7 ms·

> because they do impose a constant and non-trivial burden on everyone else (especially in cases like backspace which are relatively easy to hit on accident).

> because they do impose a constant and non-trivial burden on everyone else (especially in cases like backspace which are relatively easy to hit on accident). So make them an option and stop taking the Chrome route of stripping out everything that more advanced users use regularly. Of course, this is why I run Firefox. I can do things like force OCSP enabled and get error pages when it fails - Chrome's solution was to call OCSP useless because their less technical users couldn't understand it. Even Firefox has buried the option behind about:config and the scariest thing for me now is that we'll lose the control we get with current FF options and extensions as they "modernize" the browser. Advanced users want this level of control.

stouset 10y ago
There's a cost to this too, in terms of development effort. Yeah, one option isn't a big deal, but multiply this by the gajillion times that developers have to make a choice between something < 1% of their users want and what > 99% of their users want. Backspace-as-back-button is not an "advanced feature". It's a hotkey that essentially no other software uses for the same behavior and one which conflicts crappily with the fundamental behavior of that key. It will take you, generously, a day to relearn the new hotkey. Instead you'd rather the developers maintain indefinitely an option and corresponding logic to support your existing use-case. If you can't tell, my level of empathy for this kind of griping is roughly zero. Adapt to the new hotkey and save the complaining for something that actually matters.
- ultramancool 10y ago
  Sure, I understand your argument, but this is what addons are for. Users who want it can install an addon for it. Chrome on the other hand has such weak addon APIs that they are often unable to achieve what's needed. Firefox seems to be moving in the same direction unfortunately. I think it's worth it for those developers to at least maintain full addon APIs, even though there's a trade-off here it greatly increases the flexibility of the product.
  - recursive 10y ago
    Is it not actually possible to implement this with an addon? It seems possible with a small script embedded in each page. If an addon can't do this, what could it possibly actually do?
    - ultramancool 10y ago
      In this case yes it should be, but I was getting at a larger problem - try to do this with something like Tree Style Tabs, DownThemAll, etc.
  - HappyTypist 10y ago
    This can be done via an addon
- meatcider 10y ago
  > It's a hotkey that essentially no other software uses for the same behavior Except for Windows Explorer, but who uses that, eh? Your level of empathy is immaterial to the conversation, but thanks for sharing.
  - stouset 10y ago
    Backspace on Windows Explorer goes up one directory, not back in your history. In a not-at-all shocking turn of events, it turns out Alt-Left and Alt-Right are in fact the hotkeys for navigating backward and forward through history, so Chrome aligns perfectly with Windows Explorer in this regard.
    - Arnavion 10y ago
      Umm, Backspace in Windows Explorer absolutely does go back in history, unless this changed in Windows 8+ or something (testing on Windows 7 here).
      - thaumasiotes 10y ago
        It goes back in history on windows 10 too. I never actually knew that, but hey. I definitely believe removing backspace-to-go-back in the browser is the right choice. I did know about that one, solely because every so often I do it by mistake. The problem isn't that I lose data -- I don't. The problem is that this shortcut does nothing but cause me problems I don't want. I never want the functionality, and yet it keeps happening to me anyway because it's so easy to trigger unintentionally. There's no case for this shortcut continuing to exist.
        mrighele 10y ago
        Backspace used to go up one level up to Windows XP, if I remember correctly. Now you can go up one level with Alt+Up Arrow [1] [1] http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/keyboard-shortcuts#keyboard-shortcuts=windows-8 http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/keyboard-shortcut...
      - 10y ago
- smoothdeveloper 10y ago
  alternatives: * alert if any form filled by user wasn't submitted (in case site doesn't do that already) * let 99% of user who don't know what they did (they are in minority compared to number of times backspace is pressed to actually navigate back) retype their form if they don't navigate forward (which recovers their input, or should) * add a third hand to human race so it doesn't take all the hands to navigate back from keyboard * lure lenovo to restore the back / forward keys on thinkpads and make that implemented on most keyboards
  - Nexxxeh 10y ago
    >lure lenovo to restore the back / forward keys on thinkpads and make that implemented on most keyboards The number of times I've accidentally hit the back-a-page button on my old X201, and wiped my in-progress form entry... They smooshed those keys right around the arrow keys. The arrow keys I use to jumping around text. That's worse than having a dual-use for backspace to me. Backspace is far enough away that it's not hit by accident.
    - jamespo 10y ago
      Hitting them by accident is very rare for me - I love them on my x220, even more so when you can map them in emacs to switch buffer.
    - smoothdeveloper 10y ago
      You can hit the other "forward" key to recover everything in a good browser and/or websites which don't do silly things (99.99% of cases). It really feels chromium team should install telemetry: * how many unsubmitted forms edits lost by mistake * how many backspace keystroke to do "history-back" They should also consider alt-gr + left as "back-history", using two hands for this could be avoided this way.
