201–210 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's rather revisionist. At a point in time Chrome was way better than not just IE, but way better than Firefox. The performance was leaps and bounds ahead.
>Not because it was a superior product, not because of technology but because everyone was anti IE. >>>I think that's rather revisionist. I agree with the sibling comments that remembered the past differently: Back in 2008, Chrome was actually the superior product -- for both users and developers. - Chrome had a better partitioned process for each tab. IE and Firefox 3.x didn't so they often crashed on buggy web page…
Good points for the most part, but not that one. A shitty JavaScript .PDF viewer is a much more "jarring UI experience" than launching an external viewer that I intentionally installed for just that purpose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's rather revisionist. At a point in time Chrome was way better than not just IE, but way better than Firefox. The performance was leaps and bounds ahead.
I remember Chrome being way better than anything else at the time. I switched from Firefox to Chrome during that period because it was just so fast and lightweight in comparison. I think it was also the first time mainstream users had access to features like tabbed browsing, which was truly novel at the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since Firefox support WebExtensions now (or will soon get it) which are very close to Chrome extensions, it wouldn't be unthinkable for all non-Chrome browsers to use Firefox store instead of the Chrome one. I think Mozilla could even be convinced to open it up as an "open web extensions" store or collaborate with others to build a new one. They certainly have the infrastructure and experience to run one.
Uh, Firefox already supports WebExtensions and it is like common knowledge. Mozilla barely has the experience to run a sync service, and even that is a disaster.
The problem at this point isn't whether chrome will disable it... It can be added back, probably fairly easily as google intents to keep it around for "enterprise" anyway, so it's probably just gonna end up changing/removing one if-statement. If not, then the code already exists and has to be merged back in. The problem is distribution of the actual extensions, as Vivaldi kinda pointed out, as the other browsers most…
Since Firefox support WebExtensions now (or will soon get it) which are very close to Chrome extensions, it wouldn't be unthinkable for all non-Chrome browsers to use Firefox store instead of the Chrome one. I think Mozilla could even be convinced to open it up as an "open web extensions" store or collaborate with others to build a new one. They certainly have the infrastructure and experience to run one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is absolutely anti-competitive garbage, and you should be prepared to see more and more of it (and increasingly anti-consumer iterations if it) until people wake up and start demanding that their political leaders do something about it. “Companies will regulate themselves” is a cute libertarian bedtime story.
You're right that this is potentially anticompetitive, but “Companies will regulate themselves” is a cute libertarian bedtime story. I've never heard libertarians say that. Rather, they say that consumers have the potential to regulate companies if they choose to do so, by voting with their feet. We should do so more often than we do; when there's a free market (monopolies are not free markets) it feels pretty good t…
I really don't understand why security concerned people use Google's product in spite of knowing that Google steals everything and compromises user's privacy.
I think you are confusing security with privacy. As far as security goes, I trust Google way more than any other site to handle my credentials properly, follow security best practices, use the highest level of encryption where applicable, keep servers up to date and patched faster than anyone else, etc. Outside of Google+, I can't remember the last time there was a major security incident at Google, when they happene…
This breach was not due to missteps or problems with security on Apple’s part (though Apple has had issues with security lapses, notably passwordless root login on macOS which was never reported to have been exploited [0]).
In the instance of “The Fappening”, the breach that lead to the exposure of iCloud data was “revealed to have been gained via spear phishing attacks”. [1]
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/29/macos-hig...
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_ph...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since Firefox support WebExtensions now (or will soon get it) which are very close to Chrome extensions, it wouldn't be unthinkable for all non-Chrome browsers to use Firefox store instead of the Chrome one. I think Mozilla could even be convinced to open it up as an "open web extensions" store or collaborate with others to build a new one. They certainly have the infrastructure and experience to run one.
Mozilla supports WebExtensions since 57+ afaik. Not sure about this if there are some differences in implementation and API's between Firefox's WebExt and Chrome's.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web...
The problem at this point isn't whether chrome will disable it... It can be added back, probably fairly easily as google intents to keep it around for "enterprise" anyway, so it's probably just gonna end up changing/removing one if-statement. If not, then the code already exists and has to be merged back in. The problem is distribution of the actual extensions, as Vivaldi kinda pointed out, as the other browsers most…
We need a third party extensions store.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My gut feeling is that Google won't pull this stunt with chrome, this is some kind of scare mongering or a PR tactic, I dunno. It doesn't make a logical sense because if they are banning the ad-blockers, it means they accept that chrome is largely used by power users who can install these blockers (otherwise, what's the need?). But they should realize that a power user who installs an addon can just as easily move to…
I think its gotten to the point where power users go around to all their non-power-user friends and install ad blockers for them, at least I do in our office. The reason this is so successful is because it takes 5 seconds to go the the chrome store and add ublock origin. Convincing my non-power-user friends to move to firefox would be significantly harder. Google's goal is to remove the severity (and effectively the…
The new thing is Google valuing their profits over the wishes of a large population of their users.