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

Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 249 posts

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#201

Post by vanilla_nut »

StavrosK wrote: post #150
masswerk wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Please downgrade your browser to Google Chrome 52"?

Yes! Why don't you do that? Every other website gives me flak for using Firefox, why are people reluctant to do the same when it's Chrome that doesn't work? "Due to a bug in modern versions of Chrome, this website only works with Firefox, Safari and Chrome 52 or earlier."

Have you ever tried to downgrade a modern browser? Every browser has an auto-update mechanism built in, usually running in a separate process (Google Updater is the Chrome one, iirc) that apparently was installed alongside its respective browser and given permissions to manipulate all of the files belonging to that browser at will. It is exceedingly difficult to remain on an earlier version because these processes are so hard to stop, and most browsers don't even give you the option to ignore automatic updates any more. Even if you do manage to, expect to be harassed every few minutes by popups helpfully offering to update your browser.

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#202

Post by masswerk »

mistercow wrote: post #193
masswerk wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. So it may be related to hardware acceleration (GPU)? Or even processor type (think side channel attack mitigations.)

FWIW, I tried both with and without hardware acceleration on my 2018 MBP, and it worked fine both ways.

It's definitely bound to hardware acceleration: I just tried on an old MacPro (2008) and it stutters with hardware acceleration enabled, but runs smoothly without. Apparently, there are some overoptimistic assumptions about the GPU hardware available.

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#203

Post by endemic »

bduerst wrote: post #189
_r_o_y_ wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open Google or Youtube in Edge an you'll see a huge banner advertising Chrome. That use to happen for practically every other browser.

A company promoting their own products on their own websites is far from being criminal. Amazon.com right now just showed a giant splash for buying an Echoshow on their home page.

The difference is that Google has a near-monopoly in search. Amazon is a behemoth, but there are plenty of alternatives.

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#204

Post by vanilla_nut »

dalbasal wrote: post #45
bad_user wrote: post #5

In the case of Chrome, you can't blame Google. They made a good browser, did some marketing and it got popular. However the current situation is worrisome, because alternative implementations are dying and in the case of the web, diversity is important. Both Opera and Microsoft's Edge are now powered by Chromium. Chromium is a project controlled by Google. Its redeeming quality, in terms of its open source nature, is…

" They made a good browser, did some marketing and it got popular. " They did make a good browser. However, their market share is not down to better browser or "some advertising." They use their other assets (search, youtube, android, docs..) to make chrome the "default" option. It's a dominance breeds dominance cycle... a hallmark of modern monopoly. Chrome wouldn't have gotten anywhere if it wasn't a very good brow…

> Chrome wouldn't have gotten anywhere if it wasn't a very good browser. It is good. But, I don't think it could have been that kind of wipeout without leveraging google's greater web dominance.

Google's marketing for Chrome was (and is) so aggressive that literally every single Google-owned web property asks you to install it for the "best experience." And more often than not, because Googlers never test for other browsers, Chrome does offer the best experience on Google sites. But that doesn't mean it's the best browser experience, which is a totally subjective metric based on an individual's preferences.

Regardless, Google pushed it so hard, bundled it with so much software, and threw it in users faces so much that most non-technical users probably would have ended up with it installed -- probably set to the default browser, because of more nagging -- regardless of Chrome's quality. Even now, as Google makes steps to neuter adblockers, the average user continues to use it. Why? Because they just don't know any better or care. And I can't blame them: it takes immense effort to even use Firefox now because of random sites based on Google tech that break in every other browser. Chrome is certainly the easy way out.

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#205

Post by scarejunba »

repolfx wrote: post #190
scarejunba wrote: post #13

What's the steelman argument for Google withholding Widevine from Samuel Maddock? Electron packaging with Widevine is a thing so this seems unusual. If you are Google and you're the good guy, why are you doing this?

