31–40 of 65 posts
How about fixing some bugs? Chrome/Chromium for Linux stopped remembering which windows are minimized and which are not after a restart. Such an annoying bug that surfaced less than a year ago. Still not fixed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Chrome has had a built-in password manager for years, synced to your account, and accessible on the web: https://passwords.google.com
And it doesn’t work! It breaks on several websites I use routinely (e.g. my credit union). As far as I can tell, browser password management is a dirty hack. There is no real “login API” that could be used to build a proper password manager.
I doubt anyone gives a toss if Chrome is having a "10th birthday" except Google. Never liked how this browser forces updates down your throat including "new looks" without any choice. Feels like software I have zero control over, if every time I open it, a new version of itself downloads and installs without my permission. Google enjoys forcing itself on users regularly without consent. Which is creepy when put like…
There's a case to be made that one could develop security updates separate from "look-and-feel" updates, but I think, sadly, it's a weak case; it's all one software package, and look-and-feel changes can impact security and vise-versa. I don't think the system would actually be more secure if Chrome tried to maintain various mini-forks of versions with different look-and-feels.
I'm curious though: how is this handled in your browser of choice? IE updates look-and-feel all the time and so does Mozilla. Perhaps it's the auto-updating that's the issue? But we already know what happens if the auto-updating is removed from the equation: the web has to collectively support IE6 approximately forever.
That password piece seems particularly dangerous, and a huge lock in.
How about fixing some bugs? Chrome/Chromium for Linux stopped remembering which windows are minimized and which are not after a restart. Such an annoying bug that surfaced less than a year ago. Still not fixed.
Here's what's not new: lack of anti-tracking protections
Agreed. I just can't go back to a browser without an ad blocker nowadays. I've forgotten how absolutely ugly and distracting most of the web looks with today's ads, not to mention the out of control tracking of users and invasion of their privacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meanwhile, Mozilla is pushing forward in that area! https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2018/08/30/changing-... I'm almost 100% Firefox at this point. I trust Mozilla.
I trust Mozilla and have zero trust in Google. But I just switched back to Chrome after an experiment with Firefox. It’s just too much of a resource hog vs Chrome. Hopefully they sort that out soon.
I doubt anyone gives a toss if Chrome is having a "10th birthday" except Google. Never liked how this browser forces updates down your throat including "new looks" without any choice. Feels like software I have zero control over, if every time I open it, a new version of itself downloads and installs without my permission. Google enjoys forcing itself on users regularly without consent. Which is creepy when put like…
Just like all of the websites that you browse, you can't have control over the styles or the updates that someone pushes to their servers, forcing you to download the latest page and install the latest service workers without your permission.
I doubt anyone gives a toss if Chrome is having a "10th birthday" except Google. Never liked how this browser forces updates down your throat including "new looks" without any choice. Feels like software I have zero control over, if every time I open it, a new version of itself downloads and installs without my permission. Google enjoys forcing itself on users regularly without consent. Which is creepy when put like…
>Feels like software I have zero control over, if every time I open it, a new version of itself downloads and installs without my permission. Just like all of the websites that you browse, you can't have control over the styles or the updates that someone pushes to their servers, forcing you to download the latest page and install the latest service workers without your permission.
I do understand Google in this case and support their decision though. And if someone wants more control, fortunately they can always use Firefox.
That password piece seems particularly dangerous, and a huge lock in.
It asks before storing passwords and, in case of generated passwords, also displays the password - so it seems okay for me. Or do you think it's a lock-in because of missing export options?