      - saalweachter 10y ago
        Yes, because "Chrome phones home with all form data/keystrokes" wouldn't hit the top of HN.
- code_sloth 10y ago
  > ... my level of empathy for this kind of griping is roughly zero. Adapt to the new hotkey and save the complaining for something that actually matters. It's absolutely amazing how many comments (500++ as I write this) that this "news" generated.
snaky 10y ago
> and the scariest thing for me now is that we'll lose the control we get with current FF options That seems unstoppable for a long time now. There's no browser for power users in modern world.
- JoBrad 10y ago
  Vivaldi? I haven't used it recently, but it seems top be aimed at this group
  - 0942v8653 10y ago
    Not at all, it's closed source
- tomc1985 10y ago
  Wasn't there a Firefox fork that's keeping XUL and XPCOM and all that? Pale Moon?
amluto 10y ago
I disagree here. Some shortcuts simply suck. Backspace to go back is one. This is because backspace is very useful and means something different when a text field is focused. It would be like using just plain Q to quit.
- pantalaimon 10y ago
  ctrl + q to quit is bad enough, it's right next to ctrl + w to close a tab
  - jeeva 10y ago
    And Ctrl + Shift + W to close a window. Ugh. Lots of accidental closures...
- Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
  On OS X, Command-left arrow means something different when a text field is focused, too. It means "go to the start of the line".
ryuuchin 10y ago
> Chrome's solution was to call OCSP useless because their less technical users couldn't understand it. OCSP introduced a non-trivial delay (cited as ~300ms to a second) and there are also privacy concerns with it as well[1]. There's also the fact that it's set to soft-fail when the OCSP servers can't be contacted making it useless in that case[2]. Even if we ignore the above reasons for its exclusion from Chrome they do provide CRLSets which provide similar functionality but are pushed via browser updates (supposedly it's updated daily which makes it faster than OCSP). I'm not sure it's fair to say that they called it "useless because less technical users couldn't understand it". How else can CRLSets be explained then? [1] https://www.imperialviolet.org/2012/02/05/crlsets.html https://www.imperialviolet.org/2012/02/05/crlsets.html [2] https://www.imperialviolet.org/2014/04/19/revchecking.html https://www.imperialviolet.org/2014/04/19/revchecking.html
- ultramancool 10y ago
  > There's also the fact that it's set to soft-fail when the OCSP servers can't be contacted making it useless in that case[2]. Yes, notice that I called for OCSP force/required, not just OCSP soft-fail. I've been running OCSP required for years and never had any noticeable slowdown. Maybe there's one on the first connection of the day to a site or something? Chrome's CRLSets are extremely limited and cannot begin to capture the full number of domains which have been revoked. They can get the most popular sites and that's about it. OCSP stapling is the superior solution which will solve this in Chrome and other browsers, but for now OCSP is the only reasonable solution in a world where millions of SSL certificates have leaked and been revoked and you care about your privacy. CloudFlare alone revoked millions of certificates. These have indeed not all made it into the CRLsets. An excellent summary of the problems is here: https://www.grc.com/revocation/crlsets.htm https://www.grc.com/revocation/crlsets.htm Chrome's CRLsets contain less than 1% of current revoked certificates. I can't in good faith call that a valid solution to the problem.
  - ryuuchin 10y ago
    There is still a non-trivial privacy issue with the OCSP checks although OCSP stapling does address that problem. The Chrome situation does leave something to be desired although I can sort of understand where they were coming from from the aspect of it being confusing. It is worth noting that only the setting on the settings page has been removed. You can still enable OCSP checks and OCSP forcing through the enterprise settings[1][2]. Also worth noting is that I believe they have only disabled OCSP checks, OCSP stapling should still work correctly if the server supports it. [1] https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#EnableOnlineRevocationChecks https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#Enable... [2] https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#RequireOnlineRevocationChecksForLocalAnchors https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#Requir...
746F7475 10y ago
> So make them an option and stop taking the Chrome route of stripping out everything that more advanced users use regularly. Did you really use backspace and "move back" on regular basis? Why? You most likely aren't browsing the web with just your keyboard, so unless you are a leftie it requires you to either move your hand back to keyboard or move your hand across the whole keyboard and why would you do either of these when you can just move back with your mouses thumb button?
- Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
  Where's the "thumb button" on an Apple Mighty Mouse?
  - 746F7475 10y ago
    Well, maybe it's time to stop using inferior shit products and buy a proper mouse. Any $20 mouse from your local department store has at least one button to press with your thumb.
- Dayshine 10y ago
  >with your mouses thumb button? Because I'm far more likely to accidentally press the mouse thumb button, hence it's rebound.
- pkamb 10y ago
  As a ThinkPad external keyboard user it's my primary navigation to go Back. TrackPoint, no mouse. Primary scrolling navigation is the Home/End/PgUp/PgDn group. Backspace for Back fits amazingly in this workflow.

