"Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable" • Hacker News Board

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#381

Post by chii » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:03 AM UTC

pyre wrote: post #253

chlorion wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, the MV3 version requires zero permissions and in theory should be faster. These are real benefits that for some reason nobody will admit exist. Saying anything positive about MV3 or the lite extension seems to get you downvoted without explanation though, which is a nice example of how absurd this site is when it comes to anything related to Google. Sometimes I think downvoting should require leaving a comment a…

Sounds like the real issue is "we are replacing X with Y" and there are use-cases for both X and Y to co-exist.

and just conveniently, X has some features that the owning company doesn't like as it is antithesis to their business model. Therefore, by replacing X with Y, and touting some performance improvements (which is real, but marginal), they get to remove X with plausible deniability.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#382

Post by chii » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:07 AM UTC

endgame wrote: post #372

ragnese wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but we saw this coming a mile away (as in, people have been saying this about Chrome for about a decade). People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. But, everyone did, and this is what we get for it. We now have proprietary DRM built in to the web standards, and all kinds of other bullshit, because a bunch of people decided to not learn any lessons…

I criticise Mozilla in tech circles, I recommend Firefox and a working adblocker to friends and family, and I donate to Ladybird. What else should I be doing?

unfortunately, there's not much else you get to do. With the exception of the anti-trust suits on google coming out with a decent outcome (which i wouldn't hold my breath for), there's little that individuals can do to push back against google's might.

If you're in a position of power in a corporation to dictate software usage, consider making firefox the default choice.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#383

Post by eviks » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:20 AM UTC

TexanFeller wrote: post #379

eviks wrote: post #378

If only Mozilla hadn't wasted all that time and money and created a Chrome-comparable in stability/performance and Vivaldi-comparable in customization, we could've have an easy way out of this current mess... (v3 drops not only ad-blockers but also user style managers, so a significant degradation of the web interfaces)

I daily drive Firefox. I haven't found a single website in years that's made me open Chrome. There's nothing slow about Firefox.

I don't daily drive because I have found them, plenty of other people complain about this to make this not unique

(though I'd eat that up for more ergonomic general use enabled by customizations)

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#384

Post by rootsu » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:20 AM UTC

askvictor wrote: post #376

QuantumGood wrote: post #222

"browsers using the ExtensionManifestV2Availability policy will be exempt from any browser changes until June 2025" To extend ManifestV2 in Chrome, add the text below to a text file, saving and running it as a .reg will create and add a value of 2 to "ExtensionManifestV2Availability" in the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Google\Chrome key (When you open/run a .reg file, it updates your registry, usually preceed…

What about Linux and Mac?

Link for Mac command

https://old.reddit.com/r/chrome/comments/1d799pa/tutorial_on...

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#385

Post by aydyn » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:34 AM UTC

andmalc wrote: post #323

bambax wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But... what could possibly be the point of using a chromium based browser that is not Chrome, if not for MV2 support?

MS Edge, Arc, and Sidekick have features Chrome doesn't such as split screen, side panels, and vertical tabs. Likewise for Firefox forks such as Zen.

None of those things are anything close to killer features much less reasons to switch. Verticle tabs, seriously?

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#386

Post by icehawk » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:35 AM UTC

Rychard wrote: post #42

sho wrote: post #25

Hopefully this is the inflection point for Chrome. Despite all their made-up "security" reasons, everyone knows this is solely about making adblock less effective. For many users, adblock is what makes chrome bearable - and if they make it unbearable, then those users will leave. Slowly but surely. Google seems much too sure of itself making this change. I hope their arrogance pays off just the same as Microsoft's di…

The widespread adoption of Chrome was largely driven by word of mouth, people like you and I installing it on our friend's/relative's computers and telling them it was safer/faster/better. Nothing stops us from doing the same thing again. I've been recommending Firefox to all my family/friends/colleagues for years (ever since I've seen the writing on the wall for Chrome). While Firefox isn't perfect, it's in a much b…

The adoption of firefox was driven by word of mouth.

I still can't search on google with them trying to shove chrome down my throat

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#387

Post by the_gorilla » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:41 AM UTC

Dalewyn wrote: post #312

r00fus wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People--especially tech nerds--didn't have to switch to the closed source, conflict-of-interest, browser. Do you not remember all the ads promoting chrome? First was chrome-frame IE extension, then came all the ads - then tie-ins where you got Chrome in addition when you really wanted some other app. They pushed it hard because they knew they had no real competitors and could eat up marketshare.

Chrome won because it was more performant (read: only point of interest for Joe Average) and it was modern and cool (read: only point of interest for nerds). Firefox failed because it stagnated on performance and code quality (read: memory leaks for daaaaaaaaays) and ultimately because Mozilla was corrupted by Mitchell Baker and still is to this very day driving away nerds and engineers by the truckload. Lest we forg…

> Chrome won because it was more performant (read: only point of interest for Joe Average)

It's hard to argue chrome won on merit here when they were using their monopoly to actively sabotage users running firefox on the most popular sites.

> YouTube page load is 5x slower in Firefox and Edge than in Chrome because YouTube's Polymer redesign relies on the deprecated Shadow DOM v0 API only implemented in Chrome

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#388

Post by eastbound » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:42 AM UTC

ragnese wrote: post #259

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google made something better than what existed with Chrome, it was obvious it would capture the market significantly especially among more technical people. I don't think the fact that Chrome is (was) better is the question, it's a question of how they got here. Google took tons of money and threw it into Chrome and therefore developed something better. It's better because Google put more money into it than anyone el…

It was only true that Chrome was significantly superior (performance-wise, anyway) for a little while. Firefox had to play catch up and it took several years. It was (mostly) called the "electrolysis" (a.k.a., "e10s") project. It was considered complete by 2018, and had already offered significant performance and stability improvements for years before then. I wouldn't be surprised if Chrome still performs better on…

Imagine browsing the web without an adblock. A single ad can consume 1GB in 5 minutes on my mobile phone. The CPU will be super slow. We often underestimate the loss of performance that ads represent.

Well, that’s going to be Chrome from now on.

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#389

Post by politelemon » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:46 AM UTC

neilv wrote: post #315

Does Mozilla have a PR blitz, to pick up a big chunk of users who have a moment of disruption, and want their full uBlock Origin? It might've been better, had uBlock Origin Lite not happened, but is there still a migration opportunity here, and is Mozilla working it?

They seem to have the opposite going on, they often manage to fumble what little opportunity you'd think they have. Was just thinking of the ubo lite example you mentioned:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41707418

And also recently, their poor engagement/comms around Privacy-Preserving Attribution:

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/improving-online-adverti...

Re: "Begin disabling installed extensions still using Manifest V2 in Chrome stable"

#390

Post by arctek » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:50 AM UTC

I think at this point I'd rather pay for a desktop browser, something with blocking baked in at compile time. It would be such a QoL improvement that it's worth paying a yearly subscription for.