This + moving SSL certificate details dialog hidden away into devtools + no way to disable NaCl + chrome 56 auto-re-enabling flash and widevine on every launch (which shows a click-to-enable-flash everywhere chrome55 would just use a html5 video player) + the upcoming background tab throttling means I'll be seriously reconsidering firefox or safari before the next Chrome release :-/
I have actually started using firefox again recently, chrome has lost me due to how hard they (and Google as a company) are trying to push things on to people.
Anyways, I am in love with the nightly build of ff and everyone should honestly give it atleast a week of their time to try it.
The developer edition and the nightly build have some really interesting features for development out of the box and honestly helps make work easier. You do run in to the occasional error or two but for pre-release versions they are seriously stable.
I'm curious why you'd be opposed to throttling background tabs. I could see it being a problem if it interfered with, for example, playback from things like soundcloud, but I'd also consider that a bug. Other than that, it seems like it would be a win in battery life for people on laptops. Maybe there's some use case I'm not thinking of or not aware of though.
Hasn't Safari been doing something like throttling background tabs for a while? I don't really know the details of how Safari and Chrome's new feature compares, but you may be equally unhappy with Safari in that respect.
I'm with you on the other stuff though, I always disable Flash, NaCl and DRM plugins. I also hate the forced Material Design UI. Having a Mac native app look like Android is visually jarring.
I tried switching to Safari, Firefox, and Brave a few months ago because I was unhappy with the direction Chrome was going, but ultimately ended up coming back to Chrome. The big things that brought me back: Safari isn't supported by Privacy Badger. With Brave, it was that if you open a new window and start typing immediately, it would lose the first few keystrokes... though I just downloaded the latest, and that seems to be fixed now. I don't remember off hand what stopped me from using Firefox
This bug is about Chrome 57, not Chromium. Have you actually been manually disabling widevine all along? Because I use Chromium on Arch and I have to manually enable widevine to play Netflix. If you don't like Google's vision of how Chromium should be configured by default, why not just use Chromium in the first place?
Just switch to Firefox. This kind of stuff is why we need plurality in the browser space, and Mozilla is one of the few companies that takes - or has to take - a pro-user stance on many issues.
Honestly? It makes sense and I see nothing wrong with it.
Chrome is Google's opinionated version of Chromium, with the average user in mind.
Everyone else should be using Chromium. There's nothing wrong or lacking in it now that the PDF module has been open sourced. If one wants Flash or Widevine, those can be installed separately.
That's interesting, because Brave has Widevine off by default and includes this notice in the preference UX for enabling it:
---
Google Widevine Support
Google Widevine is a piece of Digital Rights Management (DRM) code that we at Brave Software do not own and cannot inspect. The Google Widevine code is loaded from Google servers, not from our servers. It is loaded only when you enable this option. We discourage the use of DRM, but we respect user choice and acknowledge that some Brave users would like to use services that require it. [info link to https://www.eff.org/issues/drm]
By installing this extension, you are agreeing to the Google Widevine Terms of Use. You agree that Brave is not responsible for any damages or losses in connection with your use of Google Widevine. [info link to https://www.google.com/policies/terms/]
Enable Google Widevine support [button label]
---
You can view this as a DRM mandate canary if you like. It's still in Brave 0.13.0. That's all I have to say for now.
While I understand the content producers / owners stance on DRM, I've never once found a widevine or any other DRM'd show or movie that hasn't been available via piracy. All it seems to do is things like this - degrade the legal users' experience. Even though I have amazon prime and netflix accounts, I still download all of my shows. It's just a better experience.
One question I have is this: are there any examples of cases where DRM on widely distributed media has actually worked?
We are all that boiling frog [1]. Google, and others, introduced a new business tactic that is even been followed by Microsoft (in reverse mode). They push all kind of open source and free stuff and slowly, very slowly, they move to old monopolies tactics. Most locked people will not change to another browser just because they added a new "tiny" portion of code which is not political correct.
Is there a technical reason that this can't simply be disabled with a feature flag like many of Chrome's other features? It would avoid the whole issue.
Also reading this bug report makes me realize this is probably what was going on when I had similar strange issues happen with chrome and tabs and running stuff through HDMI splitters for KVM etc.
There isn't a technical reason it shouldn't be able to be implemented. Mostly it's a matter of getting the UI preference hooked up; it looks like they've already done something similar with the Flash plugin for users which wish to disable Flash, and this is a similar case.
The reality of the Flash situation is quite messy, with a ton of websites relying on nonstandard behavior and checks to see if Flash is even installed, and Google seems to have missed the use case for disabling the plugin entirely, rather than just blocking it. This seems like a similar oversight.
