Android 12 forces you to choose a default browser unless you disable Chrome(old.reddit.com)
old.reddit.com
Android 12 forces you to choose a default browser unless you disable Chrome
https://old.reddit.com/r/GooglePixel/comments/qc02y1/android_12_forces_you_to_choose_a_default_browser/
207 comments
The solution to the Youtube-problem is to use a Youtube-frontend like Invidious [1] in combination with an extension like Privacy Redirect [2] of libredirect [3] so you don't need to touch the Youtube site at all. The same works for things like Twitter and Reddit (which can be redirected to front-ends offering the same content) or Google Maps, Google Search and Google Translate (which get redirected to alternative services). Some of these alternatives - Invidious for Youtube, Nitter for Twitter, libreddit for Reddit - can (but don't have to) be run on your own server, others use established services. This way you get the benefits of accessing content from adversarial services like Twitter and Youtube without having to interface with them directly on any device you use, not just that phone you happened to install some alternative front end like Newpipe on. You can "subscribe" to Youtube channels without telling Google you did so, you can access those subscriptions from anywhere, etc.
Ditch that Youtube app and while you're at it ditch the rest of those Google apps as well. Freedom is just one click away: Are you sure you want to uninstall this app? [OK].
[1] https://github.com/iv-org/invidious
[2] https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect
[3] https://github.com/libredirect/libredirect
Ditch that Youtube app and while you're at it ditch the rest of those Google apps as well. Freedom is just one click away: Are you sure you want to uninstall this app? [OK].
[1] https://github.com/iv-org/invidious
[2] https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect
[3] https://github.com/libredirect/libredirect
Am I the only one who is less likely to pay Google for anything when they pull hi-jinks like this? The more that they change how things work, the more that I want to disable updates and use libre software alternatives. If they were just cool and didn't try to prevent me from having things my way, I'd probably have paid them for a premium app experience.
What are you going to do though?
Apple forces you to use their web browser, any apparently 3rd part web browsers are using apple's actual browser as a plug in.
There are no viable options for smart phones that are not fascist.
There are no viable options for smart phones that are not fascist.
PinePhone + mainline Linux. Obtaining freedom isn't easy - it requires hard work and sacrifice - but it's absolutely possible.
[deleted]
I used invidious for a few weeks. Actually getting the videos once I connected was fine, the issue was that invidious instances were constantly going down and I had to keep searching for a new working instance.
I also use libreddit and teddit and almost never have a problem with those. Are there any equivalent invidious servers?
I also use libreddit and teddit and almost never have a problem with those. Are there any equivalent invidious servers?
Invidious is fairly easy to self-host, see https://docs.invidious.io/Installation/#docker-compose-metho...
I don't believe it's very resource intensive (though the recommendation is at least 3GB of RAM), so you may be able to run it on localhost on your laptop, or you could run it on some cheap VPS.
I don't believe it's very resource intensive (though the recommendation is at least 3GB of RAM), so you may be able to run it on localhost on your laptop, or you could run it on some cheap VPS.
How do I use Privacy Redirect on a mobile browser? I can't seem to install arbitrary browser extensions in Firefox on Graphene, just a little allowlist of a halfdozen "blessed" ones.
In iOS, certain apps can register for certain URL domains and protocols to open the app instead. Maybe Android has something similar and you could leverage that in an app that implements something similar.
This works flawlessly at the moment (currently using the same setup). However it's more of a workaround than a solution - Google could break/throttle all of Invidious at any point if it drives ad revenue down another couple points, just like they recently did to Vanced. The real solution is the hard one - moving away from YT entirely
Invidious is different from Vanced in that Vanced was a mod on top of the main YouTube application, while Invidious is just a different frontend with presumably no infringement of YouTube IP or code or TOS. Now, youtube-dl got the infamous copyright complaint by RIAA because they advertised using it to download copyrighted music[0], so perhaps a stronger case could be made if any code within Invidious used more hidden APIs or otherwise shows using it to watch Standard YouTube License videos without fulfilling the quid pro quo of watching ads.
0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24872911
0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24872911
> because they advertised using it to download copyrighted music
Their unit tests used some music videos, and only because Youtube's website uses different javascript for such videos. It's a stretch to call that advertising, I don't believe I'd ever read the tests code before the complaint.
Their unit tests used some music videos, and only because Youtube's website uses different javascript for such videos. It's a stretch to call that advertising, I don't believe I'd ever read the tests code before the complaint.
YouTube is getting shittier by the year also. Forcing me to watch an ad that takes 5 seconds to even start then after said ad the video freezes and doesn’t even play requiring a page refresh just to watch something. I’m ready for the alternative to arrive.
If you search for a solution, not workaround, consider this: https://joinpeertube.org.
I host a number of Peertube instances next to Invidious. There is a reason for having both of these: Peertube can not access Youtube-hosted material. Thus, to publish your own material use Peertube, to access Youtube-hosted material use something like Invidious.
Seems like an anti-trust lawsuit just waiting to happen if they do.
I don't see anti-trust actions happening in current administration.
Normally the EU is always up for making life complicated for big tech but we are currently... indisposed.
I thought that there was a rather strongly worded memo to the FTC to enforce anti-trust in july of last year.
> just like they recently did to Vanced
What did they do to Vanced? Still works on my phone.
What did they do to Vanced? Still works on my phone.
It still works but it's no longer being worked on nor offered for download.
Discussed recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30663739
Discussed recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30663739
Cease and desist.
Can you clarify what you want to do exactly?
3rd party apps can still register on Youtube URLs, the process just changed a bit. And being affected in my app[1] by this change myself I have to say that this permission-style model is an improvement IMO.
[1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.lambdasoup...
3rd party apps can still register on Youtube URLs, the process just changed a bit. And being affected in my app[1] by this change myself I have to say that this permission-style model is an improvement IMO.
[1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.lambdasoup...
Two things the new system has broken for me:
1. Previously, installing a reddit app meant that it would become the default handler of reddit links. Worst case, I'd be prompted when I opened a reddit link, and I could choose the app I wanted, and say to use it every time or continue prompting.
In Android 12, I have to go to settings and preemptively check a checkbox for every kind of url my reddit app can handle. Worse, every time my reddit app updates, these settings seem to get reset, and I have to go back and fix them.
2. It used to be possible to register an app with a file type. For example, MX Player registers itself with video file types. Firefox even has some special support for this, so if you're on a page with an embedded video, you can long press on the video and select "Open in external app". Prior to Android 12 this would give you a chooser, and you could select an installed video player.
In Android 12, it just takes you straight to the default browser. It is no longer possible to register a default handler by file type.
> I have to say that this permission-style model is an improvement IMO.
What does the new system make better? All it does is remove user choice. If I wanted a walled garden I'd use iOS.
1. Previously, installing a reddit app meant that it would become the default handler of reddit links. Worst case, I'd be prompted when I opened a reddit link, and I could choose the app I wanted, and say to use it every time or continue prompting.
In Android 12, I have to go to settings and preemptively check a checkbox for every kind of url my reddit app can handle. Worse, every time my reddit app updates, these settings seem to get reset, and I have to go back and fix them.
