36 ms·

Opera, Brave, Vivaldi to ignore Chrome's anti-ad-blocker changes

571 points by snaky 7y ago

SanchoPanda 7y ago
I wonder if that is sustainable as features are built on top of the new system and their codebase diverges further and further from chrome as a result.
- haecceity 7y ago
  Google said that the adblocking would still be available for entreprise customers so it should be as simple as flipping a switch. Maintenance should be easy if that's true.
  - ryacko 7y ago
    I think they'd simply be maintaining separate sets of backported code, since Enterprise Google Chrome won't be open source.
    - metildaa 7y ago
      WebKit/Blink is a mixed LGPL/BSD licensed project, with KHTML and other KDE developed parts being LGPL. Google likely can't keep most of their patches stripping support secret.
      - ryacko 7y ago
        Well, an enterprise would have to ask for the source code to Chrome, wouldn't they?
        vasili111 7y ago
        Well,they never asked for Microsoft Explorer/Edge code.
        ryacko 7y ago
        Only KDE, Apple, and Google can enforce it through their own licenses.
  - techntoke 7y ago
    Google never said they were removing ad-blocking. Not sure where you are getting your information.
- ralphstodomingo 7y ago
  I won't worry about that. I'm guessing this effectively creates a fork of Chromium that does not have the anti-ad blocker changes in question, which Opera/Brave/Edge will use instead of the main one. On that note, are people switching over to Firefox already?
  - mattlondon 7y ago
    I've been using Firefox for 6+months now as my primary browser. Once used to the slightly different UI I've not noticed any difference in day to day browsing. Only complaint - and this is my fault for enabling it and not a Firefox issue - is that if I used a container for Google, reCAPTCHAs are a huge huge huge pain in the arse now and take many attempts to pass. This is (I guess) because the Google cookie cannot track your general web usage (since your google cookie is in a container that only works on google domains, rather than general web properties) so it is harder to distinguish you from a bot. Also the dev tools are not as nice, but that is a niggle.
    - unicornporn 7y ago
      Try https://www.startpage.com/ https://www.startpage.com/ Works as proxy for Google Search. No captchas, very customizable. Could never live with the Bing based crap results of DuckDuckGo.
      - Doctor_Fegg 7y ago
        Whatever DDG does to Bing, it makes it worse. I recently switched from DDG to Bing and the difference is colossal - 95% of the time it’s as good as Google.
        unicornporn 7y ago
        But non-proxied Bing results are still far worse than Google, so I chose StartPage. :)
      - mattlondon 7y ago
- imgabe 7y ago
  I think Google will find people switch browsers more easily than they think. There was a time when Chrome was not ubiquitous. Even non-technical users can be convinced to click on a different icon to access the Internet if it results in a better experience. That's how we ended up with Chrome after all.
  - joaomacp 7y ago
    > Even non-technical users can be convinced to click on a different icon to access the Internet Google put a lot of effort in convincing those users, by plastering Chrome icons in their products and saying it was the supposed way to access the internet "safely". It's not as easy for others to do the same.
- robbrown451 7y ago
  I don't see that as a problem. Sure it takes effort, but especially since Google has the feature in their enterprise version, it shouldn't be too hard to just turn it on. Regardless, I'm sure a company like Brave or Microsoft can handle the engineering necessary to keep this working. You don't have to fork the whole thing.
jraph 7y ago
I feel like things would be easier if Firefox could be embeded in another browser just like chromium can. Let Google cripple their browser for themselves, and Mozilla provide the good and strong de facto browser engine.
- yoz-y 7y ago
  What is currently stopping its adoption? Iirc there were several browsers based on Gecko engine. Is it drm?
  - sametmax 7y ago
    Firefox is probably still a legacy mix of XUL, cpp and migrating to rust. I'm pretty sure chrome is easier to adapt.
    - feanaro 7y ago
      XUL was replaced quite some time ago.
      - zaarn 7y ago
        There is still some XUL components/code floating around, it's being replaced and reduced with each release.
        feanaro 7y ago
        Hmm, TIL. I was under the impression this work was already completed.
      - TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
        XUL is not supported for extensions now, but has Firefox's UI really been fully rewritten in HTML yet?
        jraph 7y ago
tzury 7y ago
This one[1] and the likes will prevent vast majority of ads, regardless of which browser you have chosen to use this morning. [1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/hosts https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/h...
- close04 7y ago
  Except mobile browsers, arguably the most critical place where you need blocking to get any kind of reasonably decent experience (load times, viewable area, battery life, etc.). Extensions like uBlock target people who don't want to bother with editing hosts files and keeping them updated.