I'm torn here, as I see what Google is trying to accomplish with their settings spread. Mostly, the browser has chosen quite sensible defaults for the bulk of its users that needs the web to JustWork(tm) and they're hesitant to add extra checkboxes to avoid confusing folks. But with the politically charged nature of DRM, as well as the technical issues presented here (HDMI / HDCP is notoriously finnicky and the user should have more control over when it's enabled) I think a checkbox to disable the plugin entirely, similar to Flash, is the best solution.
It's really a question of whether flexibility or UI performance is a higher priority for you. If you want incredible customization options, go to Firefox. If you want Chrome's UI performance, stick to Chromium.
Surprised that this is the straw and it wasn't the hotwording binary that was pulled in to listen for "ok, google" without anyone's knowledge or permission.
Most technical people are vocally opposed to it and don't want to leave a single trace in a single server log contributing to the idea that it is widely accepted and available.
A browser not only implementing DRM, but leaving you no way to disable it is seriously anti-user.
I strongly stand behind the complain vs DRM/forcing HDCP/etc, but:
What's the big deal with background throttling? On a day to day basis, how many scenarios are there where you need a background tab using CPU and doing page updates?
IMHO, it makes sense for background tabs to get throttled to save power, since 99.9% of the times, you don't need the updates (I'd say 100%, but I'm sure there'll be at least ONE counter-example).
I currently use Firefox with JS disabled, for casual browsing, and Min for anything with video or JS https://minbrowser.github.io/min/ - finally, after years, I can use a system with less than 8G of RAM.
This browser is based on Electron - does Electron also bundle this abomination of DRM plugin?
Funny enough in Firefox Widevine was default set to Always Activate on my machine. Not sure how long it's been that way. There was no "ask to activate" option. I was however able to set to "never activate". Let's see how long before this becomes annoying.
Sorry but can someone explain the problem. I'm very familiar with widevine, hls / hlse, and other various DRM type solutions. To me it appears a lot of uninformed answers or something that's completely blown out of proportion. So looking for someone to explain ?
Chrome similarly used to honor the /etc/hosts file, first by default, then via setting. Now it always uses Google's DNS, no workarounds. I cant create localhost aliases for dev VMs nor can I block distracting sites. I've switched back to firefox.
Ironically, this "feature" prevented me from getting good access to Google's own services. I was only getting routed to a saturated Google datacenter (the NUQ range, e.g. nuq04s01-in-f1.1e100.net). When I just blocked all those servers, it detected that and sent me to another range of servers (LAX) that worked much faster... but I used Firefox every time I wanted to open Google Maps because that trick didn't work from Chrome!
Robert O'Callahan said that, but then he left. I wish he had not said it, and so do many other heavy hitters who are or were at Mozilla.
It makes Firefox sound like a pity-f$#k, or a sin tax. At worst, a feel-good gesture that has unintended consequences.
If you like Firefox, use it! If you like Brave, either for the speed and safety of our 3rd party ad/tracker blocking that's on by default; or for the post-browser, user-data-sovereignty economics we're building to sustain; then use Brave. If you like Vivaldi, use it. And so on.
But don't make a cult out of one particular browser. Open source is not an issue. FYI, Brave is all open source.
[+] [-] 0x0|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] malikNF|9 years ago|reply
Anyways, I am in love with the nightly build of ff and everyone should honestly give it atleast a week of their time to try it.
The developer edition and the nightly build have some really interesting features for development out of the box and honestly helps make work easier. You do run in to the occasional error or two but for pre-release versions they are seriously stable.
p.s https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12579163 (Choose Firefox Now, or Later You Won't Get a Choice (2014))
[+] [-] rhubarbquid|9 years ago|reply
Hasn't Safari been doing something like throttling background tabs for a while? I don't really know the details of how Safari and Chrome's new feature compares, but you may be equally unhappy with Safari in that respect.
I'm with you on the other stuff though, I always disable Flash, NaCl and DRM plugins. I also hate the forced Material Design UI. Having a Mac native app look like Android is visually jarring.
I tried switching to Safari, Firefox, and Brave a few months ago because I was unhappy with the direction Chrome was going, but ultimately ended up coming back to Chrome. The big things that brought me back: Safari isn't supported by Privacy Badger. With Brave, it was that if you open a new window and start typing immediately, it would lose the first few keystrokes... though I just downloaded the latest, and that seems to be fixed now. I don't remember off hand what stopped me from using Firefox
[+] [-] slacka|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SunShiranui|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newman314|9 years ago|reply
Does anyone know the rationale for doing so? It's made trying to figure out what the connection is using into a multi-step pain now.
