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

Chrome browser for businesses

enterprise.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 282 posts

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#271

Post by beagle3 »

rsync wrote: post #264
beagle3 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of https://firejail.wordpress.com/ ? Sounds like it's what you are looking for (or is there a reason it does not satisfy your requirements?)

Thank you - I was not aware of firejail. It appears that this does the things I am looking for - however, I am suspicious - why do we need a new project like this rather than a simple recipe for the existing jail or chroot system calls ? What is it that makes something like firejail necessary ?

I've run it only once, and I don't really know, but I was under the impression it just took care of setting up bpf syscall filters and namespaces to provide least privilege - which, given neither X not e.g. Firefox was designed to be sandbox, is more complicated than one would expect.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#272

Post by tedmiston »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #247
runeks wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome doesn't have enough market share for any sensible developer to behave like this.

I thought Chrome had over 50% of the market share? https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx

That's true but in part because Safari isn't available on Windows anymore (and never was on Linux).

Chrome is still dominant but way less so when you filter down to only OS X users. This is especially true if you filter down to only the US where Macs are more popular than worldwide.

Unfortunately it seems like both that site and StatCounter require a payment to view browser percentage by platform. This info is out there for free somewhere.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#273

Post by twblalock »

epalmer wrote: post #258
mattwoodnyc wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you, I'm always interested in seeing browser metrics in other industries. I'm assuming safari is so high due to your higher-ed audience.

We have a lot of Mac users in the student body. More than 60%. Also iOS users.

I bet the majority of your Safari numbers come from iOS users. A lot of Mac users ignore Safari and use Chrome.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#274

Post by raarts »

illumin8 wrote: post #179
riprowan wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dev stops. That's reality. If you hand-wave it away, your tellers go down, and you, the CIO, lose your job. Not all software is under your direct control. Once business processes achieve a stable working state, it is imperative that they maintain uptime, sometimes in excess of six-sigma uptime. Imagine your business is NASA. Are you going to let mission systems auto-update 18 secs before launch?

The dirty truth is that every piece of software or infrastructure you deploy immediately becomes "technical debt," and you know the thing about debt is that it charges interest. You can choose to neglect paying on your debt for some period of time, but it always comes back, more expensive, later. Case in point: the IT leaders that refused to upgrade from Windows XP and Server 2003 are now paying astronomical prices f…

The prices charged for extended support are high but not astronomical and I don't think you answered the question on NASA.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#275

Post by raarts »

tomelders wrote: post #170
riprowan wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dev stops. That's reality. If you hand-wave it away, your tellers go down, and you, the CIO, lose your job. Not all software is under your direct control. Once business processes achieve a stable working state, it is imperative that they maintain uptime, sometimes in excess of six-sigma uptime. Imagine your business is NASA. Are you going to let mission systems auto-update 18 secs before launch?

I think we can all agree that NASA is a special case. Also, is it 100% true that they dont update software on actuve systems mid mission? What if they discover a critical bug?

NASA is not a special case. What about medical equipment, weapons , oil industry, stock trading, I bet other people here can think of more examples.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#276

Post by mSparks »

dang wrote: post #173
iampherocity wrote: post #172

My apologies.

Comments like this will get your account banned from HN. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13277020 and marked it off-topic.

please take your life somewhere else.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#277

Post by groovy2shoes »

qwertyuiop924 wrote: post #270
fanf2 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's have a look at maintenance activity on wc, shall we? https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/usr.bin/wc/wc.c?view=lo... http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/log/src/wc.c

BSD wc hasn't been touched in a year. GNU wc's recent patches were either the addition of features, or bugfixes for what seem to be relatively new features. Or optimization. But you could pull in wc from V7 on modern computers, and it would still work . (assuming GCC can still compile K&R C).

Yup. Likewise, the version of `wc` from Kernighan & Plaugher's «Software Tools in Pascal» still compiles and runs with any ol' ISO Pascal compiler, and still does exactly what the manpage says it does.

As an aside, I'm pretty sure K&R C is a subset of ANSI C, so any ANSI C compiler should be able to compile K&R C.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#278

Post by qwertyuiop924 »

groovy2shoes wrote: post #277
qwertyuiop924 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BSD wc hasn't been touched in a year. GNU wc's recent patches were either the addition of features, or bugfixes for what seem to be relatively new features. Or optimization. But you could pull in wc from V7 on modern computers, and it would still work . (assuming GCC can still compile K&R C).

Yup. Likewise, the version of `wc` from Kernighan & Plaugher's «Software Tools in Pascal» still compiles and runs with any ol' ISO Pascal compiler, and still does exactly what the manpage says it does. As an aside, I'm pretty sure K&R C is a subset of ANSI C, so any ANSI C compiler should be able to compile K&R C.

>pretty sure K&R C is a subset of ANSI C,

Not so, AFAICT. For one thing, K&R function declarations looked like this:

  int main(argc, argv)
  int argc, char **argv
  {
  ...
  }
Ever wonder where 1TBS came from?

Also, in K&R, function prototypes didn't list args.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#279

Post by groovy2shoes »

qwertyuiop924 wrote: post #278
groovy2shoes wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Likewise, the version of `wc` from Kernighan & Plaugher's «Software Tools in Pascal» still compiles and runs with any ol' ISO Pascal compiler, and still does exactly what the manpage says it does. As an aside, I'm pretty sure K&R C is a subset of ANSI C, so any ANSI C compiler should be able to compile K&R C.

>pretty sure K&R C is a subset of ANSI C, Not so, AFAICT. For one thing, K&R function declarations looked like this: int main(argc, argv) int argc, char **argv { ... } Ever wonder where 1TBS came from? Also, in K&R, function prototypes didn't list args.

Yes, function declarations did look like that. And GCC accepts it totally silently in pedantic ANSI C mode, not even warnings:

    11:44:57 cory@tizona /home/cory/Workspace/test
    $ cat knr.c
    #include 
    
    main(argc, argv)
            int argc;
            char **argv;
    {
            int z = foo(3, 4);
            printf("foo is %d\n", z);
    }
    
    foo(x, y)
    {
            return x + y;
    }
    
    
    11:44:59 cory@tizona /home/cory/Workspace/test
    $ gcc -std=c89 -pedantic -o knr knr.c
    
    11:45:07 cory@tizona /home/cory/Workspace/test
    $ ./knr
    foo is 7
    
    11:45:11 cory@tizona /home/cory/Workspace/test
    $ gcc -v
    Reading specs from /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-slackware-linux/5.3.0/specs
    COLLECT_GCC=gcc
    COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-slackware-linux/5.3.0/lto-wrapper
    Target: x86_64-slackware-linux
    Configured with: ../gcc-5.3.0/configure [...]
    Thread model: posix
    gcc version 5.3.0 (GCC)
I seem to recall the compatibility was deliberate on the part of the ANSI C WG, for hopefully obvious reasons.

Re: Chrome browser for businesses

#280

Post by leokennis »

cvburgess wrote: post #248
reitanqild wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Firefox there is (was?) IETab which lets you open websites in IE tabs inside Firefox. I think there was even an option to specify that certain websites (e.g. the Intranet, certain banks) should always open in IETab. Haven't used it for years but back when I was a Windows sysadmin it was the final proof that FF was better than IE: in addition to being Firefox it could also be IE : )

After a quick search, it looks like this may still be a thing for Chrome? https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ie-tab/hehijbfgiek...

I use it daily and it works great.
Post reply on HN