  - chmod775 7y ago
    I use such a host file on my android. There's even apps to manage them. Needs a rooted device though. That has the added benefit of removing ads in all apps, because when they can't be loaded, generally not even the empty widget shows.
    - Madeindjs 7y ago
      You can use Blokada who block with DNS system without rooting.
      - chmod775 7y ago
        That uses a VPN internally though, which comes with a decent amount of overhead.
        aembleton 7y ago
        See my comment above, you can use https://www.nextdns.io/ https://www.nextdns.io/
    - aembleton 7y ago
      You can sign up at https://www.nextdns.io/ https://www.nextdns.io/ and then you can block ads at the DNS level. Simple to do, and updated, and without the overhead of running a local VPN.
red_admiral 7y ago
I tried opera a while back, and while it's fast and looks good, it has a new tab page with "recommended" sites that you can't turn off - I tried, but it's protected by DRM (opera will refuse to start if the file doesn't have a valid digital signature). So if I'm going to switch browsers because of privacy/advertising concerns, it's not going to be Opera.
- V-2 7y ago
  Current Opera doesn't even allow to customize mouse gestures. The browser that once prided itself in its feature richness...
  - ModernMech 7y ago
    I mean... at least it has mouse gestures. Hard to knock it for being not feature-rich enough when it has a feature no other browser has by default (except Vivaldi, which has Opera lineage).
    - V-2 7y ago
      Sure, however: a) This built-in feature is way below the standards trivially achievable via extensions in Firefox, Chrome etc. b) It's a downgrade in relation to what Opera itself used to offer in the past (and then, if I recall, got so stripped of functionalities it didn't even support bookmarks at some point).
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- pps 7y ago
  I don't see anything like that in new tab page. I have only searchbar and thumbnails for pages I like to visit. I'm on Mac, do they have different versions of new tab page for other systems?
- ModernMech 7y ago
  The new tab page has a list of bookmarks you can customize. It starts off with some "recommeded" sites in there, but you can just remove them once and they never come back. The only thing you can't remove from the new tab page is the Google search bar, which never really bothered me. Either way, it seems like you're implying that Opera will populate the new tab page with sites it chooses, but that's just not the case.
rndgermandude 7y ago
The problem at this point isn't whether chrome will disable it... It can be added back, probably fairly easily as google intents to keep it around for "enterprise" anyway, so it's probably just gonna end up changing/removing one if-statement. If not, then the code already exists and has to be merged back in. The problem is distribution of the actual extensions, as Vivaldi kinda pointed out, as the other browsers mostly rely on the Chrome Extension store. If Google really decides to pull the plug here they could start rejecting extensions using the old, removed-from-Chrome APIs. And then what? Each browser such as Vivaldi, Brave, Opera has to implement their own app store just to host the old-API ad-blockers. And implementing such a store is a major feat. And the walled garden strikes again. Vivaldi already indicated they might create a "limited" store, meaning not a real store open to the public, but one where they list hand-picked old-API extensions such as ublock origin. Of course, innovation is still stiffed as you in such a "chrome-store + limited vendor store" scenario cannot just develop new extensions using the old-API because you'd have no chance of getting listed in the chrome store, and essentially no chance in the hand-picked limited vendor ones.
- mantap 7y ago
  You can install extensions manually. You have to be able to because otherwise you wouldn't be able to develop new ones.
- zzzcpan 7y ago
  Walled gardens for extensions is also a big problem. Maybe web browsers will finally be forced to give up that control because of all this. Personally I would like at least user freedom to choose extension stores for themselves.
- Proven 7y ago
  I can't imagine Microsoft will follow Google and they already have a store that has a ton of ad blockers. If some sort of standardization emerges among the non-Google Chromium versions, Vivaldi users could load ad blockers from Microsoft's store.
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  yeah this commitment inspires little long term confidence since the ecosystem is heavily chrome-centric I've already moved everything to Firefox to test out waters before moving all my relatives.
tus87 7y ago
Gotts keep "authoritative" establishment media funded right Google?
indronilbanerji 7y ago
I really don't understand why security concerned people use Google's product in spite of knowing that Google steals everything and compromises user's privacy.
- icxa 7y ago
