201–210 of 254 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would introduce yet another set of defaults that developers would then need to inevitably override.
I'd accept that. The user-agent knows better than I do what the user needs. Especially if the user is low-vision, color-sensitive, or whatever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does an ads company which incidentally also provides a browser balance that interest? Another argument for forced Alphabet breakup. Browser in one corp, on its lonesome. Amusingly, Alphabet has given us the number of new companies. 26. Maybe Chrome can be called C, Google search G of course, M for gmail, etc.
>forced Alphabet breakup Who will pay C for browser? A for ads. They will pay only for things they need. Will people (and you?) pay for Chromium browser to compensate its development? It's _expensive_, by the way, to develop that complex project. So I don't really see how G brakeup helps get better browser for free.
Or, gasp!, even a corporate backers at all.
The modern stack is built upon, and relies upon OSS. Even chromium draws code taken from other projects, and also, relies upon a myriad of OSS libraries and toolsets.
And beyond all of that, Firefox exists is an immensely cash flush environment.
There are endless business models, and OSS development models, without business involvement to make a browser.
The world was doing just fine before chromium came onto the scene. Chrome was pushed by Google's search engine, bundled with Chrome books, Android, on TVs, and more.
Chrome is market dominant partially due to Google's aggressive push for market share.
All this said, your fears are unfounded, and currently one of largest threats to our way of life, to freedom, to democracy, is the entire ad ecosystem.
This ecosystem, in its curent form, simply must die. There are no patches, no fixes which involve any data collection on the user, that allow for co-existance with personal freedom and democratic principles.
Ads need to be served with zero knowledge stored and collected about users, and anonomization is meaningless and proven useless.
Whether Google is broken up or not, Chrome will die soon enough, as a personal spy, and a collection device.
Google's best move right now, is to discover profitability, research how to enable it, without data collection.
Because what has happened to Meta is only the start, what is happening to Google and others in the EU, is coming to the rest of the West, and this business model is over. It's done. Finished.
Execs who are not planning for a corporate future without data collection, are poorly managing, and living in the past.
Google's best move is to see where the market will be without data collection, and use its immense power to move there now.
Before it is too late.
I think this does not work well for mobile devices. Spacing and the font size is too large. Hence, a lot of screen space is wasted and the user has to scroll more. Larger font sizes on mobile are usually not a good idea as the device tends to be closer to your eyes anyway. A snippet that could work better in my opinion is the following: html { max-width: 70ch; /* larger spacing on larger screens, very small spacing o…
So? Most people over a particular age cannot focus close-up anyway, so the phone is at arms length or close to it, which requires a larger font size.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does an ads company which incidentally also provides a browser balance that interest? Another argument for forced Alphabet breakup. Browser in one corp, on its lonesome. Amusingly, Alphabet has given us the number of new companies. 26. Maybe Chrome can be called C, Google search G of course, M for gmail, etc.
>forced Alphabet breakup Who will pay C for browser? A for ads. They will pay only for things they need. Will people (and you?) pay for Chromium browser to compensate its development? It's _expensive_, by the way, to develop that complex project. So I don't really see how G brakeup helps get better browser for free.
This sounds like an argument for breaking up Alphabet, not an argument against it.
You're effectively saying that Google is using their resources to give away something really expensive, which means that no competition will ever arise.
It seems like I'm permanently in some sort of dystopian nightmare 'unpopular opinion' group where wasting two thirds of my monitors useful space is the right way about doing things. I have monitors either side of my primary in portrait mode specifically for looking at a bunch of code/text and it still wastes at least half of the useful display area. https://i.imgur.com/Qk7fM35.png If I wanted this, I'd press the read…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
paragraphs are less readable past 90-100 characters width
I hear this a lot, and as a user I simply don’t care. I deliberately bought a giant high resolution monitor that I want to fully use. If I stretch my browser window full screen, I expect your web site’s content to expand to fit. I don’t care what some researcher thinks is “readable”. I wish web developers would stop second guessing the user.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Especially for long blocks of text or becomes easy to go to the wrong line when scanning back to the left side of the page. There exist decades of empirical research on this topic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_length
I can’t think of a source for this so take it as you wish but at some point in history it was attempted to mitigate this by changing the reading direction every other sentence so you’d be able to read in a continuous stream. It failed for obvious reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
paragraphs are less readable past 90-100 characters width
I hear this a lot, and as a user I simply don’t care. I deliberately bought a giant high resolution monitor that I want to fully use. If I stretch my browser window full screen, I expect your web site’s content to expand to fit. I don’t care what some researcher thinks is “readable”. I wish web developers would stop second guessing the user.
It seems like I'm permanently in some sort of dystopian nightmare 'unpopular opinion' group where wasting two thirds of my monitors useful space is the right way about doing things. I have monitors either side of my primary in portrait mode specifically for looking at a bunch of code/text and it still wastes at least half of the useful display area. https://i.imgur.com/Qk7fM35.png If I wanted this, I'd press the read…