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

A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

mastodon.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 602 posts

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#101

Post by Kwpolska »

worrycue wrote: post #5
dbish wrote: post #3

The problem is there are almost 0 alternatives beyond Firefox so if you don’t like their UX you’re stuck. All the “new” browsers are just chromium skins (edge, arc, etc.) Are there any real competitors building a new browser?

Frankly Firefox is barely a hedge against Chrome. When it comes to things like JPEG-XL they are in lock step with Chrome. Safari ended up being JPEG-XL’s unlikely champion. I kind of wished Apple would release Safari for other platforms again.

JPEG-XL is a feature the web can live without. But unlike Chrome, Firefox won't kill ad blockers or introduce DRM.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#102

Post by taopai »

TheRoque wrote: post #49
simula67 wrote: post #38

> to explain why they should stop using #Chromium / #GoogleChrome and use #Firefox or #Epiphany as their main #web #browser Or use Brave.

Why is brave shilled so much ? I don't think I recalled seeing as many ads from a browser other than brave. Using a browser that claims to be the new savior of the internet, "security and privacy focused", while being related to a crypto and heavily marketing their product... Meh.

It is my main browser in android. Never seen any add except some new stuff hard-coded. Yes there is something about crypto but I never used it. I am a pretty happy user. I don't understand why they market their product, I don't know any other alternative that blocks adds and is that fast on android.

Users concerned about security and privacy should use TOR. It is very useful to browse websites blocked in my country.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#103

Post by oblio »

roenxi wrote: post #96
oblio wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As crazy as that sounds, IE had a better development team until IE6 basically killed off its competition. It was more stable than equivalent browsers, it had more features, I think it was even developed faster than competitors. Which sounds a lot like Chrome, except closed source. Those considering how big and cumbersome browsers are... does open source that matter that much in the grand scheme of things? Just browse…

OS complexity isn't much of a moat, linux works fine. The "problem" is that the browser projects are organised as big monoliths with limited internal competition for the components. Although it isn't really a problem yet. Chrome works fine, and switching web browsers isn't hard to do. But if community-developed web browsers were required the complexity wouldn't slow the process down much. It just happens Google does…

> OS complexity isn't much of a moat, linux works fine.

I said browser complexity, not OS complexity.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#104

Post by wongarsu »

mrtksn wrote: post #73
tommiegannert wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." Now, this is from the perspective of the web developer. I don't think IE was ever hated the same way from the end-user perspective. Chrome is still innovating, but now end-users hate it, because it's trying to be too much. The "new IE" hat still belongs…

> I'm curious what "its own vision" was The JS and CSS and HTML box model worked differently, the websites were displayed correctly only on IE or only on other browsers. People put text that says "best viewed in Internet Explorer 6" at the bottom of the page or straight out blocked users from displaying the page in other browsers and encouraged them to download IE - just the same thing we have with Chrome today when…

Also ActiveX, which brought a lot of "desktop only" capabilities to the web, at the cost of the ultimate lock-in.

We should probably be glad that Microsoft basically stopped all IE investment when the dot-com crash happened (IE6 came out 2001), if they had kept investing the internet might still be dominated by MS

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#105

Post by [deleted] »

ksey3 wrote: post #7
dbish wrote: post #3

The problem is there are almost 0 alternatives beyond Firefox so if you don’t like their UX you’re stuck. All the “new” browsers are just chromium skins (edge, arc, etc.) Are there any real competitors building a new browser?

I have been using Brave for about a year. Dont miss Firefox or Chrome.

[deleted]

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#106

Post by have_faith »

dbish wrote: post #3

The problem is there are almost 0 alternatives beyond Firefox so if you don’t like their UX you’re stuck. All the “new” browsers are just chromium skins (edge, arc, etc.) Are there any real competitors building a new browser?

This a problem for me.

I've been a long time Firefox user, but the UI/UX has stagnated (like all browsers) for so long. I'm enjoying using Arc at the moment because it's rethinking a lot of things that bug me about the traditional browser UI paradigm but I also know that it's a trendy startup that could either: explode, decide to change features radically at the drop of a hat (pivot), or simple do something distasteful to please investors.

Extensions technically fill in the gap on the Firefox side, like Containers, but the UX is just an afterthought.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#108

Post by roenxi »

oblio wrote: post #103
roenxi wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OS complexity isn't much of a moat, linux works fine. The "problem" is that the browser projects are organised as big monoliths with limited internal competition for the components. Although it isn't really a problem yet. Chrome works fine, and switching web browsers isn't hard to do. But if community-developed web browsers were required the complexity wouldn't slow the process down much. It just happens Google does…

> OS complexity isn't much of a moat, linux works fine. I said browser complexity, not OS complexity.

What difference do you see between a browser and an OS? A browser is an OS. They perform the same role. A context to run whatever 3rd party software.

If a project is too complex for a single organisation, then break it up into 2-3 projects. That is how OSS software handles complex tasks. Someone could do a real LLVM-style browser project then we don't have to use javascript which'd catapult us all into the 21st century.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#109

Post by ralfn »

tommiegannert wrote: post #64
mrtksn wrote: post #57

Remember the "Safari is the new IE" narrative? Just because Safari doesn't support some API doesn't make it IE, IE wasn't an inferior browser at the beginning either. What made IE the IE everyone hates was its departure from standards(?) and enforcing its own vision of the web thanks to its enormous market share. On IE's case, MS probably stagnated it to prevent competition against its desktop Apps business and on Go…

IE was absolutely hated for not evolving. I'm curious what "its own vision" was, other than "do as little as possible, while Mozilla and Opera keeps pushing forward." Now, this is from the perspective of the web developer. I don't think IE was ever hated the same way from the end-user perspective. Chrome is still innovating, but now end-users hate it, because it's trying to be too much. The "new IE" hat still belongs…

>I'm curious what "its own vision" was

Making Windows a requirement for the web. Things like ActiveX.

Re: A list of recent hostile moves by Google's Chrome team

#110

Post by bunga-bunga »

mrtksn wrote: post #57

Remember the "Safari is the new IE" narrative? Just because Safari doesn't support some API doesn't make it IE, IE wasn't an inferior browser at the beginning either. What made IE the IE everyone hates was its departure from standards(?) and enforcing its own vision of the web thanks to its enormous market share. On IE's case, MS probably stagnated it to prevent competition against its desktop Apps business and on Go…

IE was different things to different people.

To developers, IE was the browser for which you had to spend hours debugging issues. Sounds like Safari to me. Considering you have to buy a whole device to use Safari, I’d argue it’s worse than IE was.

(Sent from my Safari browser)

Post reply on HN