  I think you are confusing security with privacy. As far as security goes, I trust Google way more than any other site to handle my credentials properly, follow security best practices, use the highest level of encryption where applicable, keep servers up to date and patched faster than anyone else, etc. Outside of Google+, I can't remember the last time there was a major security incident at Google, when they happened, the impact was minimal (contrast this to say the Apple Cloud leak which led to the infamous "fappening", the Marriot leak, the Equifax hack, Target, etc). Breaches and 0-days happen, but as far as I know, Google is going to be the best it gets when it comes to security. Now when it comes to my privacy, no. I don't trust Google as far as I could throw them.
  - mistersquid 7y ago
    > contrast this to say the Apple Cloud leak which led to the infamous "fappening" This breach was not due to missteps or problems with security on Apple’s part (though Apple has had issues with security lapses, notably passwordless root login on macOS which was never reported to have been exploited [0]). In the instance of “The Fappening”, the breach that lead to the exposure of iCloud data was “revealed to have been gained via spear phishing attacks”. [1] [0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/29/macos-high-sierra-bug-apple-mac-unlock-blank-password-security-flaw https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/29/macos-hig... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_photos https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_ph...
cfarm 7y ago
When Chrome did this they quickly highlighted how much control they have over what people view. Privacy focused open browsers will gain marketshare because of it.
- techntoke 7y ago
  What did Chrome do exactly? Cause they never said they were disabling ad-blocker extensions. That was the grapevine effect from the Firefox crowd.
  - cfarm 7y ago
    I was referring to this, but it looks like there was an update to the article saying that it might not block everything https://www.tomsguide.com/us/chrome-block-ad-blockers,news-30206.html https://www.tomsguide.com/us/chrome-block-ad-blockers,news-3...
paulcarroty 7y ago
The main question is how long they will do it. Now it's easy, but google can move the locker deeply inside. If anti-ad-blocker changes will needs 1-2mb patches every release, they will just give up fast.
la_barba 7y ago
If you don't control the browser you downloaded, do you control the OS you chose to install? Can Microsoft ban Google Chrome from even running on their platform? Where does the 'user gets to decide' line end and the 'vendor knows best' line begin?
agumonkey 7y ago
I, for the first time ever, uninstalled chrome/chromium from my computers. It pains me because I liked it overall, and firefox isn't happy with my 2009 laptops. Maybe chrome devs mistake will be the air gap that creates a new leader from another group.
- clumsysmurf 7y ago
  FF and Safari were the only browser that worked well on my 2009 MBP ... until FF went multi process, and then started using too much ram. Today I think its total ram usage is worse than Chrome.
  - agumonkey 7y ago
    Memory usage used to be a lot better than chrome, but I'm under linux, maybe on macos it's different, also I stopped caring about it so maybe it got worse.
  - Vinnl 7y ago
    You could try setting it up to use fewer than 8 different processes? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/performance-settings https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/performance-settings
- Chirael 7y ago
  I got a new computer recently (old one died), and because of this change I will not install Chrome on the new computer. I’m planning to use Edge for anything Google-specific like Google Docs or Sheets, and Firefox for everything else. Unfortunately, my wife has a Chromebook and it’s hard to convince her that her very cheap, almost-disposable laptop should be replaced with something more expensive just to avoid Chrome. (And no, she did not want me to install Linux on it - sigh.)
  - agumonkey 7y ago
    Buy a second hand machine. I just grabbed a 3rd gen thinkpad x1 carbon for a neighbor and the thing is a ferrari compared to any laptop I have. 390$. Probably less than 300$ for a less thin model (x250~)
EugeneOZ 7y ago
Tried Opera on Mac OS - half of toggles on the Settings page is not rendered - "Pref not found for element SETTINGS-TOGGLE-BUTTON in SETTINGS-APPEARANCE-PAG". It was so epic trash - removed instantly. They obviously don't test it on Mac OS. Tried Vivaldi - render sites with errors (some images missing). 0 plugins installed. Not acceptable, removed. Brave - I really hate person who run this project and how he is trying to sell his product by "if you hate google as much as me, use Brave", while using Chromium. So, for now I don't see any Chromium-based alternative.
- pedrocx486 7y ago
  Edge Chromium maybe? I've been using it and have no complaints...
  - EugeneOZ 7y ago
    Yeah, testing it right now :) Thanks for the reminder - it's easy to forget MS has a browser for Mac :)
  - EugeneOZ 7y ago
    Works absolutely great!
- dvdgsng 7y ago
  > Tried Vivaldi - render sites with errors (some images missing). 0 plugins installed. Not acceptable, removed. Not sure what version of Vivaldi you used when that happened, but using Vivaldi every day on multiple workstations with different OS's without any issues I can only urge you to give it another try.
  - EugeneOZ 7y ago
    There is only one version I found on their Download page, 2.5.
