181–190 of 497 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The deal has already been renewed: https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/14/mozilla_google_search...
> our source told us Moz will likely pocket $400m to $450m a year between now and 2023 from the arrangement Why in hell did they lay off MDN, Rust/Servo and Dev Tools teams?
Like, fresh install page points @ google.com. Why not A little browser popup highlighting the parts of the URL and explaining it, with a link + tutorial on how to understand parts of the URL?
Rather than dumbing the interface down, why not inform users so they can use these platforms more effectively?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not the whole story. Plenty of people moved from Firefox to Chrome, because they found Chrome to be the better browser.
Even Microsoft thought that with Edge.
Reason Chromium was chosen was more because they already had a bunch of developer experience with the engine.
That and more importantly it would cause Google to lose some control over Chrome and the web. Now Google can't exactly do further anti-competitor shenanigans like the whole shadowDOM fiasco and youtube. In this case adding random features to chrome, implementing them and causing other browsers to have a bad experience.
That and because edge is as fast as chrome (if not faster), there is less of an incentive to switch to chrome.
Oh and Microsoft is one of the few companies to be able to maintain a hostile fork of chrome and have it competitive. Largely because they have enough resources to match google for Chromium.
This is one of those cases where Microsoft can subtly claw back marketshare by playing the strength of chromium against Google. They wouldn't be able to do the same at all with Gecko/Firefox.
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…
I don't like browsers that do this, its the first thing I turn off in Safari, but how does Apple manage to get away hiding the full path under positive intent, but when Google does it its because they're evil?
I think it's pretty fair to say that the wider population of users aren't very good at determining which part of the URL is the authority, so any change to help with that can only be positive imho.
If you like chromium ecosystem, I suggest trying the Vivaldi browser. https://vivaldi.com It won me over with (1) the ability to split the window into multiple tabs (2) ability to turn any webpage into a side-bar "applet-thingy" -- great for having whatsapp, todoist, always on the side while you switch tabs. It also has plenty of other features aimed at power-users.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not sure why this is being downvoted, this is an accurate albeit sardonic description of what’s happening. People don’t want to visit AMP sites, they want to visit the site that’s the original source for their news, etc...
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…
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The comparison to AOL was my first thought also It doesn't really make sense, though. The AOL thing was always things like "visit AOL keyword lord of the rings" at the end of trailers, and that would take you to the marketing site. If Chrome wanted to do that, in the example gif the keyword wouldn't be just "en.wikipedia.org" for the URL article, it would be something like "wikipedia URL" that would bring you back…
I'd say that it's just as common to hear "google Our Brand" as "www.brand.com" at the end of television adverts now. That's entirely anecdotal, but Google (or other search engines, but basically Google) has been for a long time the way to access sites. I see people every day searching for a brand and clicking rather than appending ".com". It's more convenient. If Google can profit off laziness, they will.
At one time, there were less organizations online but now, almost every single business, large or small, has a web presence over viable domain name scarcity.
As such, discovery service online is a necessity. Google and other search engines fill that void. Now should they completely replace domains? Probably not, at least not yet, but some other addressing scheme needs to exist if we want to be less reliant on services like Google. Personally, I just use other search engines. If I'm not finding results I fall back to Google.
Wow - top posts are conspiracy theories. "The only reason to do this..." "This is a security issue..." Google has millions / billions of users. From a security standpoint the focus should be entirely on the root domain, that is the only really meaningful root of trust. If you are talking about a security issue - the KEY security issue is ANY lack of clarity around root domain. "Showing the full URL may detract from t…
Google's URLs are of course long strings of useless hex/base64 garbage, so it's natural that they want to hide them.