2. It used to be possible to register an app with a file type. For example, MX Player registers itself with video file types. Firefox even has some special support for this, so if you're on a page with an embedded video, you can long press on the video and select "Open in external app". Prior to Android 12 this would give you a chooser, and you could select an installed video player.
In Android 12, it just takes you straight to the default browser. It is no longer possible to register a default handler by file type.
> I have to say that this permission-style model is an improvement IMO.
What does the new system make better? All it does is remove user choice. If I wanted a walled garden I'd use iOS.
Can't you install Newpipe and select that as the default way to open youtube links? (Assuming you don't object to doing that of course.)
This is what I did and it works fine. Newpipe is awesome. On phones & tablets I always disable Chrome and Youtube.
IIRC you can't install Newpipe without enabling side-loaded apps, though. It's not available on the Play Store for obvious reasons.
That's not a bad thing though? F-Droid has some really great apps. Very fast too compared to their data harvesting Google play alternatives.
I mostly use FOSS apps now, their quality has improved a lot in recent years.
I mostly use FOSS apps now, their quality has improved a lot in recent years.
Which apps would you specifically recommend as faster compared to their counterparts?
Geometric Weather, Newpipe ( instead of YouTube), AndOTP (instead of Google or Microsoft authenticator, the latter being 77MB!), RCX (instead of OneDrive or Dropbox etc). Gadgetbridge to interface with my Xiaomi band and Amazfit watch (also not leaking any personal data unlike the official app!)
All apps that don't do any tracking nor ads and as such save a ton of cpu speed and storage. Especially Microsoft apps are really bad lately. Like OneDrive and Outlook. I have to use them for work. After a month or two outlook uses several gigabytes of storage and gets super slow to refresh. I don't use an open source app instead of it, as I couldn't find a great one, sadly. But I use Nine from 9folders which is great and fast. Though I really want to try out FairEmail soon.
Oh and Organic maps Vs Google maps, or OsmAnd. The latter is not faster but its maps are a lot better and the app has a lot more features.
All apps that don't do any tracking nor ads and as such save a ton of cpu speed and storage. Especially Microsoft apps are really bad lately. Like OneDrive and Outlook. I have to use them for work. After a month or two outlook uses several gigabytes of storage and gets super slow to refresh. I don't use an open source app instead of it, as I couldn't find a great one, sadly. But I use Nine from 9folders which is great and fast. Though I really want to try out FairEmail soon.
Oh and Organic maps Vs Google maps, or OsmAnd. The latter is not faster but its maps are a lot better and the app has a lot more features.
[deleted]
That sound like "you can't install Notepad++ without enabling something dangerous on Windows". It's a lock in hurdle that we can thankfully (for now) disable, let's not label it as a bad thing.
Try opening a Google maps link on iOS without Google maps installed. Annoying.
If you need a chrome browser, would using another chrome based browser work?
Are there any instances of this link hijacking crap on iOS as well?
My experience on iOS was that many application specific links were forcing the use of apple's apps, even if you have a third party app installed.
That only applied to the browser, calendar (and maybe the mail app, but I think that was always overridable), but this has changed now so you can choose default apps for all Apple built-ins.
Most Apps seem to implement their own in-app browser (LinkedIn, Apollo) too.
Most Apps seem to implement their own in-app browser (LinkedIn, Apollo) too.
So is the browser stuff fixed then? IIRC, "default browser" was left to individual apps and it was implemented as the app requesting a URI of https:// or chromeHttps:// (or something like that. It was total Apple bullshit.
From my experience, it works well. I’ve set my default browser to Firefox, and links do open in Firefox indeed. Even when I’m in an in-app browser, and there’s a little Safari icon in the lower right corner, when I tap that icon, the link opens in Firefox. So the Safari button does not mean Safari but default browser. Pretty good.
Usual reminder that Firefox in iOS still means "Safari with a Firefox skin". But yes, it's an improvement, after "only" a decade of complaints about a clearly anticompetitive restriction.
isn't that just the JS engine though? And isn't that mostly because native access to the FPU in silicon is not made use of properly in V8?
I remember someone had Chrome working on iOS but it was painfully slow.
Apple has allowed arbitrary code execution before (Pythonista) so it's possible I guess.
You can do your own rendering for sure.
I remember someone had Chrome working on iOS but it was painfully slow.
Apple has allowed arbitrary code execution before (Pythonista) so it's possible I guess.
You can do your own rendering for sure.
> isn't that just the JS engine though?
Mozilla develops the Gecko browser engine, but Firefox on iOS uses the WebKit browser engine provided by the system. If Mozilla were allowed to use Gecko on iOS, they would, trust me.
Mozilla develops the Gecko browser engine, but Firefox on iOS uses the WebKit browser engine provided by the system. If Mozilla were allowed to use Gecko on iOS, they would, trust me.
Arbitrary code execution fell under an "educational" exemption, I think. Also, the app store review process is highly variable based on the reviewer.
I'm not an iOS developer but I bet your paths into the JS engine API depends a lot on the web engine you're using. I know the in-app browser had two flavors of UI component with drastically different capabilities.
I'm not an iOS developer but I bet your paths into the JS engine API depends a lot on the web engine you're using. I know the in-app browser had two flavors of UI component with drastically different capabilities.
Yes, iOS has default settings for http and mailto links as of iOS 14
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211336
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211336
This is a nice time to point out Firefox for Android allows you to install uBlock Origin.
So I'm currently moving to new phone, after 4 years. My Firefox history is essential to me, it is a huge, indispensable and private index for stuff I know. And now it is taken as hostage by the lovely Mozilla foundation, since the only supported way to transfer it to my new phone is by using their syncing service.
I don't want to have account there, nor do I want to create mail account for creating one. Offering users no other choice to get their data is user hostile on a degree akin to Google's level. It boils my blood.
I don't want to have account there, nor do I want to create mail account for creating one. Offering users no other choice to get their data is user hostile on a degree akin to Google's level. It boils my blood.
Firefox history has a limit though and I'm pretty sure you've hit after 4 years of browsing. This is why I maintain my own history index.
Don't even get me started on that unconfigurable limit. Still, there's a very long list that still there. How do you maintain your own index?
I have a custom extension that sends my history to a SQL database (I didn't put much effort in making it easy to use for other people so I honestly wouldn't recommend you use it): https://github.com/null-dev/Historian.
What I would recommend is just making both your history and bookmarks browser agnostic. That way you don't have to worry about limits and you can switch browsers whenever you want. I'm sure there are extensions out there that can sync data between different browsers, I remember looking at xBrowserSync a while ago: https://www.xbrowsersync.org/. I don't know how well it works though as I've never used it.
What I would recommend is just making both your history and bookmarks browser agnostic. That way you don't have to worry about limits and you can switch browsers whenever you want. I'm sure there are extensions out there that can sync data between different browsers, I remember looking at xBrowserSync a while ago: https://www.xbrowsersync.org/. I don't know how well it works though as I've never used it.
If it helps at all, all your Firefox data is encrypted client side before getting uploaded.