nerd7473 7y ago
Good news :D
negamax 7y ago
Damn Google! This is so short sighted. People/everyone just installed Chrome on whatever systems they could find and that's how Chrome become so prevalent. Not because it was a superior product, not because of technology but because everyone was anti IE. Google is painting Chrome into similar corner. In a way, this is a good indicator of decline of Google. Revenue not through innovation but by coercion
- TylerE 7y ago
  I think that's rather revisionist. At a point in time Chrome was way better than not just IE, but way better than Firefox. The performance was leaps and bounds ahead.
  - whatpreventsit 7y ago
    I’ve been using both Firefox and Chrome since they came out and they have always felt near each others performance. It would be interesting to see some data on the subject.
    - they4kman 7y ago
      arewefastyet.com used to show benchmark comparisons between Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. It seems to now only show Firefox's performance across a slew of benchmarks. However, the old metrics are still available on the Wayback Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20110901000000*/arewefastyet.com http://web.archive.org/web/20110901000000*/arewefastyet.com
    - TylerE 7y ago
      One huge advantage Chrome had was it's multi-process model. This was back in the day when stuff like Flash would often nuke your entire Firefox session.
      - tty2300 7y ago
        Firefox has had this for years.
partiallypro 7y ago
I don't see how Chrome's new anti-ad blocking isn't seen as anti-competitive, considering Google basically runs the ad business on non-Google sites, etc. Sure, Facebook and Amazon also serve up ads...but Google is by far the company that is hurt the most by ad blocking. Then at the same time Chrome is essentially blocking "intrusive" ads by default...and by intrusive they basically mean non-Google ads that have the same CPC and CPM model Google has.
- bongobongo 7y ago
  It is absolutely anti-competitive garbage, and you should be prepared to see more and more of it (and increasingly anti-consumer iterations if it) until people wake up and start demanding that their political leaders do something about it. “Companies will regulate themselves” is a cute libertarian bedtime story.
  - techntoke 7y ago
    Google never said they were blocking ad-blockers. It was the hyperbole Firefox crowd who used some post by Raymond Hill from the creator of uBlock Origin as a reason to start another "Switch to Firefox" campaign. However, Hill admitted that adblockers aren't going away and it is just a proposed change in the WebRequest API to make things more akin to Safari to help adblockers operate in a standard in speedy way. Mozilla on the other hand did expose a bunch of users to ads and malicious sites recently though when they didn't renew a certificate and didn't push out a fix for over 24 hours in which all addons were disabled in their browser and the configurations were lost as well.
    - qtplatypus 7y ago
      Can you link to the site where he says this?
      - techntoke 7y ago
        https://www.howtogeek.com/fyi/chrome-may-get-faster-ad-blocking-while-breaking-ublock-origin/ https://www.howtogeek.com/fyi/chrome-may-get-faster-ad-block...
fourier_mode 7y ago
My worry is that because Chrome has become a standard of web-browsing so even after such decisions taken by Google, people would not switch to other(better) options.
jackcosgrove 7y ago
So not only is Google introducing this change into the Chromium codebase, but it sounds like they aren't putting it behind a Chrome-only compiler flag. And if you're satisfied with Chrome as-is then too bad because the GoogleUpdater will automatically update Chrome and is harder to kill than a cockroach, and Chrome will give you an annoying popup 80-some days after that version's build date telling you to upgrade Chrome even if you have managed to block GoogleUpdater.
nathanasmith 7y ago
I looked around but I can't figure out if this affects extensions like Tampermonkey. If not, writing an adblock script for that seems like an alternative.
ycombonator 7y ago
What about Microsoft Edge Chromium ?
lsiebert 7y ago
I switched to Chrome years ago. Recently I switched back to Firefox. It's changed dramatically. Speed, security, and stuff that you can't do in Chrome, like extensions like Facebook Container. To me this isn't about Chrome Vs Firefox though. It's about the benefits of a healthy marketplace for software, and the dangers of near monopolies to consumer choice.
- josh2600 7y ago
  The world is changing. People are starting to care about things they didn’t before. I think the pendulum is swinging towards privacy and I like it.
TheSeeker11 7y ago
AdGuard will not be affected by these changes - https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-api-comment.html https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-api-comment.html
- slenk 7y ago
  Apples and oranges. AdGuard is a third party app that runs at the system level. Not the same thing.
varun789 7y ago
I was just browsing along and came upon your blog. just wanted to say good blog and this article really helped me. https://www.techinpost.com/top-10-android-apps-for-students-use-2017/ https://www.techinpost.com/top-10-android-apps-for-students-...

