The Dark Side of Google Chrome

[lotuseclat79]

The Dark Side of Google Chrome (http://www.conceivablytech.com/8043/business/the-dark-side-of-google-chrome) (2 web pages).

Analysis of Google's motivations and how other browsers fare in comparison.

-- Tom

[Mr.PC]

Thanks!

[Spruce]

Interesting.
Opera is a sleeping giant :lurking:

[mrpink]

-{ Quote: "Interesting.
Opera is a sleeping giant :lurking:" }-

-{ Quote: "while Opera lost half of its share and is now estimated to hold less than 2% of the market." }-

not very likely to wake up soon ;D

[Acadia]

Opera is a darn nice browser but will never become popular unless they simplify it. The average person does not want to bother with the learning process and yes, even though the long time users of Opera may not remember, there really is a learning curve for that bugger. :wacko:

Acadia

[Spooony]

Google love wrapping all your privacy up in a cookie and then echo it out over the internet. If the search engine does that what does the browser do and upto that we dont know about?
http://www.darkreading.com/security/privacy/218800199/index.html

I mean Google=Skynet
Ever used Tor with Google?

[Hungry Man]

Every aspect of Chrome except for flash and the pdf reader are open source.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-communication/


edit: "Chrome may have driven a browser revolution, but there is no denying that it is a tool of corporate interest and profit, in a much more obvious manner than Firefox is."

It then goes on to show that Google's motivations for Chrome are for profit.

OMG A COMPANY WANTS TO PROFIT? lmao no kidding? Same with Firefox (which is heavily funded by google and used to be comprised of mainly Google engineers.)

Basically, if this is the "dark side" of Google I'm not too worried -- a company wanting to make profit by providing the best product is about the least evil thing I can think of.

[Martijn2]

-{ Quote: "Every aspect of Chrome except for flash and the pdf reader are open source.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-communication/


edit: "Chrome may have driven a browser revolution, but there is no denying that it is a tool of corporate interest and profit, in a much more obvious manner than Firefox is."

It then goes on to show that Google's motivations for Chrome are for profit.

OMG A COMPANY WANTS TO PROFIT? lmao no kidding? Same with Firefox (which is heavily funded by google and used to be comprised of mainly Google engineers.)

Basically, if this is the "dark side" of Google I'm not too worried -- a company wanting to make profit by providing the best product is about the least evil thing I can think of." }-

It makes money on the basis of user privacy information, it's your problem if you are not worried about that

[Hungry Man]

No... not at all. You can opt out of adsense/ everything else. Google makes money through advertising, which is something that exists in every browser. This has nothing to do with browser -- adsense is a separate issue and also exists in every browser.

[Kees1958]

-{ Quote: "No... not at all. You can opt out of adsense/ everything else. Google makes money through advertising, which is something that exists in every browser. This has nothing to do with browser - adsense is a separate issue and also exists in every browser." }-

True, also take intoacount that FF stil gets millions of Google to provide the search with google page, evil is a relative statement in that context (beside the fact that chromium is open source as well).

[Nick Rhodes]

-{ Quote: "
OMG A COMPANY WANTS TO PROFIT? lmao no kidding? Same with Firefox (which is heavily funded by google and used to be comprised of mainly Google engineers.)
" }-

Firefox is developed by Mozilla Corporation, all profits go to its owner, the Mozilla Foundation, which is a non-profit.

[Hungry Man]

And it's still heavily funded by Google and, as with every other product, needs some kind of income to continue development.

So... what's your point?

[rdsu]

-{ Quote: "Opera is a darn nice browser but will never become popular unless they simplify it. The average person does not want to bother with the learning process and yes, even though the long time users of Opera may not remember, there really is a learning curve for that bugger. :wacko:

Acadia" }-
Everyone can use Opera like they use Firefox or Chrome.
Where is the learning curve for those that are not interested on other features!?

The problem of Opera was not make their browser free before the Firefox appearance, and don't have a powerful company behind it like Google.

[Noob]

Chrome FTW!! ::)
On a more serious note, when Chrome was first released (I installed it the same day it was released just out of curiosity), it WAS A LOT faster than other browsers. Now the gap is very small but people still love it ;D

[Robin A.]

I began using Chrome eight months ago and uninstalled it today. In recent weeks I became increasingly dissatisfied with it. In v. 14, Flash crashed continuously, and in both 13 and 14 it was frequently necessary to manually reload several times a page to get it fully displayed. In effect, the browser became very slow for me.

Now my default is IE9, which does not show these problems and is fast. I also installed Firefox 5.0, because one financial site I need does not work well with IE9.

[x942]

-{ Quote: "Google love wrapping all your privacy up in a cookie and then echo it out over the internet. If the search engine does that what does the browser do and upto that we dont know about?
http://www.darkreading.com/security/privacy/218800199/index.html

I mean Google=Skynet
Ever used Tor with Google?" }-

I know exactly what you mean! Have you checked out Iron? Its pretty good. I use chromium on linux compiled my self without the google nonsense in there. If you compile your self you also notice HUGE performance improvements. running dev build and loving it.

TOR with google = useless. I use scroogle (all the google results fetched for you over SSL).

I like google and alot of their products but still privacy is key (Why I block cookies and trackers).

[J_L]

I'm surprised there's a financial site like that. Robin A. have you tried Compatibility View?

As for this article, I find it unsurprising.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "I began using Chrome eight months ago and uninstalled it today. In recent weeks I became increasingly dissatisfied with it. In v. 14, Flash crashed continuously, and in both 13 and 14 it was frequently necessary to manually reload several times a page to get it fully displayed. In effect, the browser became very slow for me.

