111–120 of 194 posts
Firefox does something in the middle where it makes the "https://www." and path lighter gray, while the domain name is black.
I think this is just about ease of use and displaying the most relevant information. Regular users think of it as "google.com", not as "https://www.google.com". And the full URL is still there whenever you click through to select or copy.
Mobile browsers often elide the protocol and trivial hostnames from domains in order to economize on precious screen space of phones. Desktop browsers do not face the same constraints. A desktop browser can play to the strengths of desktop computing—taking a "desktop-first" point of view—and display the full URL with the abundant space available. See Firefox's display of the full URL with a highlighted color for the domain. Alternatively, they can be made subservient to mobile and adopt conventions established from constraints that do not exist in the desktop space.
Mobile-first is frequently damaging to new desktop software projects, but in my experience it's atypical for mobile limitations to be back-ported to established desktop software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ruin chrome as an intranet browser in the last few years with TLS handling, self signed cert handling, and general settings window changing malarkey Just put it in the OS certificate store? It's worked like that since Chrome was released.
I think the issue the upper poster is referring to are things like when chrome deprecated ancient certificate features, which enterprise-solutions still happen to use by default 15 years after they were deprecated. (One such issue were certificates with a common name and no subject alt name.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn’t hide www. And you can install alternate browsers on iPhones, you know.
> And you can install alternate browsers on iPhones, you know. More like thin wrappers around Webkit. You can actually install alternate browsers on Android, you know.
On Android Google will spy on everything you do, no matter which browser you install.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ruin chrome as an intranet browser in the last few years with TLS handling, self signed cert handling, and general settings window changing malarkey Just put it in the OS certificate store? It's worked like that since Chrome was released.
I think the issue the upper poster is referring to are things like when chrome deprecated ancient certificate features, which enterprise-solutions still happen to use by default 15 years after they were deprecated. (One such issue were certificates with a common name and no subject alt name.)
URLs represent and identify content,controling them means you control content. In the short term these changes mean little but in the long term this will benefit google immensely. Google just loves slippery slopes. Identity and payment are extremely important to any ordered system of social interaction. More than content itself,controlling them helps one control everything else. I am trying hard to avoid believing co…
Legally requiring internet standards compliance would help in some ways, but imagine the hurdle that creates for future startups who have something different and maybe better in mind
URLs represent and identify content,controling them means you control content. In the short term these changes mean little but in the long term this will benefit google immensely. Google just loves slippery slopes. Identity and payment are extremely important to any ordered system of social interaction. More than content itself,controlling them helps one control everything else. I am trying hard to avoid believing co…
The focus of this change is to improve the identification of content. This coupled with payment has been subject lots of fraud where users misled about the owner of a website. google-payments-secure.via.net is not a google payment website despite the google in the domain name. The key part that signifies the ownership / identify of the person hosting the site is the END of the domain, the google.com part. That is the…
The problem here is that Google is in control of the solution and the solution is designed by them without consulting everyone else and in a way that would be advantageous to their long term dominance and prosperity.
I don't trust google and they certainly don't have my consent to shape the way I and the society I live in interact with each other.
I will say it a million times if needed. I do not trust google. Period. They ask forgiveness instead of permission and they love slipperly slops and bait-and-switch psychology tricks to get their way.
This is a giant AMP scam. The next change will be that it will trick users into thinking they are on are on a real site like example.com but will instead be on Google.com/example.com. But chrome will remove google.com just like http/s.
Chrome on Android already hides the "google.com/amp" URL prefix for AMP URLs: https://blog.amp.dev/2018/01/09/improving-urls-for-amp-pages...
This is really sad and dangerous for the web. I don't know why people aren't up in arms over this kind of devious behavior from Google.
If Microsoft had pulled this in the late 90s early 2000s there would have been senate hearing and talks of breaking up their monopoly.
Off topic : there seems to be a disconnect between the chrome devs and users. Another instance was the automatic signing in to chrome incident. I've lost trust in the chrome team and have switched to Firefox full time and honestly there's nothing that I miss. The firefox devs seem to better understand their users, frequently blog about changes that positively impact users. I have a lot more faith in firefox even thou…
Have they though? How many of their users understand what "www" or "https" mean? For those that have a vague idea, how many ever look? I don't like the change either, for a variety of reasons, but I don't think I'm their average user either. For the average user, seeing the domain and nothing else likely improves security.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems that Firefox stopped copying http:// (when I want to copy URL) which is very annoying to me. I need the whole address when copying.
I have the opposite complaint: when I highlight a portion of the url in chrome, it prepends the http:// anyway. If I have the whole thing selected it would make sense to prepend the http://