571 points by snaky 7y ago

I wonder if that is sustainable as features are built on top of the new system and their codebase diverges further and further from chrome as a result.

haecceity 7y ago
Google said that the adblocking would still be available for entreprise customers so it should be as simple as flipping a switch. Maintenance should be easy if that's true.
- ryacko 7y ago
  I think they'd simply be maintaining separate sets of backported code, since Enterprise Google Chrome won't be open source.
  - metildaa 7y ago
    WebKit/Blink is a mixed LGPL/BSD licensed project, with KHTML and other KDE developed parts being LGPL. Google likely can't keep most of their patches stripping support secret.
    - ryacko 7y ago
      Well, an enterprise would have to ask for the source code to Chrome, wouldn't they?
      - vasili111 7y ago
        Well,they never asked for Microsoft Explorer/Edge code.
        ryacko 7y ago
        Only KDE, Apple, and Google can enforce it through their own licenses.
- techntoke 7y ago
  Google never said they were removing ad-blocking. Not sure where you are getting your information.
ralphstodomingo 7y ago
I won't worry about that. I'm guessing this effectively creates a fork of Chromium that does not have the anti-ad blocker changes in question, which Opera/Brave/Edge will use instead of the main one. On that note, are people switching over to Firefox already?
- mattlondon 7y ago
  I've been using Firefox for 6+months now as my primary browser. Once used to the slightly different UI I've not noticed any difference in day to day browsing. Only complaint - and this is my fault for enabling it and not a Firefox issue - is that if I used a container for Google, reCAPTCHAs are a huge huge huge pain in the arse now and take many attempts to pass. This is (I guess) because the Google cookie cannot track your general web usage (since your google cookie is in a container that only works on google domains, rather than general web properties) so it is harder to distinguish you from a bot. Also the dev tools are not as nice, but that is a niggle.
  - unicornporn 7y ago
    Try https://www.startpage.com/ https://www.startpage.com/ Works as proxy for Google Search. No captchas, very customizable. Could never live with the Bing based crap results of DuckDuckGo.
    - Doctor_Fegg 7y ago
      Whatever DDG does to Bing, it makes it worse. I recently switched from DDG to Bing and the difference is colossal - 95% of the time it’s as good as Google.
      - unicornporn 7y ago
        But non-proxied Bing results are still far worse than Google, so I chose StartPage. :)
    - mattlondon 7y ago
imgabe 7y ago
I think Google will find people switch browsers more easily than they think. There was a time when Chrome was not ubiquitous. Even non-technical users can be convinced to click on a different icon to access the Internet if it results in a better experience. That's how we ended up with Chrome after all.
- joaomacp 7y ago
  > Even non-technical users can be convinced to click on a different icon to access the Internet Google put a lot of effort in convincing those users, by plastering Chrome icons in their products and saying it was the supposed way to access the internet "safely". It's not as easy for others to do the same.
robbrown451 7y ago
I don't see that as a problem. Sure it takes effort, but especially since Google has the feature in their enterprise version, it shouldn't be too hard to just turn it on. Regardless, I'm sure a company like Brave or Microsoft can handle the engineering necessary to keep this working. You don't have to fork the whole thing.

jraph 7y ago

I feel like things would be easier if Firefox could be embeded in another browser just like chromium can. Let Google cripple their browser for themselves, and Mozilla provide the good and strong de facto browser engine.

yoz-y 7y ago
What is currently stopping its adoption? Iirc there were several browsers based on Gecko engine. Is it drm?
- sametmax 7y ago
  Firefox is probably still a legacy mix of XUL, cpp and migrating to rust. I'm pretty sure chrome is easier to adapt.
  - feanaro 7y ago
    XUL was replaced quite some time ago.
    - zaarn 7y ago
      There is still some XUL components/code floating around, it's being replaced and reduced with each release.
      - feanaro 7y ago
        Hmm, TIL. I was under the impression this work was already completed.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 7y ago
      XUL is not supported for extensions now, but has Firefox's UI really been fully rewritten in HTML yet?
      - jraph 7y ago

tzury 7y ago

This one[1] and the likes will prevent vast majority of ads, regardless of which browser you have chosen to use this morning. [1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/hosts https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/h...

