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

Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

bugs.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 919 posts

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#181

Post by quickben »

soared wrote: post #60
jwr wrote: post #30

This is idiotic and harmful. We already lost information about the protocol, because somebody believed it is "too complex" for users. Now we're losing other parts of the URL. It's making a joke of the SSL/TLS padlock, too — what exactly is the padlock supposed to tell me? It used to signify that a "known authority" certified that I'm connected to whatever I see in the URL bar. But now that browsers take liberties wit…

99.9% of users have no idea what any of the words you just said mean. The change was made for them, not for you (the .1%)

After 20 years, the number isn't 99.9%. But:

Should chrome redirect all DuckDuckGo queries to Google.com because 99.9% use Google anyways?

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#182

Post by eam »

berbec wrote: post #168
eam wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, might as well drop then entire stuff after the domain.com/{dump all this out} (the file path) since non-techy people don't really care about it. All they care is about clicking links and navigating... /end sarcasm

Doesn't Safari on macos do this?

I'm a Firefox user so I don't typically use Safari, but I just did try it right now and I guess they do!

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#183

Post by makapuf »

Sidnicious wrote: post #98
ThePadawan wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

99.9% of motor vehicle users have no use for airbags. We still keep them for the .1%.

Airbags have utility for 100% of motor vehicle users.

Well technically that includes planes and motocross also.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#184

Post by dagenix »

kevindqc wrote: post #110
teilo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the case. I run a server that does not respond to "www." If I enter "www.myserver.com" into the address bar, I get a DNS lookup failure, but the address bar is now showing "myserver.com." That's damn confusing, and this is an idiotic default on Chrome's part.

Likewise, something is saying that their bank only works through www.bank.com. But the URL says bank.com. If they try to type in bank.com it doesn't work. But hey, now we don't have to see www which has been around forever and is a surprise to no one!

Why would you want to do that?

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#185

Post by [deleted] »

crispyporkbites wrote: post #106
soared wrote: post #54

Why does this matter? Users don't care and its easier to remember/understand that all websites are just "x.com" rather than sometimes being "www.x.com". If you have some server/troubleshooting/network/dev problem with it, the missing info should be moved to developer tools. This is just removing data that is useless and confusing to 99.9% of users - whats the problem?

Because they are on www. and not *. What happens when you copy and paste that URL? Now every single website that wants to support Chrome needs to ensure that https://foo.com is always redirected to https://www.foo.com , or at least works as if it's www. It doesn't matter that most websites already do this, it's not standard, and represents Google breaking standards because they are big enough to do their own thing. I…

[deleted]

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#188

Post by download13 »

rmason wrote: post #111
some_account wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's dumb down the internet even more because non technical users feel confused. Maybe we can actually remove the url field and just let the isp decide where they should go? They could offer a choice of 10 popular sites, like TV channels.. :)

Actually Google's long term plan is to do away with the URL completely, they just haven't figured out how yet. https://www.wired.com/story/google-wants-to-kill-the-url/

We're always going to need to see URLs. They're not going away. They're just talking about a better default view to show the user relevant information about where they are, which would be a good thing.

Being generous, maybe half of users can look at a URL and immediately identify the domain they are on. That's terrible, and goes a long way to explaining why phishing attacks are so prevalent.

I'm actually pretty excited to see what they come up with. If it's even marginally better than what we have now I'd be all for it. I'm guessing they'll end up showing some combination of the domain and page title by default (which might incentivize more sites to FIX THEIR GODDAM TITLE SCHEMES!).

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#189

Post by ddebernardy »

berbec wrote: post #168
eam wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, might as well drop then entire stuff after the domain.com/{dump all this out} (the file path) since non-techy people don't really care about it. All they care is about clicking links and navigating... /end sarcasm

Doesn't Safari on macos do this?

There thankfully is a setting to show the full url, but yeah, Safari on macOS does that by default. The change occurred around Lion (give or take a major version) if memory serves me well.

Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL

#190

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

tinus_hn wrote: post #88
gsnedders wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox's behaviour is that is makes everything except the eTLD+1 grey, because that's what's normally useful for evaluating authenticity. There's no distinction made between `www` and any other subdomain.

These are all in the same origin so they can read cookies and manipulate pages.

This is not true unless the cookie is specifically marked to be domain-wide.

There was a time when IE misbehaved. Not sure if this fixed in Edge: https://www.mxsasha.eu/blog/2014/03/04/definitive-guide-to-c...

Post reply on HN