Now my default is IE9, which does not show these problems and is fast. I also installed Firefox 5.0, because one financial site I need does not work well with IE9." }-

So I wasn't the only one with Flash issues in Chrome after all. It drove me nuts, I'd have to clear the data, close the browser, restart it, Flash works, Flash stops, reload page, page doesn't reload, rinse and repeat.

[Hungry Man]

-{ Quote: "I know exactly what you mean! Have you checked out Iron? Its pretty good. I use chromium on linux compiled my self without the google nonsense in there. If you compile your self you also notice HUGE performance improvements. running dev build and loving it.

TOR with google = useless. I use scroogle (all the google results fetched for you over SSL).

I like google and alot of their products but still privacy is key (Why I block cookies and trackers)." }-
lmao

a) You can't get chromium without "google nonsense" because it's written by google.
b) Chrome doesnt' send any of your info to google -- read about it. What that guy was referring to was adsense.
c) https://google.com


@ DW

stop using Chrome 14... don't use a beta version of a browser and expect it to work.

[Spooony]

-{ Quote: "Google basically stores a cookie on the user's computer that can be used to track him or her, he says. And the cookie can be used to identify the IP addresses he or she visits, for instance. Hansen says Google logs that data for anti-distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) purposes.
"If I'm the FBI and I say someone is hackingme at this physical location from this IP, I can issue a subpoena to Google to tell me other IP addresses associated with this," hesays.
Hansen says because the cookie is stored locally and echoed out, the user's IP addresses get logged by Google. That information can be associated with their browsing history. "I'm not saying that browsing history [itself] is stored locally and echoed out," he says.
The bottom line, he says, is that the securityfeatures fall under the guise of providing anti-phishing and anti-malware, but gathering that information is "dangerous," he says. "Those lists are to track you as well as to protect you," he says." }-

Thats not adsense

-{ Quote: "I know exactly what you mean! Have you checked out Iron? Its pretty good. I use chromium on linux compiled my self without the google nonsense in there. If you compile your self you also notice HUGE performance improvements. running dev build and loving it.

TOR with google = useless. I use scroogle (all the google results fetched for you over SSL).

I like google and alot of their products but still privacy is key (Why I block cookies and trackers)." }-
google doenst like it if your cookies is not reachable. The Tor excuse is from Google is the queries and the page rank.
But basically they telling you we are going to annoy you to hell till we get your cookie. We want your machine id.

[dw426]

-{ Quote: "lmao

a) You can't get chromium without "google nonsense" because it's written by google.
b) Chrome doesnt' send any of your info to google -- read about it. What that guy was referring to was adsense.
c) https://google.com


@ DW

stop using Chrome 14... don't use a beta version of a browser and expect it to work." }-

Both 13 and 14 do the same thing, and 13 is all but stable in name, minus the Flash issue.

[allizomeniz]

I like Firefox exactly because it does not have a platform. I guess more people like the all-in-one approach. This might be easier but you pay for it with less flexibility.

I had no idea Chrome forced ads. I can't believe people would put up with this. I knew there was some reason I didn't want it. :)

[m00nbl00d]

Google is abusive, though. I say this, because there are certain situations where they force cookies, when they shouldn't be needed in the first place.

I exposed a situation a week or couple weeks ago. It's about Google Instant service.

I don't use Google Chrome, rather Chromium. Chromium has Google Instant disabled. But, Google has it enabled by default to every Chromium user. >:(

If I were to use Google's search engine, I'd need to allow cookies just for the sake of opting-out from Google Instant. When I should opt-in, if I wanted it.

I don't want it... Why should I opt-out of a lame (for me) service I wasn't even aware of, until very recently? :wacko:

Naughty Google.

[twl845]

-{ Quote: "I like Firefox exactly because it does not have a platform. I guess more people like the all-in-one approach. This might be easier but you pay for it with less flexibility.

I had no idea Chrome forced ads. I can't believe people would put up with this. I knew there was some reason I didn't want it. :)" }-
I have Chrome installed as a second browser, and I don't see AD's. I added the AD Blocker ext. and there's no problem.:)

[vasa1]

-{ Quote: "I have Chrome installed as a second browser, and I don't see AD's. I added the AD Blocker ext. and there's no problem.:)" }-

+1. I think it's a matter of competence. If one is keen on blocking content and using Chrome, there are blockers external to the browser that get the job done. It's just a matter of Googling.

[Robin A.]

-{ Quote: "I'm surprised there's a financial site like that. Robin A. have you tried Compatibility View? " }-

I have tried compatibility mode. It does not work, although the site worked well in IE8. The problem does not affect transactions, but some interactive graphical information.

Normally the problems I get with financial sites are the opposite -- that is, sites do not work with FF or Chrome, but they do with IE (typical problem: I click on an action box, and nothing happens).

[Noob]

Hmmm, you guys are complaining about Chrome yet you are using Beta, Dev and Canary versions? ;D
What can we expect from "Beta" and "Dev" builds ::)

[SirPeterPan]

Didn't like at all. Hardly relevant article.

[x942]

-{ Quote: "lmao

a) You can't get chromium without "google nonsense" because it's written by google.
b) Chrome doesnt' send any of your info to google -- read about it. What that guy was referring to was adsense.
c) https://google.com


@ DW

stop using Chrome 14... don't use a beta version of a browser and expect it to work." }-

Ummm... I never said google sent anything back. That was old news (back when chrome came out and sent a unique ID back). I take out everything "privacy" related making it mimic iron but compiled myself. I also compile it with --safe-plugins and --incognito enabled by default. I only meant compiling ensures you remove anything you don't want - and improves performance. Sorry for the confusion in my post.


Also what does HTTPS://google.com have to do with anything? That solves nothing with TOR issues. Although I use SSL google for all normal browsing ;)