4 ms·

There are valid arguments for both sides, but instead of forcing this upon everyone, Chrome team could have added it as a config option. Set the defaults for au

There are valid arguments for both sides, but instead of forcing this upon everyone, Chrome team could have added it as a config option. Set the defaults for autocomplete anyway you like, and then let the user change the behaviour only on some sites. Or if you don't wish to pollute the settings with this, extract this behaviour into an extension and let the people choose if it bothers them enough to go and install it.

pricechild 9y ago
"config option" can't be the right answer. It's simply not realistic the 1000th time it's offered as the obvious solution.
michaelmrose 9y ago
Either googles solution is better or its not. If it is then google should make it the default even if it provides an option. Then even if they provide the option 99.999% will use the default rendering the option basically worthless. If its not they should probably just work how everyone else works.
- pathseeker 9y ago
  >Either googles solution is better or its not. No, it's better for users who read the auto-filled boxes to make sure they are sane (which is what I do). It's not good for users that don't understand what auto-fill is (i.e. they think the website is suggesting it to them).
  - hinkley 9y ago
    Or people staring at a form that is two screens long... Easy to miss things.
    - crottypeter 9y ago
      Or people unlucky enough to land on a site that has adopted "in-field labels". Once those autofill, it's anyone's guess whether you have put the right data in.
- ivanhoe 9y ago
  If you use that approach on everything then you admittedly get clean and easy to understand configuration, but you also reduce the usefulness of your app and make some of your regular users very unhappy... I stopped using Ubuntu recently for exactly that reason, too many options were cut and hidden away from GUI, and just defaults enforced on you, to the point that Windows Explorer is now far more powerful and customizable tool than Nautilus.
  - michaelmrose 9y ago
    Nautilus is not exactly a power tool. Personally I rather enjoy spacefm. Its super trivial to bind hotkeys to shell functions that operate on the current directory or files or whatever. I know that some of this can be done with custom actions but its nice to be able to a) bind keys not just provide a context menu item and b) create a custom command with a few clicks. Example something like autojump or what have you is a common tool for shell users. Its nice to bind a key to pop up a prompt key in a string and have this jump to a directory in your file manager using the same source of info as autojump. This took like 30 seconds to figure out and set up. Another example a hotkey show a thumbnail gallery of every image recursively below current dir.
- wtetzner 9y ago
  > Either googles solution is better or its not. Except that whether it's better or not is probably contingent on the particular web site and particular user.

pricechild 9y ago

"config option" can't be the right answer. It's simply not realistic the 1000th time it's offered as the obvious solution.

michaelmrose 9y ago

Either googles solution is better or its not. If it is then google should make it the default even if it provides an option. Then even if they provide the option 99.999% will use the default rendering the option basically worthless. If its not they should probably just work how everyone else works.

pathseeker 9y ago
>Either googles solution is better or its not. No, it's better for users who read the auto-filled boxes to make sure they are sane (which is what I do). It's not good for users that don't understand what auto-fill is (i.e. they think the website is suggesting it to them).
- hinkley 9y ago
  Or people staring at a form that is two screens long... Easy to miss things.
  - crottypeter 9y ago
    Or people unlucky enough to land on a site that has adopted "in-field labels". Once those autofill, it's anyone's guess whether you have put the right data in.
ivanhoe 9y ago
If you use that approach on everything then you admittedly get clean and easy to understand configuration, but you also reduce the usefulness of your app and make some of your regular users very unhappy... I stopped using Ubuntu recently for exactly that reason, too many options were cut and hidden away from GUI, and just defaults enforced on you, to the point that Windows Explorer is now far more powerful and customizable tool than Nautilus.
- michaelmrose 9y ago
  Nautilus is not exactly a power tool. Personally I rather enjoy spacefm. Its super trivial to bind hotkeys to shell functions that operate on the current directory or files or whatever. I know that some of this can be done with custom actions but its nice to be able to a) bind keys not just provide a context menu item and b) create a custom command with a few clicks. Example something like autojump or what have you is a common tool for shell users. Its nice to bind a key to pop up a prompt key in a string and have this jump to a directory in your file manager using the same source of info as autojump. This took like 30 seconds to figure out and set up. Another example a hotkey show a thumbnail gallery of every image recursively below current dir.
wtetzner 9y ago
> Either googles solution is better or its not. Except that whether it's better or not is probably contingent on the particular web site and particular user.