The steelman is that Widevine is a DRM platform; to tell the difference between a browser and a ripper application it needs a lot of knowledge about the context in which it's meant to run, and how to tell the difference between a 'real' Chrome that follows the licensing rules and a fork of Chrome that doesn't. It should have been obvious to Maddock that he wouldn't be allowed to do this: I'm not sure why it's come up…

Cool. Thanks.

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#206

Post by xxs »

afandian wrote: post #59
tenpaiyomi wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a dark pattern though. Potentially poor behavior, sure, but dark pattern, no.

"Complete your antivirus" has a pre-checked tickbox for a totally irrelevant product. And in the process agreeing to a license. That's pretty dark. Maybe as someone with above-average technical ability this looks obvious to you. To a lot of people, it isn't. And this pattern is aimed at fooling the less technically literate.

Agreeing to a license in the EU requires an affirmative action (i.e. pre-ticked checkboxes are automatically a fail to comply)

The requirements to have unticked checkboxes predates GDPR.

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#207

Post by masswerk »

milesokeefe wrote: post #200
masswerk wrote: post #67

Anecdotal observation: A few years ago, I made a video game for an early 1960s computer, the PDP-1, running in an homegrown emulator in web technology. [1] Amazingly, the game runs at 60 frames per second (yes, you could do this with early 1960s tech), and, amazingly, browsers were able to render the emulation, including a rather complex simulation of the dual-phosphor screen, at 60 fps (you could do this in 2016). A…

Do you know what changed in Chrome that caused the slow down?

I had a number of theories (involving arrays newly allocated, where they should have been reused in a managed stack, and extensive heap allocation, clamped array implementation, side channel attack mitigations running wild, etc). However, as it turns out, it's apparently about hardware acceleration (and probably about some overoptimistic assumptions made).

I.e., I just tried on an old MacPro (late 2008) with hardware acceleration disabled (Settings -> Advanced -> System -> Hardware acceleration + restart) and it runs smoothly.

Edit: Just updated the page accordingly. Thanks to everyone who helped in focusing on the matter of hardware acceleration!

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#208

Post by N3cr0ph4g1st »

masswerk wrote: post #67

Anecdotal observation: A few years ago, I made a video game for an early 1960s computer, the PDP-1, running in an homegrown emulator in web technology. [1] Amazingly, the game runs at 60 frames per second (yes, you could do this with early 1960s tech), and, amazingly, browsers were able to render the emulation, including a rather complex simulation of the dual-phosphor screen, at 60 fps (you could do this in 2016). A…

Works for me too windows 10 and chrome beta

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#209

Post by masswerk »

masswerk wrote: post #207
milesokeefe wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know what changed in Chrome that caused the slow down?

I had a number of theories (involving arrays newly allocated, where they should have been reused in a managed stack, and extensive heap allocation, clamped array implementation, side channel attack mitigations running wild, etc). However, as it turns out, it's apparently about hardware acceleration (and probably about some overoptimistic assumptions made). I.e., I just tried on an old MacPro (late 2008) with hardware…

Now we only need some code to opt out of Chrome hardware acceleration on a per-page basis.

Re: Google’s Chrome Becomes Web ‘Gatekeeper’ and Rivals Complain

#210

Post by masswerk »

masswerk wrote: post #67

Anecdotal observation: A few years ago, I made a video game for an early 1960s computer, the PDP-1, running in an homegrown emulator in web technology. [1] Amazingly, the game runs at 60 frames per second (yes, you could do this with early 1960s tech), and, amazingly, browsers were able to render the emulation, including a rather complex simulation of the dual-phosphor screen, at 60 fps (you could do this in 2016). A…

Update: Apparently, the problem is related to hardware acceleration. At least, disabling it works fine for me. The page in question has been updated to include a note on this.

Thanks to everyone who reported their experiences and helped to track down the issue!

On a more general level, the argument about all the eggs and a single basket still stands. (Knowing why a particular basket fails doesn't help the eggs.)

Post reply on HN