Fun times ahead for Chrome users

[moonbat]

From here:

Google plans to show a banner to Chrome users who run Manifest V2 extensions in their browser. This starts on June 3 for development editions -- Beta, Dev, and Canary -- of the browser.

Manifest V2 extensions that have the Feature badge will lose that badge on that day.

The extensions management page in Chrome lists the soon-unsupported extensions. It provides a link to read up on the change and "find alternative" buttons next to each extension.

Then, in the months that follow, Manifest V2 extensions will be disabled automatically by Chrome. Google says that users may enable the extensions again for a short period of time. This option will be removed eventually, leaving users with no option to re-enable their extensions.

[Night Wing]

Talk about Google "shooting itself in both feet". I think a goodly amount of Chrome users will be kicking Chrome to the curb and switching to other browsers. If this does happen, Chrome is going to experience their own "Bud Light" treatment.

I'm glad I never got on the "Chrome Bandwagon".

[Pentium4User]

I don't think many users will abandon it.
They accept that Google dictates them what to do.

[moonbat]

I think a goodly amount of Chrome users will be kicking Chrome to the curb and switching to other browsers

What other browsers? Every browser today is just a wrapper around Chrome's engine, and Firefox will also probably follow suit eventually as always.

[Night Wing]

I don't think many users will abandon it.

I'm am going to disagree with you on this one and be the "odd man out".

In that article, the one extension that will be affected is uBlock Origin. Google hates uBlock Origin. Even if there is a "uBlock Origin Lite" for Chrome, how many users will put up with being forced to watch or see irrelevant ads that Google wants them to see on Google's behalf. If I was a Chrome user, I would not put up with that.

As an analogy, I will use myself.

When Microsoft released Windows 8 in October of 2012, I absolutely hated it when I first saw it at the computer shop where I volunteer at. I decided I would never use Windows 8. I decided to seek out Linux by experimenting with different linux distros until I found one I really liked which turned out to be Linux Mint with the Xfce desktop environment in January of 2013.

For what I need in an operating system, Linux meets my "needs, likes and wants" which means I have no use for any Microsoft operating system ever again. In essence, Microsoft lost me permanently as a user. Not all Chrome users are "sheep" with a ring in their nose. Some are like me. A "wolf" which Google cannot control.

If I can kick Microsoft to the curb, I think there will be other Chrome users with my mind set which will not put up with Google's direction with regards to Chrome and kick Chrome to the curb.

In closing, sometimes the grass is actually greener on the other side of the fence. One just has to have the determination to "jump over that fence" and never come back.

[Night Wing]

I think a goodly amount of Chrome users will be kicking Chrome to the curb and switching to other browsers

What other browsers? Every browser today is just a wrapper around Chrome's engine, and Firefox will also probably follow suit eventually as always.

Looks like I am going to have to disagree with you as well like I did with Pentium4User.

As far as I know the four big alternative players with respect to Chrome are Firefox, Waterfox, Vivaldi and Brave. You assume other browsers will blissfully and willingly follow with Google's direction with Chrome. It could happen. It may happen. But it may not happen.

Brave has it's own built in adblocker. Wasn't the guy who is the main man at Brave now, wasn't he the same person who was forced out at Mozilla/Firefox? I think that person is Brendan Eich. If I am correct, I do not think he will follow Google's lead with Chrome.

Conversely, Mitchell Baker was the woman at Mozilla who was guiding or should I say "wrecking" Firefox under her so called "leadership". Baker is no longer the top dog at Mozilla. I think there is another woman now running Mozilla. She might think this is her chance to make a name for herself and not follow Google's decision with respect to Chrome.

At Waterfox, I do not think Alex is going to follow Google's lead with Chrome either. And whoever is running Vivaldi, I think they will think long and hard with regards to following Chrome.

All four browsers above have a good chance of picking up more users by not going the Chrome route which means more market share if their gamble pays off. If I was them, I would stand my ground and not follow in Chrome's footsteps and see what happens.