Another thing to point out that a lot of long-time Android users (or even iPhone users) don't know: Safari on iOS recently gained browser extension support.
While iOS Safari had a content blocker API and password manager integration, it now has support for full browser extensions that can do more.
Probably the only downside to iOS extensions is that they're more frequently paid, since developers need to have paid Apple development accounts. uBlock Origin itself is not available, but there are alternative content blockers with similar features.
Here are some neat ones: https://www.macrumors.com/guide/ios-15-safari-extensions/
While iOS Safari had a content blocker API and password manager integration, it now has support for full browser extensions that can do more.
Probably the only downside to iOS extensions is that they're more frequently paid, since developers need to have paid Apple development accounts. uBlock Origin itself is not available, but there are alternative content blockers with similar features.
Here are some neat ones: https://www.macrumors.com/guide/ios-15-safari-extensions/
You can also set a "Private DNS" in the Android settings menu to dns.adguard.com and block (most) ads system-wide, including those in any ad-riddled "free" games/apps.
The browser situation on Android sucks. I test every browser I try like this: Can it scroll through Imgur properly? Sadly, only Chrome and Brave pass this test (its been a while since I tried Edge, but it used to fail at this too). Luckily Brave has decent ad blocking built in.
I don't know why you would blame the browser and not Imgur for this.
Oh, I'm certain Imgur could fix this issue if they wanted to. But they would rather push users into their app, so that's never going to happen.
I still think this is as good test because A) I use Imgur's website on mobile, and B) expecting all web sites to be correctly optimized is unrealistic. I prefer to use Brave and uninstall Chrome, than use Firefox with Chrome as a backup.
I still think this is as good test because A) I use Imgur's website on mobile, and B) expecting all web sites to be correctly optimized is unrealistic. I prefer to use Brave and uninstall Chrome, than use Firefox with Chrome as a backup.
Is it possible nowadays to tell Brave to delete cookies when closing the browser?
Under Settings > Brave Shields & Privacy, there is as "Clear data on exit" toggle. I'm not sure, but I think that uses whatever settings you have under "Clear browsing data". In those settings you can individually toggle history, cookies, cache, etc.
The best browser on Android is usually Samsung Internet Browser. It will work on non-Samsung devices.
It has dark mode, it has adguard block addon, it's chromium, etc.
It has dark mode, it has adguard block addon, it's chromium, etc.
That doesn't sound good at all. I don't want a Samsung, adguard or chromium..
Firefox for Android leaves much to be desired. But I still use it over Chrome.
Vivaldi on Android is really nice. Blocks ads and trackers by default and does it well.
Vivaldi is nice. Last time I tried it there were a few UI quirks that made me switch back to Brave. IIRC, it didn't behave all that great with Imgur (though better than Firefox).
Hmm, design of some page is broken so you measure all browsers based on that? That's one of the weirder things I've heard in a while...
Well, its a webpage I use often. So I need a compatible browser.
Yes and it works fine except for one minor issue: no Firefox Sync support for uBlock rules.
Otherwise it's fantastic. It's so good that I wouldn't consider using the internet without it. My iPad doesn't have it, and I practically never use its web browser.
Otherwise it's fantastic. It's so good that I wouldn't consider using the internet without it. My iPad doesn't have it, and I practically never use its web browser.
uBlock Origin and DOZEN of other extensions!!
No others allowed.
Unless you use a beta version and do a weird thing with accounts and a website.
And it's been broken this way for years now.
Firefox seems to be trying hard to keep their benefits over chrome as minimal as possible.
No others allowed.
Unless you use a beta version and do a weird thing with accounts and a website.
And it's been broken this way for years now.
Firefox seems to be trying hard to keep their benefits over chrome as minimal as possible.
The worst part is that it was much better before the botched update (which was essentially push of a different browser) that they inflected on us one bright day without warning.
Firefox is the best browser we have, and it is really not that good, and the management is just terrible.
Firefox is the best browser we have, and it is really not that good, and the management is just terrible.
Did they provide a rationale for this change? Or is this more of a "middle manager's bonus depends on engagement KPI" kind of thing?
Does Google ever provide a rationale for why they continue to twist Android internals to use More Google?
Oh, just wait a while. Google employees will be logging in soon, you’ll see the rationale on this very thread!
Waiting for the obligatory "Googler here, not on the Android team, but here's my totally personal opinion why this is actually a good thing..."
In fairness, that easily can be an actual personal opinion; consider that "people who work at Google" is almost certain to be filtered to "people who aren't too bothered by Google's behavior" in the first place, and then they work in an environment that exposes them to the values that create Google's behaviors.
Also consider that people are more likely to vocalize what they think their company is doing well as opposed to what they think their company is doing poorly in a public forum.
My guess is that people who juggle multiple browsers and who want actively want a null default are nonexistent but the people who are confused when opening links after installing a second app that works as a http handler changing the flow are.
I'm one of those nonexistent people. I have Firefox for personal use and then Chrome for work stuff. Depending on the app launching the link, I choose the browser myself.
The new work profile container stuff has somewhat reduced the utility of this but it's not gone for me yet.
The new work profile container stuff has somewhat reduced the utility of this but it's not gone for me yet.
Same story. Got four different browsers I work with.
I use MS Edge for trusted websites and the ones I want to be logged into and DuckDuckGo browser for random pages and news articles which are normally filled with ads and tracking code.
A better thing is the TWRP option to "format system partition."
"That's an excellent question...."
I always felt Google regards Android as a mistake. It is too open. Just look at how iOS is printing money for Apple with its walled garden.
And Google's Pixel line smartphones are not selling.
If they could do it all over again things would be very different.
If they could do it all over again things would be very different.
Alphabet simply does not want to invest enough in R&D to develop devices as solid as Apple’s, nor do they want the expenses of in person support. Nothing has stopped them for the past 15 years from spending money to develop a similar locked down device and building out a network of retail stores.
They would rather leave the expensive hardware business to other companies since it does not scale as cheaply as slinging ads via software. Microsoft is guilty of the same. They are happy with the high margin rent from Azure/Windows/Office licensing, so why bother rolling the dice on expensive hardware development and support.
They would rather leave the expensive hardware business to other companies since it does not scale as cheaply as slinging ads via software. Microsoft is guilty of the same. They are happy with the high margin rent from Azure/Windows/Office licensing, so why bother rolling the dice on expensive hardware development and support.
Given the recent investment in a custom chip, the opening of a store in NYC, massive ad spend for pixel, and statements on earnings calls noting hardware investment I don’t think it’s lack of desire. Nest and sundry Google Home devices far exceed Apple’s equivalent offerings.
I think the truth may be Apple just makes it look easy, and it’s really hard - even with the resources at Google’s disposal.
I think the truth may be Apple just makes it look easy, and it’s really hard - even with the resources at Google’s disposal.
I'm happy with the Pixel line, so I hope they don't try to redo them. Google tried to turn the Pixel phones into Google's iPhones ever since they dropped the Nexus branding.
It certainly helped when they bought half of HTC's engineers in 2017.
