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

451–460 of 602 posts

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

#451

Post by lapcat »

izacus wrote: post #362
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…

Safari already implements Manifest V3 (it never had anything else to block ads) and DRM. So what the heck are you talking about? Safari is leading the charge on all those hostile changes. (Not to mention all the other ways how they undermine the web, like refusing to properly support PWAs and forcing you to go through Apple reviewed process for apps.) This strange narative how Safari (the only browser you're ever all…

> Safari already implements Manifest V3 (it never had anything else to block ads)

This isn't entirely accurate. Confusion on the issue abounds.

From 2010 to 2019, the safariextz format had support for webRequest BlockingResponse https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web... and indeed there was a Safari version of uBlock Origin. This was eliminated in Safari version 13.

The "newer" (2015) Safari content blocker API is similar to Chrome's declarativeNetRequest. However, Manifest V3 is far broader than just eliminating webRequest BlockingResponse, though that's what people tend to focus on. For example, there are strict limits on script execution that also cause problems for userscript extensions.

Safari web extensions (2020) will continue to support Manifest V2, albeit without webRequest BlockingResponse, which Safari web extensions never supported. Apple is in the process of adding MV3 support to Safari web extensions without deprecating MV2 (just like Firefox).

In a sense, Manifest V3 and delcarativeNetRequest are separate issues. After all, delcarativeNetRequest is also supported in Chrome MV2. Chrome took the "opportunity" to eliminate webRequest BlockingResponse in MV3. Safari took the opportunity to eliminate BlockingResponse much earlier. But MV3 could have supported BlockingResponse if Google had wanted; there's nothing inherent to MV3 that precludes the API, other than an arbitrary decision.

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

#452

Post by hackmiester »

profmonocle wrote: post #311
sph wrote: post #142

What is the excuse of all people reading this thread in agreement and still using Chrome? As I mentioned elsewhere, this is preaching to the choir. A choir of Chrome users. Google wouldn't be so dominant if tech people like us would stop making lazy excuses to continue its hegemony. In Dante's Divina Commedia , there is a circle of hell for those too lazy to take a stance [1]. If it were written today, it would inclu…

For me it's the ecosystem. I like my desktop browser syncing with my Android browser, and I really like built in chromecast support in my browser. I know that Firefox has a mobile version with sync, but last time I tried it, I didn't care for it. I know there have been some attempts to bring chromecast support to Firefox via extensions, but last I tried it it was very buggy. But it's been many years since I tried eit…

I have chrome installed and just cast my screen, minimize it and keep using firefox. I also don’t own any chromecast devices anymore, so this only really comes up at Airbnbs, the odd meeting room, etc.

I’ve heard you can do the same with Brave.

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

#453

Post by tylercrompton »

tapoxi wrote: post #447
hliyan wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a Mac M1 user who wants a lightweight browser, what would you recommend: 1. Safari (with this, I have trouble with some websites, particularly Google ones) 2. Firefox (good, but has been a memory hog in the past) 3. Brave (like that it's Chromium, but I worry about the odd features like crypto) 4. Edge (I just downloaded it. leaning toward this choice)

I've fallen in love with Arc https://arc.net/ It's Chromium-based with a custom UI (in SwiftUI). It's very clean and Mac-native.

I would avoid Chromium-based browsers entirely as it still allows Google to strongarm their way into standards that few others want.

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

#454

Post by pornel »

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…

Recent Safari deserves credit for listening to developers and catching up with many standards.

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

#455

Post by worrycue »

robin_reala wrote: post #399
worrycue wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet it supports AVIF, a a directly competing format ... There is nothing neutral about supporting one format and not supporting another.

If the functionality is effectively the same then supporting one of two formats reduces the attack surface for security exploits for little loss.

> If the functionality is effectively the same

If it were people wouldn't be pushing for JPEG-XL.

I'm not going to repeat the advantages of JEPG-XL - plenty of posts on that already.

For some bizarre reason, Mozilla chooses to back the other format - release Firefox can display AVIF right now - while leaving JPEG-XL stuck behind a flag in a Nightly.