close04 7y ago
Except mobile browsers, arguably the most critical place where you need blocking to get any kind of reasonably decent experience (load times, viewable area, battery life, etc.). Extensions like uBlock target people who don't want to bother with editing hosts files and keeping them updated.
- chmod775 7y ago
  I use such a host file on my android. There's even apps to manage them. Needs a rooted device though. That has the added benefit of removing ads in all apps, because when they can't be loaded, generally not even the empty widget shows.
  - Madeindjs 7y ago
    You can use Blokada who block with DNS system without rooting.
    - chmod775 7y ago
      That uses a VPN internally though, which comes with a decent amount of overhead.
      - aembleton 7y ago
        See my comment above, you can use https://www.nextdns.io/ https://www.nextdns.io/
  - aembleton 7y ago
    You can sign up at https://www.nextdns.io/ https://www.nextdns.io/ and then you can block ads at the DNS level. Simple to do, and updated, and without the overhead of running a local VPN.

red_admiral 7y ago

I tried opera a while back, and while it's fast and looks good, it has a new tab page with "recommended" sites that you can't turn off - I tried, but it's protected by DRM (opera will refuse to start if the file doesn't have a valid digital signature). So if I'm going to switch browsers because of privacy/advertising concerns, it's not going to be Opera.

V-2 7y ago
Current Opera doesn't even allow to customize mouse gestures. The browser that once prided itself in its feature richness...
- ModernMech 7y ago
  I mean... at least it has mouse gestures. Hard to knock it for being not feature-rich enough when it has a feature no other browser has by default (except Vivaldi, which has Opera lineage).
  - V-2 7y ago
    Sure, however: a) This built-in feature is way below the standards trivially achievable via extensions in Firefox, Chrome etc. b) It's a downgrade in relation to what Opera itself used to offer in the past (and then, if I recall, got so stripped of functionalities it didn't even support bookmarks at some point).
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
pps 7y ago
I don't see anything like that in new tab page. I have only searchbar and thumbnails for pages I like to visit. I'm on Mac, do they have different versions of new tab page for other systems?
ModernMech 7y ago
The new tab page has a list of bookmarks you can customize. It starts off with some "recommeded" sites in there, but you can just remove them once and they never come back. The only thing you can't remove from the new tab page is the Google search bar, which never really bothered me. Either way, it seems like you're implying that Opera will populate the new tab page with sites it chooses, but that's just not the case.

rndgermandude 7y ago

The problem at this point isn't whether chrome will disable it... It can be added back, probably fairly easily as google intents to keep it around for "enterprise" anyway, so it's probably just gonna end up changing/removing one if-statement. If not, then the code already exists and has to be merged back in. The problem is distribution of the actual extensions, as Vivaldi kinda pointed out, as the other browsers mostly rely on the Chrome Extension store. If Google really decides to pull the plug here they could start rejecting extensions using the old, removed-from-Chrome APIs. And then what? Each browser such as Vivaldi, Brave, Opera has to implement their own app store just to host the old-API ad-blockers. And implementing such a store is a major feat. And the walled garden strikes again. Vivaldi already indicated they might create a "limited" store, meaning not a real store open to the public, but one where they list hand-picked old-API extensions such as ublock origin. Of course, innovation is still stiffed as you in such a "chrome-store + limited vendor store" scenario cannot just develop new extensions using the old-API because you'd have no chance of getting listed in the chrome store, and essentially no chance in the hand-picked limited vendor ones.

mantap 7y ago
You can install extensions manually. You have to be able to because otherwise you wouldn't be able to develop new ones.
zzzcpan 7y ago
Walled gardens for extensions is also a big problem. Maybe web browsers will finally be forced to give up that control because of all this. Personally I would like at least user freedom to choose extension stores for themselves.
Proven 7y ago
I can't imagine Microsoft will follow Google and they already have a store that has a ton of ad blockers. If some sort of standardization emerges among the non-Google Chromium versions, Vivaldi users could load ad blockers from Microsoft's store.
LoSboccacc 7y ago
yeah this commitment inspires little long term confidence since the ecosystem is heavily chrome-centric I've already moved everything to Firefox to test out waters before moving all my relatives.

tus87 7y ago

Gotts keep "authoritative" establishment media funded right Google?

indronilbanerji 7y ago

I really don't understand why security concerned people use Google's product in spite of knowing that Google steals everything and compromises user's privacy.