I loved the LG made Nexus phones a lot back the day. But yes HTC did build nice, solid phones as well.
Oh no no no. They executed the MS playbook perfectly. Now it's just the time to cash in. It's "Google - The Ballmer Years".
They seem to be adding very little wrt. useful features, and resorting to pointless churn as we're seeing here. Unfortunately the most workable "open" alternative is the mainline Linux stack, which has yet to reach "daily driver" usability on any device. Sailfish is a non starter as it's just a closed UX on top of vendor kernels and drivers, only the middle layers are open.
Because they will not be developing an operating system completely for free? It makes no sense.
>completely for free
Yeah, yeah. And the money they spend on it doesn't come for a multibillion ad business.
Yeah, yeah. And the money they spend on it doesn't come for a multibillion ad business.
It is possible that 98% of people aren't as familiar with digging through said menus, and that they would prefer having a default application, and that this is the way to force it.
I don't enjoy power-user features and functions being removed from a device, but I've come to expect it on mobile. I don't think it is always willful "evil". It may just be "this is how most people do it, this is a way to simplify code/UX/etc." and they pull the trigger without thinking about the HN or reddit thread with a few people complaining.
I don't enjoy power-user features and functions being removed from a device, but I've come to expect it on mobile. I don't think it is always willful "evil". It may just be "this is how most people do it, this is a way to simplify code/UX/etc." and they pull the trigger without thinking about the HN or reddit thread with a few people complaining.
I'd make the point that previously when opening a link or document that could be used by multiple locations you got a popup asking which one to use and if it should always be used or as a one off.
No problems with defaults, but you should let the user pick.
No problems with defaults, but you should let the user pick.
That's a little hard to believe, because the prompt makes it very obvious what's happening. If you attempt to open a link and it prompts you to pick a browser, the options are (using my own phone as an example:
Open With
(Samsung Internet) (Chrome) (Firefox) (Firefox Focus)
Just Once | Always
Android already really wants you to click "Always" and just have something set. But I click "Just Once" every time, because I want the freedom to use Firefox Focus for the random clickbait article that shows up in my news feed that I don't want polluting my Firefox history. By its nature, it is already an intentional decision on my part.
This being removed from Android 12 is Google saying, "Yeah, we really don't want you to have that choice anymore, because you might not pick the right choice for us."
Open With
(Samsung Internet) (Chrome) (Firefox) (Firefox Focus)
Just Once | Always
Android already really wants you to click "Always" and just have something set. But I click "Just Once" every time, because I want the freedom to use Firefox Focus for the random clickbait article that shows up in my news feed that I don't want polluting my Firefox history. By its nature, it is already an intentional decision on my part.
This being removed from Android 12 is Google saying, "Yeah, we really don't want you to have that choice anymore, because you might not pick the right choice for us."
You say that this prompt is "very obvious" but I strongly disagree.
> Open With
> (Samsung Internet) (Chrome) (Firefox) (Firefox Focus)
> Just Once | Always
I'm an android developer and have been for more than 10 years. I get messed up at this kind of prompt sometimes, and just the other day I thought to myself, 'surprised google hasn't improved that yet '
I'm sure 99%+ global android users find the experience confusing.
> Open With
> (Samsung Internet) (Chrome) (Firefox) (Firefox Focus)
> Just Once | Always
I'm an android developer and have been for more than 10 years. I get messed up at this kind of prompt sometimes, and just the other day I thought to myself, 'surprised google hasn't improved that yet '
I'm sure 99%+ global android users find the experience confusing.
Agree to disagree, I guess?
What would you propose as an alternative? To my mind, this is a pretty like-for-like experience with other operating systems, e.g. when you click an unknown file extension in Windows and it prompts you to pick the program to open it with. You'll get a prompt that says "How do you want to open this file?", you'll get a prompt to pick the program, and then there's a tick box that says "Always use program to open .XYZ files" It's reasonably intuitive to me.
And again, if you click "Always", the prompt never comes back again. I've unintentionally clicked Always once or twice and then had to spend some time in the Android System menu resetting defaults.
The only other option for using the non-default browser after you have one associated is to long-click the URL and then manually locate the browser you want to use in the Share menu. That is cumbersome AF. The present menu offered when a non-default browser is specified is much better, IMO.
What would you propose as an alternative? To my mind, this is a pretty like-for-like experience with other operating systems, e.g. when you click an unknown file extension in Windows and it prompts you to pick the program to open it with. You'll get a prompt that says "How do you want to open this file?", you'll get a prompt to pick the program, and then there's a tick box that says "Always use program to open .XYZ files" It's reasonably intuitive to me.
And again, if you click "Always", the prompt never comes back again. I've unintentionally clicked Always once or twice and then had to spend some time in the Android System menu resetting defaults.
The only other option for using the non-default browser after you have one associated is to long-click the URL and then manually locate the browser you want to use in the Share menu. That is cumbersome AF. The present menu offered when a non-default browser is specified is much better, IMO.
Perhaps when you uninstalled a default third-party browser before, it was setting the default to None? Eg. install Firefox -> delete it -> now links take an extra click to actually open in a browser.
Well, I'm probably developing more and more into a grumpy mid-30s guy, but I'm just annoyed by all of this.
Just let me use the browser I want and don't fuck around like this. Just let me have things the way I want, I will even accept that I have to fiddle with obscure settings and whatnot, but at least give me the option to have things the way I like them and give me the feeling that I have control over at least _something_.
I have the feeling with every tech news, there's immediately something like "but you can only do it in that way because the developer/producer does not want you to do it another way".
Don't know if I can keep up with all of this.
Has anybody experience with switching from e-commerce & software to lumberjack?
Just let me use the browser I want and don't fuck around like this. Just let me have things the way I want, I will even accept that I have to fiddle with obscure settings and whatnot, but at least give me the option to have things the way I like them and give me the feeling that I have control over at least _something_.
I have the feeling with every tech news, there's immediately something like "but you can only do it in that way because the developer/producer does not want you to do it another way".
Don't know if I can keep up with all of this.
Has anybody experience with switching from e-commerce & software to lumberjack?
This is only if you really want to be able to open different browsers depending on which link you click. You can still set the default to some other browser and forget it.
For how long, though? At some point Google just decides that Android only works with Chrome and users don't want anythign else (look at the data from A12 user base!) and removes that option, just like Apple did.
> and removes that option, just like Apple did.
Umm, no - Apple started without that option, but recently introduced it.
Umm, no - Apple started without that option, but recently introduced it.
Learned something new here thanks!
edit: But is it "native" Firefox or just a different theme for Safari? I think I read somewhere in this thread, that you are bound to use Apples JS engine?!
edit: But is it "native" Firefox or just a different theme for Safari? I think I read somewhere in this thread, that you are bound to use Apples JS engine?!
I've worked around this issue by installing "Open Link With" (https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.tasomaniac.openwith.flos..., https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tasomaniac...) and setting it as the default browser. Unfortunately its mechanism for setting browsers as default on a per-domain level has issues (can't open Reddit images and threads in separate apps). And a few years back, this app got slower and randomly spends a few seconds preparing a list of browsers, though I never debugged why it started happening.
