Lol at "subdomain.www.domain.com" displays as "subdomain.domain.com".
Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
471–480 of 919 posts
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#472I'm going to assume there will be no convincing The Team of people whose Wonderful Idea this was. https://www.wired.com/2016/11/googles-chrome-hackers-flip-we...
No more red purses? Give me a break.
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#473Earlier quoted context omitted.
So citibank and NTP will need to change their domain structure. That's okay: those are confusing structures. This is a tradeoff -- continuing to support already-confusing differences is not worth the loss of the ease-of-use gain referenced in the grandparent.
It seems like the Internet is moving more to a "centralized" design where certain actors have decided "well, here's how we're going to do things now, deal with it". The golden age of the Internet is already dead, guys. We're unfortunately over the hump.
EXACTLY!
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#474> This is a dumb change. No part of a domain should be considered "trivial". As an ISP, we often have to go to great lengths to teach users that "www.domain.com" and "domain.com" are two different domains... What ISPs teach their users anymore these days? Why the heck do we want to go back to that? Time for a modicum of historical perspective. If you care about usability this is clearly an improvement. This is part o…
No this is Google (and others) attempting to fix confusion caused by developers making systems that are hard to understand for users. Nothing is stopping developers from redirecting or setting up DNS to make the two domains go to the same place. I personally feel like any negative user experience should be addressed by the developers of the website, not the browser. Meanwhile I'm sure there are people out there who w…
Exactly, thank you!
I think first and foremost the browser should be clear and easy to use for the general user, not an easy to debug frontend for devs, if we do that the browser will be a mess. Devs know where to look to see what the real address is if they get reports of there site not working, and can then fix the issue on their end. It's not like the issue isn't something that you can't change on the server end.
The people who run the sites should do all they can to make the experience as hassle-free as possible. This means no www.domain.com and domain.com going to different places, 99% of users will expect to end up on the same site regardless of where you add the www or not, to them it's the same as adding the htttps or not, it should "just work" regardless what they put in the front on the URL. (of course there will always be some edges cases, but I feel it's worth it for a better end-user experience.
IDK, just my 2c.
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#475Safari already hides "www.". In fact it hides everything except the root-level domain, e.g. " https://www.google.com/about/" shows just "[lock] google.com". Firefox and Opera show the full domain but gray out everything in the entire URL except the root-level domain, so "www." is gray. Just saying, de-emphasizing and hiding parts of the URL is clearly a trend. This isn't just a Google thing.
this is actually the main reason I cannot use Safari. It always boggled my mind that they made this decision. For power users, they never look at the url unless they want information from it, in which case the `www` is valuable. For low tech users, it can lead to straight up incomprehensible issues, like sites not rendering properly (think of a `m.*`). The UI gains are so small, that part of the screen is never reall…
> this is actually the main reason I cannot use Safari.
Then I have good news for you! If you go to Safari's preferences and select the Advanced tab, there's a checkbox called "Show full website address" that disables this behavior and shows the full URL in the search bar.
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#476To be honest, I want to see the actual domain I'm on in the location bar, and not some obscured version of it. In what universe is hiding part of the domain an usability improvement? What does it improve? Confusion? Misinformation? Lack of trust in the location showed by the browser? It's so stupid I had to check the calendar to make sure it's not the 1st of April today. I didn't check it in Chrome though, for fear that some days might have been hidden away as they have been considered trivial.
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#477This is AWESOME! Thank you Chrome!
On a completely unrelated topic, there is a bug I'm noticing: ICANN doesn't allow emojis in TLDs.
What? That's ridiculous-- I can put them in the main part of the domain name along with an enormous number of cute homoglyphs. So why not smileys and homoglyphs in TLDs? If users can deal with smileys in the main domain that tells where the site is, surely they can deal with them in the little extra part that comes at the end. Everything's just .com underneath anyway so what would problem be?
Google has done the work to remove the unsafe part of domains. Now our domains can really shine. So give us more bling to put in there, ICANN! C'mon.
Also-- why not www as tld? I love "biz" and "pizza" as much as anyone, but excuse me they got nuthin on the world wide web. C'mon ICANN give us "www" in the Trailing Little Domain! We're ready for it now! :)
Best, Your Userbase
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#478Earlier quoted context omitted.
this is actually the main reason I cannot use Safari. It always boggled my mind that they made this decision. For power users, they never look at the url unless they want information from it, in which case the `www` is valuable. For low tech users, it can lead to straight up incomprehensible issues, like sites not rendering properly (think of a `m.*`). The UI gains are so small, that part of the screen is never reall…
> this is actually the main reason I cannot use Safari. Then I have good news for you! If you go to Safari's preferences and select the Advanced tab, there's a checkbox called "Show full website address" that disables this behavior and shows the full URL in the search bar.
Unfortunately this is not in Safari for iOS.
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#479> This is a dumb change. No part of a domain should be considered "trivial". As an ISP, we often have to go to great lengths to teach users that "www.domain.com" and "domain.com" are two different domains... What ISPs teach their users anymore these days? Why the heck do we want to go back to that? Time for a modicum of historical perspective. If you care about usability this is clearly an improvement. This is part o…
> If you care about usability this is clearly an improvement. This is part of a long-running industry trend -- Safari does this too -- to improve the usability of the Internet and technology in general. I am genuinely interested in knowing if this is a usability improvement. Citing "Apple does it too" is not convincing to me. It seems to me if URLs are meaningless to you, hiding part of them is meaningless to you so…
The behavior of safari is quite as bad and very confusing. Want to copy the url you see? Nope, you copied https as well.
What you see is not what you get seems counter-intuitive imho.
Re: Chrome 69: “www.” subdomain missing from URL
#480> This is a dumb change. No part of a domain should be considered "trivial". As an ISP, we often have to go to great lengths to teach users that "www.domain.com" and "domain.com" are two different domains... What ISPs teach their users anymore these days? Why the heck do we want to go back to that? Time for a modicum of historical perspective. If you care about usability this is clearly an improvement. This is part o…
Yes, this point is important. We need to get the web/internet as simple as changing channels on a television. That is what the masses are capable of.
So we should have a limited control medium requiring extremely high levels of capital and regulation to provide content in a limited set of locations that can only be consumed by the user?
I suppose this change does get to this exact point since it obfuscates the page location so far as to be totally inaccurate, just as channel numbers obscure the frequencies and data transmission methods do on television.