stouset 10y ago

There's a cost to this too, in terms of development effort. Yeah, one option isn't a big deal, but multiply this by the gajillion times that developers have to make a choice between something < 1% of their users want and what > 99% of their users want. Backspace-as-back-button is not an "advanced feature". It's a hotkey that essentially no other software uses for the same behavior and one which conflicts crappily with the fundamental behavior of that key. It will take you, generously, a day to relearn the new hotkey. Instead you'd rather the developers maintain indefinitely an option and corresponding logic to support your existing use-case. If you can't tell, my level of empathy for this kind of griping is roughly zero. Adapt to the new hotkey and save the complaining for something that actually matters.

ultramancool 10y ago
Sure, I understand your argument, but this is what addons are for. Users who want it can install an addon for it. Chrome on the other hand has such weak addon APIs that they are often unable to achieve what's needed. Firefox seems to be moving in the same direction unfortunately. I think it's worth it for those developers to at least maintain full addon APIs, even though there's a trade-off here it greatly increases the flexibility of the product.
- recursive 10y ago
  Is it not actually possible to implement this with an addon? It seems possible with a small script embedded in each page. If an addon can't do this, what could it possibly actually do?
  - ultramancool 10y ago
    In this case yes it should be, but I was getting at a larger problem - try to do this with something like Tree Style Tabs, DownThemAll, etc.
- HappyTypist 10y ago
  This can be done via an addon
meatcider 10y ago
> It's a hotkey that essentially no other software uses for the same behavior Except for Windows Explorer, but who uses that, eh? Your level of empathy is immaterial to the conversation, but thanks for sharing.
- stouset 10y ago
  Backspace on Windows Explorer goes up one directory, not back in your history. In a not-at-all shocking turn of events, it turns out Alt-Left and Alt-Right are in fact the hotkeys for navigating backward and forward through history, so Chrome aligns perfectly with Windows Explorer in this regard.
  - Arnavion 10y ago
    Umm, Backspace in Windows Explorer absolutely does go back in history, unless this changed in Windows 8+ or something (testing on Windows 7 here).
    - thaumasiotes 10y ago
      It goes back in history on windows 10 too. I never actually knew that, but hey. I definitely believe removing backspace-to-go-back in the browser is the right choice. I did know about that one, solely because every so often I do it by mistake. The problem isn't that I lose data -- I don't. The problem is that this shortcut does nothing but cause me problems I don't want. I never want the functionality, and yet it keeps happening to me anyway because it's so easy to trigger unintentionally. There's no case for this shortcut continuing to exist.
      - mrighele 10y ago
        Backspace used to go up one level up to Windows XP, if I remember correctly. Now you can go up one level with Alt+Up Arrow [1] [1] http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/keyboard-shortcuts#keyboard-shortcuts=windows-8 http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/keyboard-shortcut...
    - 10y ago
smoothdeveloper 10y ago
alternatives: * alert if any form filled by user wasn't submitted (in case site doesn't do that already) * let 99% of user who don't know what they did (they are in minority compared to number of times backspace is pressed to actually navigate back) retype their form if they don't navigate forward (which recovers their input, or should) * add a third hand to human race so it doesn't take all the hands to navigate back from keyboard * lure lenovo to restore the back / forward keys on thinkpads and make that implemented on most keyboards
- Nexxxeh 10y ago
  >lure lenovo to restore the back / forward keys on thinkpads and make that implemented on most keyboards The number of times I've accidentally hit the back-a-page button on my old X201, and wiped my in-progress form entry... They smooshed those keys right around the arrow keys. The arrow keys I use to jumping around text. That's worse than having a dual-use for backspace to me. Backspace is far enough away that it's not hit by accident.
  - jamespo 10y ago
    Hitting them by accident is very rare for me - I love them on my x220, even more so when you can map them in emacs to switch buffer.
  - smoothdeveloper 10y ago
    You can hit the other "forward" key to recover everything in a good browser and/or websites which don't do silly things (99.99% of cases). It really feels chromium team should install telemetry: * how many unsubmitted forms edits lost by mistake * how many backspace keystroke to do "history-back" They should also consider alt-gr + left as "back-history", using two hands for this could be avoided this way.
    - saalweachter 10y ago
      Yes, because "Chrome phones home with all form data/keystrokes" wouldn't hit the top of HN.
code_sloth 10y ago
> ... my level of empathy for this kind of griping is roughly zero. Adapt to the new hotkey and save the complaining for something that actually matters. It's absolutely amazing how many comments (500++ as I write this) that this "news" generated.

snaky 10y ago

> and the scariest thing for me now is that we'll lose the control we get with current FF options That seems unstoppable for a long time now. There's no browser for power users in modern world.