As an analogy, a single 100 pound chimpanzee cannot take down an 800 pound gorilla. But a pack of 100 pound chimpanzees can and will do serious harm to an 800 pound gorilla. No different than a 120 pound wolf cannot take down a single 1200 pound moose by itself. But a pack of wolves can and will take down a single lone moose.

Many years back there was a user on here who told me in a public post Windows 8 was a fantastic operating system when it came out in October of 2012. He loved it. I told him in a public post I thought Windows 8 was a POS operating system. I also told him there was no sense to argue the point about our respective views when it came to Windows 8.

I told him the marketplace will have the final say so and when the marketplace had it's say, the marketplace said Windows 8 was a POS operating system and this is why in October of 2013, Window 8.1 came out.

The marketplace will have the final say so about Google's direction with Chrome with respect to other browsers. Chrome will either pick up more users and marketshare or it will lose users and marketshare.

[Pentium4User]

I think about 10% of users at all are willing to change their software when the produces changes something they don't like.
The others are most likely continuing to use it.

Remember how many people complained about Windows 10 at the beginning and how many are still using that OS when they were forced to abandon Windows 7?

Same applied for IE in the past and I assume it will apply for Chromium-based stuff too.

Forks will exist, but the user base will be low.
Just ask how many people know Waterfox, Pale Moon etc.

Ads are not that annoying for so many people (they accept them instead of changing to other products).

[suzyne]

From what I have read, (because I have never installed or used it because I am not interested in their BAT or crypto) the Brave ad blocker is a good as uBlock Origin, and being built-in does not rely on what extensions v2 or v3 or whatever are supported.

So for the users who use ad blockers and are interested or willing to make a change but prefer a Chrome like experience instead of Firefox, Google's decision could be a real win for the Brave community?

[Potkeny]

the Brave ad blocker is a good as uBlock Origin, and being built-in does not rely on what extensions v2 or v3 or whatever are supported.

Vivaldi has a built-in adblocker which in their communication will not be impacted either, how effective that will be I don't know, but might be "good enough" for a backup (chrome) browser.

[Night Wing]

Remember how many people complained about Windows 10 at the beginning and how many are still using that OS when they were forced to abandon Windows 7?

Same applied for IE in the past and I assume it will apply for Chromium-based stuff too.

Forks will exist, but the user base will be low.
Just ask how many people know Waterfox, Pale Moon etc.

Ads are not that annoying for so many people (they accept them instead of changing to other products).

When Windows 7 reached it EOL in January of 2020, at the computer shop where I help out, many people came in and the one BIG gripe about Windows 10 was the "automatic updates". Many of these users had bad experiences with the updates from Microsoft with regards to Windows 7 which included audio sound not working, wifi not working, graphics not working, etc. They wanted no part of Windows 10's automatic updates.

They asked the shop owner if there was another operating system besides (Apple) OS. The owner mentioned Linux. Some of these people had heard of Linux while others had not heard of Linux. The ones who had heard of linux had been told by Windows fan boys Linux was "all command line".

The owner told them some linux distros are command line heavy with Arch linux being one of them. But he said there were other distros where the command line (Terminal) was heardly used. Then he mentioned "me" where I was not a power user in Linux and had been using Linux since January of 2013.

The owner called me out from the back room where I usually work and told me to help these people out who wanted to know about Linux. He also told me to explain it to them in easy to understand plain english and not power user techno babble.

At the shop I have two computers running Linux Mint. One is a desktop tower computer and the other is a 15" laptop. I sit down with them at either the tower or the laptop which ever the customer is used to using computer wise.

Both computers have my bookmarks on the Bookmarks Toolbar. I show them how to use Libre Office, show them my music library, show them my pictures library, show them my emails in Hotmail, show them anything they want to know about. And when they ask what anti-virus program I use, I tell them I use no anti-virus program. That astounds them. All told, it takes me about two hours of time which I do not charge them for.