Interesting bug in fdroid's search, "Open Link With" returned no relevant results but "Open With" returned the expected app first.
A big corp being hostile to users and treating users like cattle? Nothing new here.
People have been warned for years about this kind of s#it, but they were more interested in the free stuff offered by the big corp.
People have been warned for years about this kind of s#it, but they were more interested in the free stuff offered by the big corp.
Seems to be the M.O. of these companies. Get a comfortable and safe/monopolistic position and then screw the users over.
It's so funny how everything seems open and promising until they reach a certain size and then it suddenly starts to be restrictive and closed.
It's so funny how everything seems open and promising until they reach a certain size and then it suddenly starts to be restrictive and closed.
I needed to read this a couple of times before understanding what's the issue. Interesting how differently people use their devices.
For me instead, the #1 annoyance with Android 12 is that it doesn't support changing the default camera app anymore. I'm on Pixel 3, where Google Camera is artificially made shitty as the 60 fps option for the video is hidden. As a workaround, I've been running the Camera PX version of the app (from XDA Developers) which let's you change the fps and has other cool customization (while still keeping the best parts of Google Camera). Now this doesn't help as the "double tap the power button" shortcut always opens the subpar stock camera app.
For me instead, the #1 annoyance with Android 12 is that it doesn't support changing the default camera app anymore. I'm on Pixel 3, where Google Camera is artificially made shitty as the 60 fps option for the video is hidden. As a workaround, I've been running the Camera PX version of the app (from XDA Developers) which let's you change the fps and has other cool customization (while still keeping the best parts of Google Camera). Now this doesn't help as the "double tap the power button" shortcut always opens the subpar stock camera app.
YouTube does the same thing. If you have it set to ask when opening YouTube links, and the YouTube app is available for opening them, it will change the setting so the links always open in the YouTube app without asking.
I would pay for a mobile operating system that was not from Google or Apple and that i could install with one click. Before someone recommends Android ROMs, that's too complicated for most people and i don't have the patience or time to dig through forum posts for the solutions to bugs.
I avoid google where i can and this includes their mobile operating system. I despise apple because of their design choices that prevent you from doing even the simplest tasks.
An easily installed alternative would be great.
I avoid google where i can and this includes their mobile operating system. I despise apple because of their design choices that prevent you from doing even the simplest tasks.
An easily installed alternative would be great.
Then you'd need to first pay for a phone that isn't bootlocked to a certain OS. Not many phones are.
Once your Android phone is boot-unlocked, it's actually pretty straightforward to flash a LineageOS rom. It could be streamlined, sure, but since the hard part is unlocking and tends to require some tech skills, not many need the flashing to be any simpler than it is.
Once your Android phone is boot-unlocked, it's actually pretty straightforward to flash a LineageOS rom. It could be streamlined, sure, but since the hard part is unlocking and tends to require some tech skills, not many need the flashing to be any simpler than it is.
Google Pixel line is, funny enough, not boot-locked. And it offers quite decent hardware. Being build for Googles non-bloatware versions of Android the Pixel phones also offer a high degree of compatibility with de-googled versions of Android out there.
This is highly dependent on where you live. For example there are pretty much no bootlocked phones in Finland
Are you sure you're not referring to simlock? If not, is that mandated by law in Finland?
Are there actually (current, available, lineage-supported(1)) COTS phones, where you can add your own signing keys, and then re-lock the boot-loader? With mainline/non_ancient Linux kernel?
Because without that, aren't all (modded to unlocked_boot-loader) Android devices susceptible to an Evil-Maid attack? Even if the device/user uses FDE, the evil maid could just spoof the key-entry frontend, no?
(1) or whatever other ALT-Android/Linux FW.
Because without that, aren't all (modded to unlocked_boot-loader) Android devices susceptible to an Evil-Maid attack? Even if the device/user uses FDE, the evil maid could just spoof the key-entry frontend, no?
(1) or whatever other ALT-Android/Linux FW.
> Are there actually (current, available, lineage-supported(1)) COTS phones, where you can add your own signing keys, and then re-lock the boot-loader? With mainline/non_ancient Linux kernel?
You may want to check out https://grapheneos.org/
You may want to check out https://grapheneos.org/
Only supports the Pixel devices, no?
`fastboot flashing lock` is available on some phones, but is there a comprehensive list somewhere of devices, where you can freely/add remove signing keys?
`fastboot flashing lock` is available on some phones, but is there a comprehensive list somewhere of devices, where you can freely/add remove signing keys?
While not one click, GrapheneOS is fairly easy to install (series of clicks on the phone and a web page), and does not require digging through forum posts.
However, it is based on AOSP and only supports relatively recent Pixel phones. Also, like all non-Android/non-iOS phones, some apps may or may not work on it. Depending on your phone use case, this may or may not be acceptable.
However, it is based on AOSP and only supports relatively recent Pixel phones. Also, like all non-Android/non-iOS phones, some apps may or may not work on it. Depending on your phone use case, this may or may not be acceptable.
> I would pay
But no one else would. You won't get the same level of support, features, or app compatibility unless you're willing to pay the salary of those who will make it possible, or you're able to find a niche group of people (eg. a million developers) to split the cost of making this possible. The OS duopoly is only a thing because making a functional & useful mobile operating system takes a enormous amount of human effort by some of the most skilled people in their fields.
But no one else would. You won't get the same level of support, features, or app compatibility unless you're willing to pay the salary of those who will make it possible, or you're able to find a niche group of people (eg. a million developers) to split the cost of making this possible. The OS duopoly is only a thing because making a functional & useful mobile operating system takes a enormous amount of human effort by some of the most skilled people in their fields.
And yet the base OS of Android is made by volunteers ;)
How much of it is volunteer work nowadays?
I'm very happy with my Fairphone 3+ bought here:
https://esolutions.shop/
They sell mobiles with /e/OS preinstalled, which is their privacy enhanced version of LineageOS (Android).
https://esolutions.shop/
They sell mobiles with /e/OS preinstalled, which is their privacy enhanced version of LineageOS (Android).
I looked into Fairphone, but their current offering — Fairphone 4 — seems to have persistent issues with the camera quality, and no official LineageOS build either.
It really bums me out. I need a smartphone that will run Android apps, because the duopoly is not going anywhere and governments and banks are pushing hard to use theirs, but also because there is no way around WhatsApp here in the Netherlands if I want to give my young son a chance at going to play dates and stuff.¹ I also like Fairphone's more ethical hardware side, but their offering just falls short a bit at the moment. Am I missing something here?
1: Personally, I'm fine without apps, and would much prefer to have a phone that does what Linux does for me on the desktop, but I'm not an island.
It really bums me out. I need a smartphone that will run Android apps, because the duopoly is not going anywhere and governments and banks are pushing hard to use theirs, but also because there is no way around WhatsApp here in the Netherlands if I want to give my young son a chance at going to play dates and stuff.¹ I also like Fairphone's more ethical hardware side, but their offering just falls short a bit at the moment. Am I missing something here?
1: Personally, I'm fine without apps, and would much prefer to have a phone that does what Linux does for me on the desktop, but I'm not an island.
