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't correct. Try the new mobile Firefox. Buying Pocket signalled that if you can take the right Mozillan to lunch, you can get an early exit. That did not solve the problem. It's still impossible to remove Pocket.

Yes, the latest mobile Firefox does make network requests. When Firefox updated, I got a "recommended by Pocket" section full of ads and click bait. I do not want that. And it's on about:blank just like when Chrome started capping up the blank page. I had to install a script to load an actual blank HTML page because about:blank isn't blank.

I turned on transparent proxying for HTTP and HTTPS the other day to see what requests FF was up to for its highlights on the supposedly blank page etc.

It's very chatty, annoyingly. Captive portal check on all requests that has to be disabled in about:config and a laundry list more. That config is scarily full of remote and telemetry based URLs also, but at least they are co figurable I guess.

An open source browser that just does what you want and no more seems like a dying hope.

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#252

Post by [deleted] »

headmelted wrote: post #232

This isn't new, though. I think people forgive Google for more because they like them. IE did exactly the same thing before Chrome and was roundly (and rightly) admonished for it. In fairness, Chrome's proposals do seem to be designed with the open web in mind - at least insofar as being items that other projects could reasonably be expected to implement in their engines if they chose to do so. There's nothing so egr…

[deleted]

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#253

Post by riquito »

threeseed wrote: post #234
user5994461 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like a case for anti trust, just like microsoft had with IE.

1) iOS is not a monopoly. 2) Apple has legitimate technical reasons for not allowing other browser engines (well specifically the JS part). Intent matters.

> Apple has legitimate technical reasons for not allowing other browser engines (well specifically the JS part). Intent matters.

Oh please... source?

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#255

Post by clairity »

userbinator wrote: post #30

developers grouse about the other browser makers who are “holding the web back.” Indeed, perhaps "holding the web back" is a good thing if it means websites will be more accessible overall, to even less common browsers like NetSurf, Dillo, and all the other text-based ones. IMHO the "feature war/race" between the major browser vendors has had an overall negative effect, as if all sites somehow need to turn into ridic…

i really wish the standards bodies would make a concerted push for a solid advance in CSS (flexbox and css grids are pushing that way but are relatively complex), so that we could get rid of DIV-itis. it's like the TABLE-itis of the past, but two letters shorter (i'm exaggerating, but still...). that would not only clean up the html but make both learning and development faster.

they should also really advance basic web functionality, like making contenteditable more flexible to build text editors on top of, and adding more (and more stylable) form controls (e.g., a good date-time picker, a true omni/combo box, etc). forms are all over most websites, so let's make those faster and less error prone to develop without a bunch of extraneous javascript handlers or resorting to formidable js frameworks.

in short, let's keep the learning curve shallow for web development--that's what made it great in the first place.

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#256

Post by ben174 »

bluetwo wrote: post #95
Ajedi32 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it was essentially a paid-for promotional tie-in From what I recall, it wasn't paid-for either. > we developed an unpaid collaboration to engage our users and viewers of the show in a new way Source: https://blog.mozilla.org/firefox/update-looking-glass-add/

If they didn't get paid, why on earth did they do it?

I think it was the opposite of paid. They wanted to draw the Mr. Robot crowd to Firefox.

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#257

Post by connorelsea »

jen20 wrote: post #229
user5994461 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like a case for anti trust, just like microsoft had with IE.

Why? iOS has by most measures less than 50% of the market.

Even with a low market share Apple could still theoretically be engaging in practices that are anti-consumer, such as disallowing the use of other browser engines.

Though, afaik, Apple does not stoop to the levels of Amazon, who removed the Twitch app from Roku platform for absolutely no reason other than to line their pockets with more cash.

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#258

Post by notyourday »

icebraining wrote: post #162
notyourday wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure it is - it markets my information to advertisers via its own platform. It is my neighborhood drug dealer, and drug are pretty good - nicely packaged and no one fucks with me when i use its drug delivery service. Mozilla is pretending to be a health store. But we are starting to see that they are also peddling drugs. Not Google drugs - drugs with security and drugs with delivery system and drugs that we are prett…

Can you specify which "shady drugs" are these? Because I'm not seeing it. In this particular case, the addon was written by Mozilla employees, and was completely harmless. I don't think Mozilla did well - and I've said so in the original thread - but calling it shady compared to Google ads? That's laughable. DoubleClick is one of the largest malware distribution platforms in history.

Pocket.

Mr. Robot.

Google tells me - "Dude, for providing me your information you get gooodieeeees!"

Mozilla tells me - "We respect your privacy. "

In a micro-font : "except when we do things that you should not be concerned about"

Re: Chrome is Not the Standard

#259

Post by connorelsea »

foobarz wrote: post #228
brians wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What reduction in bug rate should we expect for each, day, $100M invested?

Back in time, Microsoft invested heavily in program analysis to fix those hideous BSODs due to broken third-party drivers. It was very successful. Apple's problem is simpler as they own the code, and bugs are likely to come from understaffed engineering.

Apple's self-contained platform, huge sums of money, and massive upgrade adoption rates would make it very easy for them to ship modern software. They for some reason choose not to
Post reply on HN