We keep records and of the people I school in Linux in the demo phase, 80% come back and we either load a linux distro on their present computer or they buy a brand new computer which we wipe Windows 10 off of it and put a linux distro of their choice which is usually Mint in Xfce on it. We use Mint because it is so easy to learn and configure coming from Windows. Also, keep in mind I live in a small rural town in southeast Texas.

Back in 1998, I think the Windows operating system had around a 98% marketshare. Fast forward today and depending on the articles you can now search for and read online, the Windows operating system has between a 62%-69% marketshare". That is a big drop in 26 years. So those Windows users went to a different operating system.

As for your contention ads are "not that annoying", that is not what we hear when customers come into the shop and they want these ads on their computers................"KILLED OFF". And they want it done...........NOW! So we get rid of the ads.

As for other browsers these customers do not know about, we tell them the names of the other browsers like; Firefox, Waterfox, Vivaldi, Brave, Pale Moon, Opera and even (UGH!) Edge.

As we say in a small rural town, "There is more than one way to skin a squirrel" if you get my drift.

[suzyne]

Vivaldi has a built-in adblocker which in their communication will not be impacted either, how effective that will be I don't know, but might be "good enough" for a backup (chrome) browser.

Vivaldi does look like a better option than Brave for people who want to stay with Chromium. I have read some things about the Basic Attention Token that makes the Brave company and browser look shady and deceitful?

If Vivaldi (or any browser) does let a few ads through, it's not like the complete destruction of an acceptable browsing experience. I actually don't care that much about blocking every single ad.

[vannilla]

The real problem with WWW ads is that they are malware.
If they were just a static image without any code running in the background or when you interact with them, there would be no need to even create adblockers (not really, but you get my point).
Ads as part of a video's source stream I suppose can be something more dynamic, like ads in TV normally are, as long as they don't do anything shady either.

[suzyne]

The real problem with WWW ads is that they are malware.

Before coming to Pale Moon, not much more than a year ago, I was a Chrome user for many years without an ad blocker. During that time, I never had any indication or evidence that either of my laptops ever got infected by unwanted programs from a visited website.

So what do you mean when equating website ads with "malware" because my personal experience suggests you must be using the word differently from what I understand it to normally mean? Otherwise, I must have been exceptionally lucky, or atypical in my browsing habits.

[moonbat]

Regarding Brave, the BAT tokens are entirely opt-in and the feature is disabled by default. The built in adblocker is a toy compared to uBO, it has nowhere the kind of capabilities like being able to click and create cosmetic filtering rules. I don't expect Vivaldi or other browsers to be any better.

Brave has it's own built in adblocker. Wasn't the guy who is the main man at Brave now, wasn't he the same person who was forced out at Mozilla/Firefox? I think that person is Brendan Eich. If I am correct, I do not think he will follow Google's lead with Chrome.

Like I said - all these browsers are a wrapper around Chrome's Blink engine, which is where the Javascript and CSS APIs available to web pages and extensions reside. Whatever they try to implement to get around the imposed limitations is only going to be a kludge and they will have to keep up with Google's demented pace of rabid releases. It's not upto Eich or anyone else to offer better adblocking functionality than what Blink mandates going forward.
And regarding Mozilla, their ship sailed long ago. They fired a huge chunk of their engineers, losing institutional knowledge in the process, and don't expect Baker's successor to do anything to reverse the decline even assuming s/he wants to.

At this point Pale Moon is the only browser in control of its destiny, having chosen a truly independent path with the Goanna platform.

[suzyne]

At this point Pale Moon is the only browser in control of its destiny, having chosen a truly independent path with the Goanna platform.

Does any browser based on WebKit, like Safari or Otter, count as having control of it's destiny?

[moonbat]

I guess they're as independent as Pale Moon, given Webkit isn't anywhere as dominant as Blink.

[Night Wing]

Regarding Brave, the BAT tokens are entirely opt-in and the feature is disabled by default. The built in adblocker is a toy compared to uBO, it has nowhere the kind of capabilities like being able to click and create cosmetic filtering rules. I don't expect Vivaldi or other browsers to be any better.