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

#456

Post by tomrod »

bagacrap wrote: post #420
tomrod wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * #WebEnvironmentIntegrity a.k.a. #DRM for whole websites would hurt the web, #opensource browsers and OSes What really blew my mind was how out of touch the dev guiding the WEI proposal is, in relation to how dangerous this implementation would be.

It's one dev, out of hundreds/thousands! At least one web platform lead from the Chrome team is on record saying that the proposal could never move past the experimentation phase. Do you think it's impossible for one bad^H^H^H clueless apple to slip through the interview process? Isn't it a good thing that a company as large as Google still allows individuals to experiment with their ideas?

I'm an economist -- I focus on incentives.

What I see of the one bad^H^H^H clueless apple is that their incentive with WEI aligns with a monopolist's goal to vertically and horizontally integrate.

Google has proven, time and again, that their "don't be evil" mantra is long out of sync with what a layperson would feel is evil. Hence, it makes sense to expect they will behave as any other company.

Perhaps one thinks WEI will make the web "better" with more targeted ads. This is in err, since adverts make a worse experience overall.

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

#457

Post by jonsneyers »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #440
izacus wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safari already implements Manifest V3 (it never had anything else to block ads) and DRM. So what the heck are you talking about? Safari is leading the charge on all those hostile changes. (Not to mention all the other ways how they undermine the web, like refusing to properly support PWAs and forcing you to go through Apple reviewed process for apps.) This strange narative how Safari (the only browser you're ever all…

It also doesn't support AV1 or AVIF. A cynical part of me thinks Safari supported JPEG-XL for pure tribal warfare, as its the "anti" AVIF. That would be so petty...

Actually Safari added support for three new image formats at the same time: JPEG XL, AVIF and HEIC.

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

#458

Post by snowwrestler »

andrewla wrote: post #438
r00fus wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name the sites because I find Firefox to be faster and more compliant

The most recent data loss incident was when I was trying to use the New York DMV website to upgrade to a RealID driver's license at the same time that I was changing my address. Validation error on one page became unrecoverable (fixing the problem didn't fix it) and going back started me at ground zero. I then tried the same flow on Chrome (including the validation error) and couldn't get it to repro; things just wor…

This is such a great example of the problem with Chrome dominance.

You've come to believe that Firefox is broken with respect to Chrome. When in reality you only know that websites work better in Chrome. But that's not because Chrome works better, it's because those web teams only test against Chrome, and when Chrome is broken, they break their own website to match, so it works in Chrome but not other browsers.

This is exactly the danger being highlighted in this thread. How long until the DMV site and Concur (and other sites) have little notes that say "Chrome required to use this website"? And then we're right back to the bad old IE days again.

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

#459

Post by toastal »

ccity88 wrote: post #212
sph wrote: post #142

What is the excuse of all people reading this thread in agreement and still using Chrome? As I mentioned elsewhere, this is preaching to the choir. A choir of Chrome users. Google wouldn't be so dominant if tech people like us would stop making lazy excuses to continue its hegemony. In Dante's Divina Commedia , there is a circle of hell for those too lazy to take a stance [1]. If it were written today, it would inclu…

I would love to use Firefox, Brave, even Safari, but I'm quite literally locked into the Google eco-system. My work emails are G-Suite, so having chrome means I can sync data from sheets, slides, docs etc. I stupidly moved everything personal to a Gmail address too back in 2016 when things weren't looking so grim, and cloud only was a hype so I'm kind of locked into using chrome for personal use too as I can't get aw…

No one said you had to ungoogle your life all at once. Take steps. Switch your browser to Fx or something else. Pick up a new email address with low fees with calendar & contact sync over CalDAV/CardDAV & keep both emails in use while slowly converting some over to the new address. Use LiberOffice or Etherpad on new documents. Use UnifiedPush on Android to handle notifications without send everything through Google. Install F-Droid & migrate to open alternatives. Eventually, you’d find Aurora store is just used for a handful of apps like your bank & everything else is in your browser or uses an open protocol so F-Droid apps work fine.

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

#460

Post by mercacona »

kvrck wrote: post #181
kmlx wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i’ve been a happy safari user (desktop and mobile) for years now.

What adblock do you use with Safari? Last time I've tried, I couldn't find one and returned back to Firefox.

Does NextDNS count as adblock?
Post reply on HN