WhatsApp works fine on /e/OS, its even easily installable from their appstore! As are loads of other apps.
Including banking and government ID apps only spread though official app stores?
You’re in luck!
https://sailfishos.org/
https://sailfishos.org/
> that i could install with one click
Come on, there isn't even a button "install" on the sailfish website. You certainly have to go through the "developers" menu, but even there, it's not clear where to go to install it.
It does not fit att all the requirements
Come on, there isn't even a button "install" on the sailfish website. You certainly have to go through the "developers" menu, but even there, it's not clear where to go to install it.
It does not fit att all the requirements
If you could click one button on a website and override your entire OS, malware makers would have a field day with it.
Such things sound cool but are untenable in the real world. Microsoft used to have downloadable binaries on websites (ActiveX) and that showed what a stupid idea it was :) There's a reason internet explorer has such a bad name.
Such things sound cool but are untenable in the real world. Microsoft used to have downloadable binaries on websites (ActiveX) and that showed what a stupid idea it was :) There's a reason internet explorer has such a bad name.
You have to grant webUSB permission and enable OEM unlocking on your Pixel, but GrapheneOS can be installed from a website: https://grapheneos.org/install/web
It is arguably easier than installing windows on a laptop (if you were someone who had done neither before), since it is just a few buttons to press.
It is arguably easier than installing windows on a laptop (if you were someone who had done neither before), since it is just a few buttons to press.
I think you're the one with unrealistic expectations here. There's quite literally no way for you to install another OS with one click; even if you do have a device that allows you to flash other OSes to it, you have to unlock the bootloader and -- oops! That's your one click.
OP means it figuratively. Amazon's "one click" checkout isn't actually just one click, it's a metaphor for how simple they're going to make it for you to buy the item. Similarly, a "one click" install of another OS should be taken to mean "dead simple to install" instead. You're welcome to debate how easy it is to install Sailfish OS on those grounds, but if we're being pedantic then there's quite literally no solutions that actually fit the parent's description.
OP means it figuratively. Amazon's "one click" checkout isn't actually just one click, it's a metaphor for how simple they're going to make it for you to buy the item. Similarly, a "one click" install of another OS should be taken to mean "dead simple to install" instead. You're welcome to debate how easy it is to install Sailfish OS on those grounds, but if we're being pedantic then there's quite literally no solutions that actually fit the parent's description.
One click really was one click. They had all the payment and address info shared. You just clicked one button. They did have an undo.
I just read their install instructions and there are over 20 steps to follow.
Technically, Sailfish is what you're asking for, though it's a little bit niche, Europe-focused, and only supported on specific Sony devices: https://sailfishos.org
> I despise apple because of their design choices that prevent you from doing even the simplest tasks.
That seems a little dramatic. I'm quite sure that iPhone owners are able to complete "simple tasks."
I'd recommend trying a device with a recent iOS version, giving it a chance, and seeing if that opinion still rings true. The iPhone as a platform is a lot more open and flexible than it used to be.
I switched from Android in 2016, and the most shocking thing about it was just how much of the experience is essentially identical to Android. Apple and Google have been borrowing identical features from each other for quite some time now.
If you last tried iOS back when Steve Jobs was alive, you might think that all of these things couldn't be done on iOS:
- Install full browser extensions (introduced in iOS 15)
- Integrate with 3rd party password managers (iOS 12)
- Change default browser, email apps. (Default navigation app still can't be changed, sadly.)
- Removing icons from the home screen without uninstalling the app (iOS 15)
- Adding widgets to your home screen (iOS 14)
- Use an alternate keyboard (iOS 12)
- Tell Siri to play a song in Spotify or other third party services
- Use third party communication, navigation, and music services with CarPlay (Spotify even adds a custom UI element for its favorite button)
- Play videos with Picture-in-Picture
- Cast to Chromecast and other non-Apple casting devices (app-dependent, but you can always use the Chrome browser, YouTube, and Spotify apps to cast that way)
- NFC is no longer locked down
Really, the only difference between Apple and Google is that their business interests are aligned in a slightly different way. They're both restrictive when it comes to features that threaten their business model.
I agree with you that we should have more/better alternatives, or at the very least more consumer protections and restrictions on Apple and Google's duopoly.
> I despise apple because of their design choices that prevent you from doing even the simplest tasks.
That seems a little dramatic. I'm quite sure that iPhone owners are able to complete "simple tasks."
I'd recommend trying a device with a recent iOS version, giving it a chance, and seeing if that opinion still rings true. The iPhone as a platform is a lot more open and flexible than it used to be.
I switched from Android in 2016, and the most shocking thing about it was just how much of the experience is essentially identical to Android. Apple and Google have been borrowing identical features from each other for quite some time now.
If you last tried iOS back when Steve Jobs was alive, you might think that all of these things couldn't be done on iOS:
- Install full browser extensions (introduced in iOS 15)
- Integrate with 3rd party password managers (iOS 12)
- Change default browser, email apps. (Default navigation app still can't be changed, sadly.)
- Removing icons from the home screen without uninstalling the app (iOS 15)
- Adding widgets to your home screen (iOS 14)
- Use an alternate keyboard (iOS 12)
- Tell Siri to play a song in Spotify or other third party services
- Use third party communication, navigation, and music services with CarPlay (Spotify even adds a custom UI element for its favorite button)
- Play videos with Picture-in-Picture
- Cast to Chromecast and other non-Apple casting devices (app-dependent, but you can always use the Chrome browser, YouTube, and Spotify apps to cast that way)
- NFC is no longer locked down
Really, the only difference between Apple and Google is that their business interests are aligned in a slightly different way. They're both restrictive when it comes to features that threaten their business model.
I agree with you that we should have more/better alternatives, or at the very least more consumer protections and restrictions on Apple and Google's duopoly.
I know you said no Android roms, but GrapheneOS can be installed from a website over webUSB in just a couple steps. It's as simple as enabling OEM unlocking and clicking install - just make sure you have a supported non-carrier variant Pixel.
That's the closest you're going to get to "install with one click". There is no preinstalled Google spyware or bloat
That's the closest you're going to get to "install with one click". There is no preinstalled Google spyware or bloat
The problem is not the operating system itself, the problem is the secrecy of the manufacturers and the complete lack of standardization in the ARM environment. It's trivial to make a (tiny) operating system for PCs as all the early initialization is done by the BIOS/UEFI and the interface that calls the OS from there is clearly defined. And in theory you don't even need to write hardware-specific drivers for basic system functionality - video, storage access, mouse and keyboard are all abstracted by the BIOS/UEFI. If you want, you can write a "hello world"-capable "OS" in a day or two - it's about 20 lines of ASM code [1] that you put onto an USB stick and that's it.
For ARM, everyone ships their own bootloader that has certain expectations on the hardware built-in (especially flash layout), there are no standards at all that serve as some sort of fallback... it's an utter wild west. And Google seems for whatever reason very reluctant to force the manufacturers as part of the Google Services license to adhere to at least some standards (=following the open source mandate for the kernel and other GPL-licensed parts, publishing device trees, allowing access for people to flash their own OS).