icxa 7y ago
I think you are confusing security with privacy. As far as security goes, I trust Google way more than any other site to handle my credentials properly, follow security best practices, use the highest level of encryption where applicable, keep servers up to date and patched faster than anyone else, etc. Outside of Google+, I can't remember the last time there was a major security incident at Google, when they happened, the impact was minimal (contrast this to say the Apple Cloud leak which led to the infamous "fappening", the Marriot leak, the Equifax hack, Target, etc). Breaches and 0-days happen, but as far as I know, Google is going to be the best it gets when it comes to security. Now when it comes to my privacy, no. I don't trust Google as far as I could throw them.
- mistersquid 7y ago
  > contrast this to say the Apple Cloud leak which led to the infamous "fappening" This breach was not due to missteps or problems with security on Apple’s part (though Apple has had issues with security lapses, notably passwordless root login on macOS which was never reported to have been exploited [0]). In the instance of “The Fappening”, the breach that lead to the exposure of iCloud data was “revealed to have been gained via spear phishing attacks”. [1] [0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/29/macos-high-sierra-bug-apple-mac-unlock-blank-password-security-flaw https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/29/macos-hig... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_photos https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_ph...

cfarm 7y ago

When Chrome did this they quickly highlighted how much control they have over what people view. Privacy focused open browsers will gain marketshare because of it.

techntoke 7y ago
What did Chrome do exactly? Cause they never said they were disabling ad-blocker extensions. That was the grapevine effect from the Firefox crowd.
- cfarm 7y ago
  I was referring to this, but it looks like there was an update to the article saying that it might not block everything https://www.tomsguide.com/us/chrome-block-ad-blockers,news-30206.html https://www.tomsguide.com/us/chrome-block-ad-blockers,news-3...

paulcarroty 7y ago

The main question is how long they will do it. Now it's easy, but google can move the locker deeply inside. If anti-ad-blocker changes will needs 1-2mb patches every release, they will just give up fast.

la_barba 7y ago

If you don't control the browser you downloaded, do you control the OS you chose to install? Can Microsoft ban Google Chrome from even running on their platform? Where does the 'user gets to decide' line end and the 'vendor knows best' line begin?

agumonkey 7y ago

I, for the first time ever, uninstalled chrome/chromium from my computers. It pains me because I liked it overall, and firefox isn't happy with my 2009 laptops. Maybe chrome devs mistake will be the air gap that creates a new leader from another group.

clumsysmurf 7y ago
FF and Safari were the only browser that worked well on my 2009 MBP ... until FF went multi process, and then started using too much ram. Today I think its total ram usage is worse than Chrome.
- agumonkey 7y ago
  Memory usage used to be a lot better than chrome, but I'm under linux, maybe on macos it's different, also I stopped caring about it so maybe it got worse.
- Vinnl 7y ago
  You could try setting it up to use fewer than 8 different processes? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/performance-settings https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/performance-settings
Chirael 7y ago
I got a new computer recently (old one died), and because of this change I will not install Chrome on the new computer. I’m planning to use Edge for anything Google-specific like Google Docs or Sheets, and Firefox for everything else. Unfortunately, my wife has a Chromebook and it’s hard to convince her that her very cheap, almost-disposable laptop should be replaced with something more expensive just to avoid Chrome. (And no, she did not want me to install Linux on it - sigh.)
- agumonkey 7y ago
  Buy a second hand machine. I just grabbed a 3rd gen thinkpad x1 carbon for a neighbor and the thing is a ferrari compared to any laptop I have. 390$. Probably less than 300$ for a less thin model (x250~)

EugeneOZ 7y ago

Tried Opera on Mac OS - half of toggles on the Settings page is not rendered - "Pref not found for element SETTINGS-TOGGLE-BUTTON in SETTINGS-APPEARANCE-PAG". It was so epic trash - removed instantly. They obviously don't test it on Mac OS. Tried Vivaldi - render sites with errors (some images missing). 0 plugins installed. Not acceptable, removed. Brave - I really hate person who run this project and how he is trying to sell his product by "if you hate google as much as me, use Brave", while using Chromium. So, for now I don't see any Chromium-based alternative.

pedrocx486 7y ago
Edge Chromium maybe? I've been using it and have no complaints...
- EugeneOZ 7y ago
  Yeah, testing it right now :) Thanks for the reminder - it's easy to forget MS has a browser for Mac :)
- EugeneOZ 7y ago
  Works absolutely great!
dvdgsng 7y ago
> Tried Vivaldi - render sites with errors (some images missing). 0 plugins installed. Not acceptable, removed. Not sure what version of Vivaldi you used when that happened, but using Vivaldi every day on multiple workstations with different OS's without any issues I can only urge you to give it another try.
- EugeneOZ 7y ago
  There is only one version I found on their Download page, 2.5.

