6 ms·
Ask HN: How YouTube is recommending Chrome in middle of monopoly trial?
Google Chrome is a fast and secure browser for YouTube. Try it? I got this when not logged into google on Edge. It's a popup not a video ad. Edge runs on chromium tech, so this claim is BS. They are in-between monopoly trial. Shouldn't they have limited some of their shady practices? I also can't think brave can run ads like that. Aren't they abusing their position?
- smoldesu 3y agoBecause Google isn't at trial for their browser monopoly? If recommending a browser was monopolistic behavior, both Microsoft and Apple would be metaphorical rubble by now. The industry has done this for years, our glorious FAANG vanguards decided that browser solicitation was a normal user experience.
- eli 3y agoAmong other reasons, wouldn't it be more suspicious if they suddenly stopped?
- madduci 3y agoBecause adblocking doesn't work on Chrome. Use Firefox.
- hkt 3y agoI recently saw a "adblockers aren't allowed on youtube" gate from Firefox. I recommend using Minitube on Linux desktop now. Plus youtube-dl and NewPipe.
- shrimp_emoji 3y agoyoutube-dl is broken now and barely updated for some byzantine reasons, no? yt-dlp is supposed to be the new hotness, though I've yet to try it. https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/ https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp/
- jedberg 3y ago> yt-dlp is supposed to be the new hotness I've been using it as a drop-in replacement for YouTube-dl and it's been great.
- LoganDark 3y agoI use yt-dlp to download all my music now - it works. Really well. Probably because it pretends to be an Android client, and those are perpetually out of date. (Think of the shitty smart TVs!)
- hkt 3y agoTrue. yt-dlp is symlinked to youtube-dl on my system and I forget that sometimes!
- renegat0x0 3y agoI started using https://yewtu.be/ https://yewtu.be/ recently
- sansah 3y agoI'm using uBlock https://ublockorigin.com/ https://ublockorigin.com/. It works on chrome, edge and firefox. I dont see any extra ads on chrome over firefox.
- mirashii 3y agohttps://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b... explains a variety of techniques uBlock Origin implements in Firefox that are not supported in Chrome, with some statistics about what percentage of ads those are.
- legitster 3y agoNot only are they not on trial for this at all, changing your behavior because of a trial would be admission that the behaviors were suspect to begin with! If they are arguing that their methods are above board, then they should continue doing them through the court case.
- robertlagrant 3y agoHaving an open source Chromium that allows competing browsers to be built at a fraction of the cost might make it hard to claim monopolistic practices. If Google never existed, would we have more browser choice now?
- hkt 3y agoThe monopolistic practices are largely about (IMO) forcing standard adoption to make it impossible to develop new browsers. I suspect competition law is ill equipped to turn that into action, though.
- lazide 3y agoAlso, they were dumping a lot of energy into shutting down competition that way instead of making IE not suck.
- josefx 3y agoThere are so many angles. So many angles. Before chrome there where a lot more competing browser engines, so that is already a solid YES. Then you have the handheld/smartphone market that was a lot more diverse before Google Android hit the market. > at a fraction of the cost Microsoft gave IE away for free and there where dozens of IE clones build on top of its engine, you just never had a reason to use any of them because in the end they where still IE clones.
- smoldesu 3y ago> Then you have the handheld/smartphone market that was a lot more diverse before Google Android hit the market. "Then you have the UNIX market that was a lot more diverse before Red Hat Linux hit the market." I think it will be trivial to prove that Google is actively harming the internet. Proving that Chromium is anticompetitive for being large and complicated is a suicide mission. If the market decides that a terrible, buggy and enormous runtime is the best way to freely distribute content, then that's what we'll settle on. It's hardly surprising that things got this way, too; locked-down platforms are becoming so normalized that browsers are the only window of freedom users and developers have. It's not like Google or Apple made it any easier to ship native, cross-platform apps in that time, either. So of course users will gravitate to a browser that has more features than their own OS. So... implicating Google is easy. Trashing Chrome adoption and feature-creep is a different battle entirely.
- redder23 3y agoWhat supposed claim is BS? "Chrome is a fast and secure browser for YouTube." That claim is NOT BS. And I am not shilling for Google here, I use Brave and Firefox myself and NEVER used Chrome EVER and I am proud of it. However, they did not claim its MORE secure or faster, they just say "is a fast and secure". I remember when Chrome came out how heavily Google pushed it back then I used their search. It was something similar I think, or was it Firefox ads somewhere else? Not sure but there was also no claim just a meaningless general statement. God Google search is it shitty these days. Putting things in quotes does not even work anymore and the search results are garbage.