As a result, to even get started on ARM you need at the very least information from the platform vendor how memory is structured, where to place the image, how to flash it, how to bring up CPU cores... and that's only going to give you a serial port at best. You then need to develop at least basic functionality to initialize the graphics processor, and only then the user can actually see something.
[1]: http://mikeos.sourceforge.net/write-your-own-os.html
For ARM, everyone ships their own bootloader that has certain expectations on the hardware built-in (especially flash layout), there are no standards at all that serve as some sort of fallback... it's an utter wild west. And Google seems for whatever reason very reluctant to force the manufacturers as part of the Google Services license to adhere to at least some standards (=following the open source mandate for the kernel and other GPL-licensed parts, publishing device trees, allowing access for people to flash their own OS).
As a result, to even get started on ARM you need at the very least information from the platform vendor how memory is structured, where to place the image, how to flash it, how to bring up CPU cores... and that's only going to give you a serial port at best. You then need to develop at least basic functionality to initialize the graphics processor, and only then the user can actually see something.
[1]: http://mikeos.sourceforge.net/write-your-own-os.html
I still want to read up more on the subject, but I was under the impression, that the EFI-support in U-Boot was/is supposed to remove most pain-points from the above list of valid points.
The boot-sequence (I thought) that is becoming the new "standard" is: B1 ... U-Boot -> grub-arm-efi -> whatever_OS.
The boot-sequence (I thought) that is becoming the new "standard" is: B1 ... U-Boot -> grub-arm-efi -> whatever_OS.
That applies for ARM-based appliances which in most if not all cases run U-Boot... the problem is, in literally every appliance whose firmware I touched for one or the other reason the respective fork of U-Boot was extremely old, and the vendors did not publish the sources at all or lacking the configuration used.
In the mobile sector, most don't ship u-boot but some other bootloader, in this case mostly because u-boot doesn't support GUI operation/output which is vital for a phone.
In the mobile sector, most don't ship u-boot but some other bootloader, in this case mostly because u-boot doesn't support GUI operation/output which is vital for a phone.
LineageOS without Google Services/gapps is pretty nice... I only miss Google Maps.
Copperhead os? Not cheap.
There are google free versions of Android. https://e.foundation/
For sure, but have you tried an even partially de-googled phone? It's not as simple as not using gmail and google maps. Lots of apps don't like MicroG, and MicroG free Android results in a small percentage of apps working.
Google has done an amazing job of owning yet "not owning" Android.
Google has done an amazing job of owning yet "not owning" Android.
I've been using a de-googled phone for about a year now (CalyxOS, uses MicroG) and I have yet to run into an app that behaves differently than when I used the stock OS for my Pixel. I've even tried downloading Google's apps and they work the same, no hiccups (Maps, Camera and Translate for me). CalyxOS includes a firewall that can disable network connectivity on a per-app basis, so one could even just use downloaded maps/translation sets with Google apps if they wanted.
Again, this is just my personal experience--I'm sure there are apps out there that deliberately throw a fit when they detect a custom-signed OS running on your phone. I just have yet to see that in any of the banking, social media or productivity apps I've used.
Again, this is just my personal experience--I'm sure there are apps out there that deliberately throw a fit when they detect a custom-signed OS running on your phone. I just have yet to see that in any of the banking, social media or productivity apps I've used.
I've been on CalyxOS with MicroG for a couple months now and unfortunately have had several apps which did not get along with MicroG. It's too bad but it's a decent compromise so far.
Australia's covid app required googles services or apple
Sign over your privacy or sit in the hole, peasant.
Sign over your privacy or sit in the hole, peasant.
I use a completely de-googled phone OS - /e/. MicroG works great.
Anyone know how they do this? Is this one of those APIs that exist but you're not allowed to use (unless you're Google) if you want to get published on the play store?
What do you mean specifically? The "use this app as the 'default' default browser" behaviour?
My guess is that Chrome's app ID is simply hardcoded somewhere inside the OS.
My guess is that Chrome's app ID is simply hardcoded somewhere inside the OS.
> The "use this app as the 'default' default browser" behaviour?
Yes, this. If the app id is actually baked into the OS that seems shadier than usual.
Yes, this. If the app id is actually baked into the OS that seems shadier than usual.
This has been happening for a while, my solution was to disable google chrome, and install chrome beta instead just to have a "chrome"
What is the rationale for opening different links in different browsers? Do some pages render better in other browsers?
Didn't Microsoft had trouble in Russia for pushing Internet Explorer so much?
I am all for hating on Google, but is this really a problem? How many people are consistently opening different links in different browsers? Whats wrong with just setting the default to some non-Chrome browser?
Well, it's a great way to try to force web developers (who must make it work on Android Chrome) to either buy extra devices or be unable to use the default of their choice. And if you can get the developers to default to Chrome, that's good for reinforcing "chrome first" development.
Edit: Apparently I misunderstood the imposition (see the response chain below). Seems benign but annoying for power users.
Edit: Apparently I misunderstood the imposition (see the response chain below). Seems benign but annoying for power users.
Developers have no trouble changing this setting though, right?
You can use the default of your choice.
Previously, if you didn't choose a default, Android would ask you every time you opened a url - which browser?
Now, if there's no default set, it just uses Chrome instead.
Workarounds are disabling Chrome, or setting a third party browser selector as the default browser.
Previously, if you didn't choose a default, Android would ask you every time you opened a url - which browser?
Now, if there's no default set, it just uses Chrome instead.
Workarounds are disabling Chrome, or setting a third party browser selector as the default browser.
I do all the time. I use Chrome, Firefox, Firefox Nightly on a daily basis for different things.
Yet another major reason to never use Android, the weaker, worse, less secure, less private OS.
Weaker and worse is arguable. There is so much more functionality available on Android than iOS, I can install whatever I'd like on my device, I can write any kind of app I choose to and install it on my device. I can organize my media files in any manner I wish to.....
But yes less secure, and much less private. Android is essentially spyware for google.
But yes less secure, and much less private. Android is essentially spyware for google.
naoqj(1)
Well you just forced me into old Reddit. Why do people like that clunky interface?
IMO the "new" interface is a serious downgrade. Especially on mobile: it keeps nagging you to switch to the mobile app and is rife with dark patterns, including pretending some subreddits are only accessible through the app.
Clunky, as opposed to the new design:
* "No, you can't see this community, download the app"
* "this post is nsfw, download the app"
* (popup at the bottom of the screen) "do you want to use the app?"
* when reading comments, suddenly the chain stops and completly unrelated posts are shown
* if you want to read a comment chain deeper than three, you have to open each subcomment individually. Naturally, pressing back won't take you to the right position after following a chain
* all of the above is slower than even youtube, making it the worst web experience right after IBM's presentation of the plex font
* "No, you can't see this community, download the app"
* "this post is nsfw, download the app"
* (popup at the bottom of the screen) "do you want to use the app?"