Brave has it's own built in adblocker. Wasn't the guy who is the main man at Brave now, wasn't he the same person who was forced out at Mozilla/Firefox? I think that person is Brendan Eich. If I am correct, I do not think he will follow Google's lead with Chrome.

Like I said - all these browsers are a wrapper around Chrome's Blink engine, which is where the Javascript and CSS APIs available to web pages and extensions reside.

With your line of thinking, all of those other browsers will have no choice but to fall in line and follow Chrome's lead. But they do have a choice if they truly do not like what Chrome has been doing for many years now. There are standards, but Google does not follow standards because it is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Google expects others to put a ring in their nose and follow what Google wants.

It just depends on how much backbone they have to buck Chrome. In other words, what if a few of them or all of them decide to choose another engine besides Blink. When people really get fed up with something, they will not blindly follow along anymore. The "last straw syndrome".

As an analogy, I will use myself as an example.

You were not around here when linux Pale Moon was first released back in January of 2014. Those on this Forum for Pale Moon using linux Pale Moon, I would guess the vast majority of them "install" linux Pale Moon in the distro of their choice.

But not me. I'm not a fan of the linux Terminal when it comes to installing things in linux distros. If one wants to use linux Pale Moon for the "first time", they will have to use the Terminal to install it in a linux distro. If there "is" an alternative way to do things, I will eventually find that way.

I might be the only one on this site who does "not" install linux Pale Moon in any of the distros I have played around with since January of 2014. Because of my dislike for the Terminal, I've learned how by using the Image File in Pale Moon, to make the Pale Moon launcher icon and the path to it to launch Pale Moon by using gui windows.

I'm not the type of person who "runs with pack". I'm one of those who chooses my own path based on what I need, want and like. And I learned that on my own when I was a young child.........not to be a follower and/or not blindly following along to get along.

[moonbat]

With your line of thinking, all of those other browsers will have no choice but to fall in line and follow Chrome's lead.

Correct. They don't have a rendering engine of their own.

There are standards, but Google does not follow standards because it is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Google expects others to put a ring in their nose and follow what Google wants.

Wrong - Google totally owns the standards board and the standards are whatever they decide they are, not something separate. What you describe is Internet Explorer in the late 90s, Microsoft was the one that chose to ignore the standards of the day. Google simply pushes a new draft feature into Chrome (given their long term goal seems to be turning Chrome into a web operating system rather than a browser) and then pushes it into the so called 'living' standard.

It just depends on how much backbone they have to buck Chrome. In other words, what if a few of them or all of them decide to choose another engine besides Blink.

What other engine? Blink, Webkit, Gecko and Goanna are the only ones on the market and one does not simply jump from one to another. Microsoft ditched their engine used in Edge originally, as did Opera, and both of them now use Blink. Given the bloat added to the standards again thanks to Google, these companies simply don't want to devote the resources playing a game of catch up to Chrome, and Google having destroyed the very concept of a standard (how can it be one if it changes every few weeks?) means that every browser implements whatever they consider important, while web frameworks will always build to the latest Chrome canary running draft specs ensuring that websites built on them break with any other browser.

As an analogy, I will use myself as an example.

While your approach is commendable, it unfortunately doesn't map to how these companies work. Unless and until any antitrust case against Google focuses on how they've turned the web standards into a farce by leveraging their browser engine monopoly, nothing is going to change for the better.

[vannilla]

During that time, I never had any indication or evidence that either of my laptops ever got infected by unwanted programs from a visited website.

Malware is any piece of software with the purpose of damaging the user. Collecting information without at least informing the user can be damaging and it is when this information is sold for the sake of turning a profit. Other names like "spyware" are merely sub-categories of the more generic "malware" classification.
Web ads, at least the banner ones you commonly see outside of video streams, are not just an image or an animation, they run actual programs whenever they are loaded and these programs are usually malware in one way or another.

[UCyborg]

Supermium has the ambition to keep Manifest V2 when it's dropped upstream.

http://win32subsystem.live/supermium/
https://github.com/win32ss/supermium