3 ms·
The question is if removing 'www' and the protocol are strong enough incentives to take the trouble to manually switch from an integrated (on Android) and bundl
by Santosh83 7y ago
The question is if removing 'www' and the protocol are strong enough incentives to take the trouble to manually switch from an integrated (on Android) and bundled (just about everywhere) browser.
On the other hand I suspect that users will get used to not seeing 'www' and the protocol and in no long time, will call browsers not following suit as "having cluttered UI."
Monopolies (even de facto ones) train their target users, and not the other way around. We will get used to yet another small erosion of choice, complexity and the appreciation of diversity that exposure to them brings.
- ehsankia 7y agoOut of all the things that would make people go from Chrome to Firefox, removing www is literally at the very very bottom of the list for average users... I understand technical people and power users caring and claiming it's not a good idea, but the majority of people won't even notice anything changed.
- Santosh83 7y agoThat's my point. Any single factor by itself seems hardly a reason to switch. Sadly the "whole picture" is not something the vast majority of users are likely to be informed about, so barring severe and protracted regression, I don't see any large-scale switch away from Chrome.