Works pretty well considering its status, though it doesn't like to play along with the hard status bar on my screen sessions.
Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
61–70 of 178 posts
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Open a new tab and click the arrow on the right or click "Apps" at the bottom of the screen.
I believe there's also omnibox completion on app names (though maybe you have to use it a few times first)
Would be nice if they installed an ssh:// URI handler
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe there's also omnibox completion on app names (though maybe you have to use it a few times first)
Would be nice if they installed an ssh:// URI handler
I did actually try that in the hopes it would work. Onmibox completion is doing the trick for me now.
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#64Can someone please explain to me why I would possibly want to run a terminal emulator inside of my web browser, instead of just using the terminal emulator app that my system ships with?
the complete list of software i use day-to-day consists of a web browser and a terminal emulator. if i switched over to this, that list goes down to just a browser. maybe some people don't care, but i think it's pretty cool.
If the complete list of software you use is a web browser and a terminal emulator, what do you do in the terminal emulator? Run a text-based web browser and/or other terminal emulators?
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#65To all those who question the value of this, it's that we now have a new ssh client that runs everywhere Chrome runs. Additionally and non-trivially, the innards of the terminal UI is now exquisitely accessible to the legions of developers who know HTML and CSS. Presumably it's a small step to embedding cross-domain SSH into a webapp.
That said, there are minuses. The big minus is that Chrome, like literally every piece of software that handles the download and installation of other software, provides an entirely new way to discover, download, and install software. The instructions for downloading putty for windows is simple and stable over time. The instructions for installing this plugin are Chrome specific and unstable over time.
Overall, I'd say this plugin has marginal positive value.
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe there's also omnibox completion on app names (though maybe you have to use it a few times first)
Would be nice if they installed an ssh:// URI handler
oh, good idea. I wonder if navigator.registerProtocolHandler works in apps?
I tried adding it manually in settings->Content Settings...->Handlers, but it only allows you to select handlers on sites that have already requested permission, not add new ones (as far as I can tell).
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Windows! I spend most of my time coding in PuTTy + Vim when I'm on windows. In my limited testing this works as I expect with xterm-256, tmux, and Vim on my Ubuntu 12.04 Server without having to configure anything. PuTTy is a pain to configure on a new box.
How do you save yourself the trouble of configuring this extension? What sorts of configs have you had to do for Putty?
Setting unicode, changing backspace, setting xterm-256 as the TERM variable, etc ... PuTTy configuration is unintuitive when you first try to configure it. There's a well known page dedicated to configuring PuTTy properly on Windows.
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#68I opened chrome to check this out, but it wants me to "sign in" to install the extension. For me this is a bridge too far: I don't care to tell google about every single extension/application (extensplication?) I'm using. Like many people, I'm trying to step back from google/facebook snooping, and this would be a solid step toward such big brothering. I suppose next they'll see what email providers I use and whom I c…
this doesn't answer your question, but you can always download the crx file and sideload it without signing in (you can also clone it from the chromium repo, but then you'd also have to build the nacl part).
Kind of a pain, but if someone does want to try it out badly enough...
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#69I opened chrome to check this out, but it wants me to "sign in" to install the extension. For me this is a bridge too far: I don't care to tell google about every single extension/application (extensplication?) I'm using. Like many people, I'm trying to step back from google/facebook snooping, and this would be a solid step toward such big brothering. I suppose next they'll see what email providers I use and whom I c…
>For me this is a bridge too far: I don't care to tell google about every single extension/application (extensplication?) I'm using. Oh for pete's sake... Is there anything to this " I suppose next they'll see what email providers I use and whom I correspond with with mutt or whom I chat with on other services with finch etc.. Why expand google's data-gathering "attack surface"? Or is it further chicken-little, slipp…
> You'll have to forgive me for being blunt.
"You'll have to forgive me for being rude, obnoxious, conclusion-jumping."
Fixed that for ya.
You're welcome.
Re: Secure Shell chrome (killer) app
#70I opened chrome to check this out, but it wants me to "sign in" to install the extension. For me this is a bridge too far: I don't care to tell google about every single extension/application (extensplication?) I'm using. Like many people, I'm trying to step back from google/facebook snooping, and this would be a solid step toward such big brothering. I suppose next they'll see what email providers I use and whom I c…
> Like many people, I'm trying to step back from google/facebook snooping, and this would be a solid step toward such big brothering. Google seems to be working on this. If you've ever seen someone without a Google account try to use Android for the first time you can see how much effort they are putting into stopping people from using their products.
I've never used android--is it difficult then?