nerd7473 7y ago

Good news :D

negamax 7y ago

Damn Google! This is so short sighted. People/everyone just installed Chrome on whatever systems they could find and that's how Chrome become so prevalent. Not because it was a superior product, not because of technology but because everyone was anti IE. Google is painting Chrome into similar corner. In a way, this is a good indicator of decline of Google. Revenue not through innovation but by coercion

TylerE 7y ago
I think that's rather revisionist. At a point in time Chrome was way better than not just IE, but way better than Firefox. The performance was leaps and bounds ahead.
- whatpreventsit 7y ago
  I’ve been using both Firefox and Chrome since they came out and they have always felt near each others performance. It would be interesting to see some data on the subject.
  - they4kman 7y ago
    arewefastyet.com used to show benchmark comparisons between Firefox, Chrome, and Safari. It seems to now only show Firefox's performance across a slew of benchmarks. However, the old metrics are still available on the Wayback Machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20110901000000*/arewefastyet.com http://web.archive.org/web/20110901000000*/arewefastyet.com
  - TylerE 7y ago
    One huge advantage Chrome had was it's multi-process model. This was back in the day when stuff like Flash would often nuke your entire Firefox session.
    - tty2300 7y ago
      Firefox has had this for years.

partiallypro 7y ago

I don't see how Chrome's new anti-ad blocking isn't seen as anti-competitive, considering Google basically runs the ad business on non-Google sites, etc. Sure, Facebook and Amazon also serve up ads...but Google is by far the company that is hurt the most by ad blocking. Then at the same time Chrome is essentially blocking "intrusive" ads by default...and by intrusive they basically mean non-Google ads that have the same CPC and CPM model Google has.

bongobongo 7y ago
It is absolutely anti-competitive garbage, and you should be prepared to see more and more of it (and increasingly anti-consumer iterations if it) until people wake up and start demanding that their political leaders do something about it. “Companies will regulate themselves” is a cute libertarian bedtime story.
- techntoke 7y ago
  Google never said they were blocking ad-blockers. It was the hyperbole Firefox crowd who used some post by Raymond Hill from the creator of uBlock Origin as a reason to start another "Switch to Firefox" campaign. However, Hill admitted that adblockers aren't going away and it is just a proposed change in the WebRequest API to make things more akin to Safari to help adblockers operate in a standard in speedy way. Mozilla on the other hand did expose a bunch of users to ads and malicious sites recently though when they didn't renew a certificate and didn't push out a fix for over 24 hours in which all addons were disabled in their browser and the configurations were lost as well.
  - qtplatypus 7y ago
    Can you link to the site where he says this?
    - techntoke 7y ago
      https://www.howtogeek.com/fyi/chrome-may-get-faster-ad-blocking-while-breaking-ublock-origin/ https://www.howtogeek.com/fyi/chrome-may-get-faster-ad-block...

fourier_mode 7y ago

My worry is that because Chrome has become a standard of web-browsing so even after such decisions taken by Google, people would not switch to other(better) options.

jackcosgrove 7y ago

So not only is Google introducing this change into the Chromium codebase, but it sounds like they aren't putting it behind a Chrome-only compiler flag. And if you're satisfied with Chrome as-is then too bad because the GoogleUpdater will automatically update Chrome and is harder to kill than a cockroach, and Chrome will give you an annoying popup 80-some days after that version's build date telling you to upgrade Chrome even if you have managed to block GoogleUpdater.

nathanasmith 7y ago

I looked around but I can't figure out if this affects extensions like Tampermonkey. If not, writing an adblock script for that seems like an alternative.

ycombonator 7y ago

What about Microsoft Edge Chromium ?

lsiebert 7y ago

I switched to Chrome years ago. Recently I switched back to Firefox. It's changed dramatically. Speed, security, and stuff that you can't do in Chrome, like extensions like Facebook Container. To me this isn't about Chrome Vs Firefox though. It's about the benefits of a healthy marketplace for software, and the dangers of near monopolies to consumer choice.

josh2600 7y ago
The world is changing. People are starting to care about things they didn’t before. I think the pendulum is swinging towards privacy and I like it.

TheSeeker11 7y ago

AdGuard will not be affected by these changes - https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-api-comment.html https://adguard.com/en/blog/chrome-api-comment.html

slenk 7y ago
Apples and oranges. AdGuard is a third party app that runs at the system level. Not the same thing.

varun789 7y ago

I was just browsing along and came upon your blog. just wanted to say good blog and this article really helped me. https://www.techinpost.com/top-10-android-apps-for-students-use-2017/ https://www.techinpost.com/top-10-android-apps-for-students-...