[+] [-] shmerl|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ferbivore|9 years ago|reply
[1]: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=615738...
[+] [-] mixedCase|9 years ago|reply
Chrome is Google's opinionated version of Chromium, with the average user in mind.
Everyone else should be using Chromium. There's nothing wrong or lacking in it now that the PDF module has been open sourced. If one wants Flash or Widevine, those can be installed separately.
[+] [-] BrendanEich|9 years ago|reply
---
Google Widevine Support
Google Widevine is a piece of Digital Rights Management (DRM) code that we at Brave Software do not own and cannot inspect. The Google Widevine code is loaded from Google servers, not from our servers. It is loaded only when you enable this option. We discourage the use of DRM, but we respect user choice and acknowledge that some Brave users would like to use services that require it. [info link to https://www.eff.org/issues/drm]
By installing this extension, you are agreeing to the Google Widevine Terms of Use. You agree that Brave is not responsible for any damages or losses in connection with your use of Google Widevine. [info link to https://www.google.com/policies/terms/]
Enable Google Widevine support [button label]
---
You can view this as a DRM mandate canary if you like. It's still in Brave 0.13.0. That's all I have to say for now.
[+] [-] BrendanEich|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robxu9|9 years ago|reply
Welp.
[+] [-] jjcm|9 years ago|reply
One question I have is this: are there any examples of cases where DRM on widely distributed media has actually worked?
[+] [-] akerro|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ihalip|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wslh|9 years ago|reply
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
[+] [-] superkuh|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bostand|9 years ago|reply
But I don't like having a huge pile of unverified third party code in a browser i never use for content consumption.
[+] [-] asadotzler|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nmjohn|9 years ago|reply
Simply deleting the folder that contains "widevinecdmadapter.plugin" will effectively disable the plugin.
So, for example, on OSX using homebrew to install chrome, it'd be:
[+] [-] Sunset|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] adzm|9 years ago|reply
Also reading this bug report makes me realize this is probably what was going on when I had similar strange issues happen with chrome and tabs and running stuff through HDMI splitters for KVM etc.
[+] [-] zeta0134|9 years ago|reply
The reality of the Flash situation is quite messy, with a ton of websites relying on nonstandard behavior and checks to see if Flash is even installed, and Google seems to have missed the use case for disabling the plugin entirely, rather than just blocking it. This seems like a similar oversight.
I'm torn here, as I see what Google is trying to accomplish with their settings spread. Mostly, the browser has chosen quite sensible defaults for the bulk of its users that needs the web to JustWork(tm) and they're hesitant to add extra checkboxes to avoid confusing folks. But with the politically charged nature of DRM, as well as the technical issues presented here (HDMI / HDCP is notoriously finnicky and the user should have more control over when it's enabled) I think a checkbox to disable the plugin entirely, similar to Flash, is the best solution.
[+] [-] bartvk|9 years ago|reply
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/pinch-to-zoom... for pinch-to-zoom
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/compact-theme... for a theme that makes it look more Safari-like
[+] [-] mtarnovan|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] problems|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joecool1029|9 years ago|reply
Surprised that this is the straw and it wasn't the hotwording binary that was pulled in to listen for "ok, google" without anyone's knowledge or permission.
[+] [-] edoceo|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] murkle|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raldi|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] josteink|9 years ago|reply
Most technical people are vocally opposed to it and don't want to leave a single trace in a single server log contributing to the idea that it is widely accepted and available.
A browser not only implementing DRM, but leaving you no way to disable it is seriously anti-user.
But this is Google, so go figure.
[+] [-] hobarrera|9 years ago|reply
What's the big deal with background throttling? On a day to day basis, how many scenarios are there where you need a background tab using CPU and doing page updates?
IMHO, it makes sense for background tabs to get throttled to save power, since 99.9% of the times, you don't need the updates (I'd say 100%, but I'm sure there'll be at least ONE counter-example).
[+] [-] timonovici|9 years ago|reply
This browser is based on Electron - does Electron also bundle this abomination of DRM plugin?
[+] [-] goslackware|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rabboRubble|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jnky|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] angryasian|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gregw2|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Renevith|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Fej|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BrendanEich|9 years ago|reply
It makes Firefox sound like a pity-f$#k, or a sin tax. At worst, a feel-good gesture that has unintended consequences.
If you like Firefox, use it! If you like Brave, either for the speed and safety of our 3rd party ad/tracker blocking that's on by default; or for the post-browser, user-data-sovereignty economics we're building to sustain; then use Brave. If you like Vivaldi, use it. And so on.
But don't make a cult out of one particular browser. Open source is not an issue. FYI, Brave is all open source.