JoBrad 10y ago
Vivaldi? I haven't used it recently, but it seems top be aimed at this group
- 0942v8653 10y ago
  Not at all, it's closed source
tomc1985 10y ago
Wasn't there a Firefox fork that's keeping XUL and XPCOM and all that? Pale Moon?

amluto 10y ago

I disagree here. Some shortcuts simply suck. Backspace to go back is one. This is because backspace is very useful and means something different when a text field is focused. It would be like using just plain Q to quit.

pantalaimon 10y ago
ctrl + q to quit is bad enough, it's right next to ctrl + w to close a tab
- jeeva 10y ago
  And Ctrl + Shift + W to close a window. Ugh. Lots of accidental closures...
Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
On OS X, Command-left arrow means something different when a text field is focused, too. It means "go to the start of the line".

ryuuchin 10y ago

> Chrome's solution was to call OCSP useless because their less technical users couldn't understand it. OCSP introduced a non-trivial delay (cited as ~300ms to a second) and there are also privacy concerns with it as well[1]. There's also the fact that it's set to soft-fail when the OCSP servers can't be contacted making it useless in that case[2]. Even if we ignore the above reasons for its exclusion from Chrome they do provide CRLSets which provide similar functionality but are pushed via browser updates (supposedly it's updated daily which makes it faster than OCSP). I'm not sure it's fair to say that they called it "useless because less technical users couldn't understand it". How else can CRLSets be explained then? [1] https://www.imperialviolet.org/2012/02/05/crlsets.html https://www.imperialviolet.org/2012/02/05/crlsets.html [2] https://www.imperialviolet.org/2014/04/19/revchecking.html https://www.imperialviolet.org/2014/04/19/revchecking.html

ultramancool 10y ago
> There's also the fact that it's set to soft-fail when the OCSP servers can't be contacted making it useless in that case[2]. Yes, notice that I called for OCSP force/required, not just OCSP soft-fail. I've been running OCSP required for years and never had any noticeable slowdown. Maybe there's one on the first connection of the day to a site or something? Chrome's CRLSets are extremely limited and cannot begin to capture the full number of domains which have been revoked. They can get the most popular sites and that's about it. OCSP stapling is the superior solution which will solve this in Chrome and other browsers, but for now OCSP is the only reasonable solution in a world where millions of SSL certificates have leaked and been revoked and you care about your privacy. CloudFlare alone revoked millions of certificates. These have indeed not all made it into the CRLsets. An excellent summary of the problems is here: https://www.grc.com/revocation/crlsets.htm https://www.grc.com/revocation/crlsets.htm Chrome's CRLsets contain less than 1% of current revoked certificates. I can't in good faith call that a valid solution to the problem.
- ryuuchin 10y ago
  There is still a non-trivial privacy issue with the OCSP checks although OCSP stapling does address that problem. The Chrome situation does leave something to be desired although I can sort of understand where they were coming from from the aspect of it being confusing. It is worth noting that only the setting on the settings page has been removed. You can still enable OCSP checks and OCSP forcing through the enterprise settings[1][2]. Also worth noting is that I believe they have only disabled OCSP checks, OCSP stapling should still work correctly if the server supports it. [1] https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#EnableOnlineRevocationChecks https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#Enable... [2] https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#RequireOnlineRevocationChecksForLocalAnchors https://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#Requir...

746F7475 10y ago

> So make them an option and stop taking the Chrome route of stripping out everything that more advanced users use regularly. Did you really use backspace and "move back" on regular basis? Why? You most likely aren't browsing the web with just your keyboard, so unless you are a leftie it requires you to either move your hand back to keyboard or move your hand across the whole keyboard and why would you do either of these when you can just move back with your mouses thumb button?

Doctor_Fegg 10y ago
Where's the "thumb button" on an Apple Mighty Mouse?
- 746F7475 10y ago
  Well, maybe it's time to stop using inferior shit products and buy a proper mouse. Any $20 mouse from your local department store has at least one button to press with your thumb.
Dayshine 10y ago
>with your mouses thumb button? Because I'm far more likely to accidentally press the mouse thumb button, hence it's rebound.
pkamb 10y ago
As a ThinkPad external keyboard user it's my primary navigation to go Back. TrackPoint, no mouse. Primary scrolling navigation is the Home/End/PgUp/PgDn group. Backspace for Back fits amazingly in this workflow.