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

Chrome Is Bad

chromeisbad.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 306 posts

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#191

Post by themusicgod1 »

OK so to summarize this thread if I'm reading it correctly, TFA makes claims that are easily proven to be related to an old technical snafu in the auto-updater

Now consider

> The [other thing] has a universal back door through which that $G_GAFAM_COMPANY2 can forcibly change the software. This is called "auto-update". It puts the user helplessly at $G_GAFAM_COMPANY2 mercy.

- richard stallman http://stallman.org/amazon.html

This right here is the root of the problem

we are all at NSA/Alphabet Google+Microsoft's mercy, and auto-updater although arguably useful for normie-facing software like the world's standard web browser has downsides.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#192

Post by [deleted] »

anentropic wrote: post #97
LeoPanthera wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does Chrome do better than Safari?

Does anyone know a way to get Safari to show a preview of the url when you hover over a link? I tried to switch recently since it's supposed to waste less battery but two things I found were a bad experience after Chrome: - no decent ad blocker? the one I saw recommended was Ad Guard but that seems to require you to have an Electron app running simultaneously (!) in order for it to block anything - in Chrome when I h…

[deleted]

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#193

Post by dang »

politelemon wrote: post #47
sroussey wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possible correlation and hand waving equals causation. I, too, was hoping for something, well, technical. Considering #1 on hacker news...

That this is so high right now is quite reflective of HN. It's nearly an exact match of the meme like utterance often seen on reddit: "chrome bad".

If you're going to credit the community with the problem I trust you'll credit it with the solution as well.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25402000

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#194

Post by Aeolun »

prox wrote: post #169
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #83

The amount of effort I need to invest to get my development team to even look at our apps in a browser other than Chrome is exhausting and I have to put up with snark and eye rolling every step of the way. I feel like I'm back in the IE7 era.

This point is truly worthy of an article or domain name. People here ask why there is so much “hate” for Chrome, but forget something important, that it doesn’t fall out of the sky. More and more I find that sites / apps work badly on my FF or Safari. It’s truly shameful and that IS my why absolutely am disappointed with Chrome and devs who can’t be arsed to do the work for other browsers.

If you’ve never been in the IE era maybe it’s hard to believe/understand that browsers are different enough to make that necessary.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#195

Post by _qulr »

dang wrote: post #188
_qulr wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is the well-known Loren Brichter: https://twitter.com/lorenb/status/1337832978253230081 So there's unlikely to be a conspiracy, just a dude with too much money and self-importance.

Personal attacks are not ok here. Please don't respond to a comment that breaks the site guidelines by breaking them yourself. That just makes the thread even worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

This entire submission has been flagged, so it appears that Hacker News itself sees something seriously wrong with the author's web site.

Anyway, FWIW, I was defending the author from the charge of doing something suspicious.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#196

Post by rndgermandude »

comex wrote: post #14

This is total nonsense. Even for malware, hiding from Activity Monitor would be quite a feat. Short of an exploit, you couldn't hide your process without a kernel rootkit, but macOS has required user approval to load kernel extensions for several versions now. I suppose you could go the low-tech way and just name your process "WindowServer" to confuse the user, but you'd still end up with two WindowServers. The idea…

While it's indeed unlikely that there is deliberately hiding, there is a chance that the google updater triggers something in some (OS-level) components via some (implicit) IPC mechanism that causes load spikes in those components. You'd hardly see any load for the real culprit itself but those other connected components may run hot.

This user says their WindowServer runs hot. Some Chrome-related software may have entered a state where it accidentally DoS'es the WindowServer either due to a bug in google software or a bug in WindowServer that google software triggers, at least in the system configurations particular to this user.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#197

Post by gnicholas »

If Google is doing this, that's not great. I am much more disturbed by the behavior of Microsoft Teams, which installs itself into your login items on install. Then you remove it from your login items and think you're all good. But if you ever open the application, it automatically adds itself to your login items again.

As far as I can tell, it will re-add itself no matter how many times you have removed it. This strikes me as incredibly user hostile and I'm surprised Microsoft is quite so brazen about it. I would expect this behavior would lead people to just uninstall the desktop application and use Teams through a browser when needed.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#198

Post by wnevets »

coldtea wrote: post #163
wnevets wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hating Google is very fashionable on HN these days, I'm not surprised to see this so highly voted. I also wouldn't be surprised if most of the upvotes are based on the title/domain rather than the actual "content".

> Hating Google is very fashionable on HN these days Well, why shouldn't it be?

Why shouldn't apple? For some reason apple gets a pass on HN for things like fighting to keep forced labor camps open [1]. Lets hate Google AND Apple.

1. https://9to5mac.com/2020/11/23/anti-forced-labour-bill-apple...

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#199

Post by justinhj »

crazygringo wrote: post #102

This should not be the #1 story on HN right now. :( It's a single anecdote that deleting Chrome on two computers sped them up. It provides zero evidence (even anecdotal) that it has anything to do with "Keystone" specifically. It provides zero evidence for the idea that "Keystone" is able to "nefariously hide itself from Activity Monitor". And it also completely contradicts the normal user experience of Chrome, which…

Why don’t you let the vote buttons do the voting? If you’re not interested in content you can ignore it and not upvote it

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#200

Post by justinhj »

bsmith0 wrote: post #131
crazygringo wrote: post #102

This should not be the #1 story on HN right now. :( It's a single anecdote that deleting Chrome on two computers sped them up. It provides zero evidence (even anecdotal) that it has anything to do with "Keystone" specifically. It provides zero evidence for the idea that "Keystone" is able to "nefariously hide itself from Activity Monitor". And it also completely contradicts the normal user experience of Chrome, which…

Agreed, about 25% of the content on HN seems to be Google hate.

None of the top 30 stories right now mention Google
Post reply on HN