3 ms·

Why listen to developers? They (and their bosses) created such a hostile environment for users in the first place, if they'd done the right thing then this woul

by flukus 8y ago

Why listen to developers? They (and their bosses) created such a hostile environment for users in the first place, if they'd done the right thing then this wouldn't need to be baked into the browser at all. Listen to users, they need protection from developers.

wwweston 8y ago
Developers make the things users use -- there aren't users without developers. Developer interests therefore often overlap with user interest, even if they don't always. Where they're in tension, the particulars of the solution matter. Users aren't winning if their web audio apps inexplicably stop playing sound in a new version, if Chrome's decision makers decide to muck around with a standard in such a way that devs acting in perfectly good faith find their Web Audio API stuff breaking/working from release to release, and those devs either have to burn time adapting to the hoops du jour particular to each browser or simply give up trying to hit a moving/multiplying target. As others have pointed out, there are simpler ways to offer users consideration for opt-in audio.
sp332 8y ago
Cross-posting my comment from Ars Technica: So here's how weird and user-unfriendly this is. If you link straight to a page, it will be muted. [Autoplaying sound - unless you're in Chrome 66] http://dryad.technology/gametitle http://dryad.technology/gametitle But! If you go to http://dryad.technology http://dryad.technology first and then click "Game Title", it plays sound. If you control-click it to open it in a new tab, it also plays sound. But if you drag the link "Game Title" to the tab bar to open a new tab, it doesn't. This honestly doesn't look like a fully-baked feature.
ksk 8y ago
Why not just stop visiting sites that don't align with your views? Reward sites that respect your views and interests... 1. "Users want to view my website but Chrome is getting in the way.." 2. "Users don't seem to want to visit my website. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong..."

by flukus 8y ago

wwweston 8y ago

Developers make the things users use -- there aren't users without developers. Developer interests therefore often overlap with user interest, even if they don't always. Where they're in tension, the particulars of the solution matter. Users aren't winning if their web audio apps inexplicably stop playing sound in a new version, if Chrome's decision makers decide to muck around with a standard in such a way that devs acting in perfectly good faith find their Web Audio API stuff breaking/working from release to release, and those devs either have to burn time adapting to the hoops du jour particular to each browser or simply give up trying to hit a moving/multiplying target. As others have pointed out, there are simpler ways to offer users consideration for opt-in audio.

sp332 8y ago

Cross-posting my comment from Ars Technica: So here's how weird and user-unfriendly this is. If you link straight to a page, it will be muted. [Autoplaying sound - unless you're in Chrome 66] http://dryad.technology/gametitle http://dryad.technology/gametitle But! If you go to http://dryad.technology http://dryad.technology first and then click "Game Title", it plays sound. If you control-click it to open it in a new tab, it also plays sound. But if you drag the link "Game Title" to the tab bar to open a new tab, it doesn't. This honestly doesn't look like a fully-baked feature.

ksk 8y ago

Why not just stop visiting sites that don't align with your views? Reward sites that respect your views and interests... 1. "Users want to view my website but Chrome is getting in the way.." 2. "Users don't seem to want to visit my website. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong..."