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

Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

androidpolice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 497 posts

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#111

Post by Spivak »

tyingq wrote: post #78
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chrome for Android already modifies the address bar on AMP pages How does it do this? The URL looks totally as I'd expect (google.com/amp/) - I'm on version 84.0

They are boiling frogs: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog Little changes over time, so you don't see the end game right away. Signed exchanges and further hacking up / hiding the URL will come. This change only hides some of the URL, with a hover action that shows it again.

I really don't get why people think that signed exchanges are this super nefarious plot to destroy the open web when it's exactly the thing that would make a distributed web possible.

Disconnecting content authorship and publishing with hosting so that literally anyone can host web content securely is fantastic!

* Want to bootstrap your IPFS network? You can safely and securely host a huge chunk of the web from big publishers on day 0.

* Want to compete with AMP? Now you can because AMP isn't special anymore!

* Are you a small ISP that wants to cache web pages close to your customers to reduce bandwidth usage?

* Archiving website has never been easier since they're already bundled and packed.

We've already reached the point where the content you're seeing and the server you're connecting to are completely disconnected. Signed exchanges just democratize the process instead of requiring every publisher to pick a CDN.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#112

Post by polote »

The title is misleading and people don't read the article.

Chrome is not hiding the bar address, it is only showing the domain in normal times, and showing the full url when you hover the bar

Personally I find it better for non technical people, because they can focus on the domain only. For tech people you have the option to keep the full url visible at all time, which fixes the issue.

As for people complaining about AMP, this is something different, which has nothing to do with displaying only the domain, but instead "showing the real domain when you are on a google AMP page"

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#113

Post by stunt »

I prefer what Firefox. Just keep the domain name black/highlighted and the rest of URL gray.

But, for average user this might be more effective to detect phishing attacks since they never check full URL anyway. (Unless when a website does something stupid with query string parameters)

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#114

Post by bitexploder »

raybb wrote: post #105
bitexploder wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are going back to AOL days. That didn’t work out so well for AOL in the long run. It’s kind of crazy to me you can’t do marketing now without at least discussing Google and Facebook these days. Edit: at least you knew you were the customer with AOL and paid them with clear terms for access.

Do you or anyone else have a video or screenshots of what you're talking about? Or is there a specific name of the product where AOL was doing this?

When dial up Internet was a thing, AOL was the leader in that universe. It was basically one of the earliest walled gardens out there. They had their own chat, email, etc. You accessed it all through their desktop client. You never had to leave the AOL application to experience "the internet". They of course were still providing general Internet access, so you could still fire up Netscape [and earlier browsers] and cruise to whatever websites you wanted. The Internet eventually eclipsed what AOL could offer for most people and their premium price and sometimes dodgy Internet service eventually fell by the wayside to a more open Internet experience for most users.

Edit: AIM was a really popular messaging client for years after the fall of AOL as a premiere dial up Internet service.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#115

Post by magicalist »

raybb wrote: post #105
bitexploder wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are going back to AOL days. That didn’t work out so well for AOL in the long run. It’s kind of crazy to me you can’t do marketing now without at least discussing Google and Facebook these days. Edit: at least you knew you were the customer with AOL and paid them with clear terms for access.

Do you or anyone else have a video or screenshots of what you're talking about? Or is there a specific name of the product where AOL was doing this?

Movie trailers often had them, sometimes long after AOL had declined in relative popularity. An example I mentioned in another comment was at the end of one of the lord of the rings trailers:

https://youtu.be/V75dMMIW2B4?t=143

I have no idea how popular they ever were, but I'm sure there's a large segment of people that find it easier to remember and to type in "Lord of the Rings" into their computer than "www.lordoftherings.net".

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#116

Post by kergonath »

brianush1 wrote: post #67
kergonath wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The premise “browsers are as powerful as OSes” is dubious. “Why do you need OSes” is something I would expect from someone who does not know how a computer works. Whilst they should probably be tweaked, address bars are central to the web as it is currently. Google should stay as far as possible from me and has no business telling me it approves of the sites I am browsing. I did not downvote the post, but there is no…

I understood the "Why do you need OSes" as "Why would you use Windows when you can use ChromeOS, since the only thing you'll ever need to open is Chrome" And all of these opinions are obviously not held by the poster but are rather what the poster believes Google wants.

If it is sarcasm, it’s not great. These exact points are commonly made by people who clearly take them seriously. These people are obnoxious enough, there’s no need to reproduce their talking points.

My experience is that as much as some geeks love to go on about web apps, real people still do more than browse the web on their computers.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#117

Post by mkr-hn »

avasthe wrote: post #100
filleduchaos wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, I know the 95% out there who don't even know what a browser is but only know Chrome's icon gives access to the web won't understand any of this I find it fascinating how some people in tech bubbles think everyone else is a stupid sheep who can't possibly understand such incredibly complex concepts like what a "browser" is.

Depends. I have seen a lot of people who don't understand such things. And I have seen teachers who think using a different editor to write a program might affect output.

This expectation probably comes from seeing how even Word->Word can break things. It's reasonable to try and develop a heuristic from that.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#118

Post by MockObject »

avasthe wrote: post #76
khaledh wrote: post #12

IMO this is the real reason why they're pushing hard towards this: However, it's also worth considering that making the web address less important, as this feature does, benefits Google as a company. Google's goal with Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) and similar technologies is to keep users on Google-hosted content as much as possible, and Chrome for Android already modifies the address bar on AMP pages to hide that…

It need not be malice. It maybe because the design people think people are too stupid to understand URLs. As other comment mentioned, Safari does it too. The trend seems to be abstracting away stuff like filesystem. Many people I know don't even organize stuff into folders on their phones. Everyone seems to dump everything in Download or something like that. The existence of separate applications for Music, Video and…

> It maybe because the design people think people are too stupid to understand URLs

You may be right, but it's hard to see why this would be a concern in 2020. The number of users who have actually grown up with URLs in their childhood increases all the time.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#119

Post by rimliu »

d99kris wrote: post #66
khaledh wrote: post #12

IMO this is the real reason why they're pushing hard towards this: However, it's also worth considering that making the web address less important, as this feature does, benefits Google as a company. Google's goal with Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) and similar technologies is to keep users on Google-hosted content as much as possible, and Chrome for Android already modifies the address bar on AMP pages to hide that…

To play the devil's advocate, Apple's Safari has been hiding full addresses for quite a while, without having any direct benefit as a company as far as I know.

hmm, the only thing it hides for me is the protocol, and that one is easy understand: a padlock shown: https. "Not Secure":http.

Re: Google resumes its attack on the URL bar, hides full addresses on Chrome 86

#120

Post by lern_too_spel »

achn wrote: post #46
daveed wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, depends who you mean by people? I'm pretty happy to go to amp sites. The thing I care about is the content.

Then you've not used many AMP sites - many do not function properly and try to 'stream' the content as you scroll leading to a garbage experience and missing content.

I have never had that experience. Maybe there's something wrong with your browser.
Post reply on HN