* when reading comments, suddenly the chain stops and completly unrelated posts are shown
* if you want to read a comment chain deeper than three, you have to open each subcomment individually. Naturally, pressing back won't take you to the right position after following a chain
* all of the above is slower than even youtube, making it the worst web experience right after IBM's presentation of the plex font
> Why do people like that clunky interface?
Why do people like the super slow new reddit? Is a slightly shinier site really worth several 100ms delay for actions taken?
FWIW, I’d switch to new in a heartbeat. Better Markdown, more customization, looks cleaner (and I’m always logged in, so the account thing is not an issue). But not with the crappy speed it currently has.
Why do people like the super slow new reddit? Is a slightly shinier site really worth several 100ms delay for actions taken?
FWIW, I’d switch to new in a heartbeat. Better Markdown, more customization, looks cleaner (and I’m always logged in, so the account thing is not an issue). But not with the crappy speed it currently has.
At least with adblock it actually loads pretty fast, the issues are the annoyances, and man I didn't know how bad it was.
It dimmed the entire page to try to ask me for notification access: https://i.judge.sh/EUnAO/2_koa6cB9q.png
Then it wants to ask me about topics i'm interested in: https://i.judge.sh/RF58W/N_17B22eMD.png
Then, without ublock, below the fold, almost all of the content on the page is an advertisement https://i.judge.sh/bfACD/6_Kl9IneDr.png
It dimmed the entire page to try to ask me for notification access: https://i.judge.sh/EUnAO/2_koa6cB9q.png
Then it wants to ask me about topics i'm interested in: https://i.judge.sh/RF58W/N_17B22eMD.png
Then, without ublock, below the fold, almost all of the content on the page is an advertisement https://i.judge.sh/bfACD/6_Kl9IneDr.png
I run everything with uBlock Origin and uMatrix (maybe it’s like amp where it slows down if you block something…), it’s most certainly still far slower than old. I recently gave it a try again and it either got worse or I had forgotten just how bad it was.
> Why do people like that clunky interface?
For me, more posts fit on the screen in old reddit. In this case, it's 10 posts in old reddit vs 6 in new, (desktop monitor).
No infinite jank-loading and nudging more content I never requested into view as I scroll. Similarly I don't want to find a new book stuck to the back cover of the book I just finished reading.
In old reddit I can open comments in new tab, scroll to last comment, then close tab. I don't always do that, but I like the option.
In new reddit, the separator is a single line "More posts from the GooglePixel community"... Not even a horizontal line. I sometimes miss the end of one thread, and don't realise I'm reading comments in the next. Each to their own. I'd stop using old if new was better.
For me, more posts fit on the screen in old reddit. In this case, it's 10 posts in old reddit vs 6 in new, (desktop monitor).
No infinite jank-loading and nudging more content I never requested into view as I scroll. Similarly I don't want to find a new book stuck to the back cover of the book I just finished reading.
In old reddit I can open comments in new tab, scroll to last comment, then close tab. I don't always do that, but I like the option.
In new reddit, the separator is a single line "More posts from the GooglePixel community"... Not even a horizontal line. I sometimes miss the end of one thread, and don't realise I'm reading comments in the next. Each to their own. I'd stop using old if new was better.
> clunky
As opposed to what? The smooth new interface? Reddit is a cesspit of poor design, but at least the old theme did it without getting in the way.
As opposed to what? The smooth new interface? Reddit is a cesspit of poor design, but at least the old theme did it without getting in the way.
It’s a losing battle with this crowd. I finally just wrote a user script that deletes the “old” from the URL for me.
I love the old interface. The new one is impossible for me to use. I can't read a thing on it.
The entirety of Google itself is like a dark pattern.
Good for me, it's been over 5 years since I last had Chrome installed on mobile.
Slightly OT but I heard complaints about bluetooth on android 12.
I am holding back at Android 11, anybody knows if this has been adressed yet?
I am holding back at Android 11, anybody knows if this has been adressed yet?
It's pretty much BS like that that had me switch to IOS after years on Android.
Because Android will make you pick a default browser, you switched to iOS where you weren't even allowed to change the default browser (depending on when it was you switched), and even now every browser is actually Safari so users think there is diversity but there isn't really.
Ok.
I mean, I acknowledge that sort of thinking is common, but it's makes no sense to me.
Ok.
I mean, I acknowledge that sort of thinking is common, but it's makes no sense to me.
you can pick a alternate browser on IOS and as I said - it was multiple instances
Go in your google/android settings and make sure location tracking is off - come back and tell me with a straight face that the UX of the feature is not a dark pattern.
Go in your google/android settings and make sure location tracking is off - come back and tell me with a straight face that the UX of the feature is not a dark pattern.
I use an iPhone too, but aren't all iOS browsers using the Safari engine in the background, even if the front end is branded as Firefox/Edge/whatever?
Only for javascript - you can have your own html engine, but you have to use the sarari javascript engine. Technically you can have your own javascript engine, but your performance will be bad enough that we can ignore this.
The performance would be bad because of no JIT, but the main issue it is that Apple requires WebKit usage:
> 2.5.6 Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript.
> 4.7 HTML5 Games, Bots, etc. -> only use capabilities available in a standard WebKit view (e.g. it must open and run natively in Safari without modifications or additional software); and use WebKit and JavaScript Core to run third-party software and should not attempt to extend or expose native platform APIs to third-party software;
Now, I get their reasoning - if you did parse regular javascript and JIT was allowed (which would be required to prevent any anticompetitive remarks in terms of performance for these other engines), random pages could exploit those 3p browsers and extract information from the APIs they have access to.
But computers are complicated enough to where you probably couldn't explain to a layperson/congressperson the difference between iOS forcing developers to use their Window management APIs and iOS forcing developers to use their javascript APIs, so this is unlikely to change with regulatory force or anything of the sort.
> 2.5.6 Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript.
> 4.7 HTML5 Games, Bots, etc. -> only use capabilities available in a standard WebKit view (e.g. it must open and run natively in Safari without modifications or additional software); and use WebKit and JavaScript Core to run third-party software and should not attempt to extend or expose native platform APIs to third-party software;
Now, I get their reasoning - if you did parse regular javascript and JIT was allowed (which would be required to prevent any anticompetitive remarks in terms of performance for these other engines), random pages could exploit those 3p browsers and extract information from the APIs they have access to.
But computers are complicated enough to where you probably couldn't explain to a layperson/congressperson the difference between iOS forcing developers to use their Window management APIs and iOS forcing developers to use their javascript APIs, so this is unlikely to change with regulatory force or anything of the sort.
I am technical and I still don't quite grasp the reasoning. Why does it matter if a browser makes available a non-standard API? And why is this a concern for mobile and not desktops?
Apple doesn't want app developers to deflect responsibility of user data siphoning off onto third-party websites or parties. Think the contacts API - the user might grant the app access to it in general, but then facebook.com could try to access them via a special browser API; if there aren't any extra prompts within the browser's code asking for user permission, this could lead to the site siphoning off user contacts without the user knowing.
[deleted]
I use just a handful of services that require Chrome, so it's unreasonable to have to disable it entirely to restore default historical behaviors. Really feels like throwing their toys out of the crib over not having total dominance on people's devices.