6 ms·

Um, Firefox works just fine on XP and Vista, just like Chrome. I'm sure Google would be happy if people switched to Chrome for Docs, but they're not forcing any

by fpgeek 13y ago

Um, Firefox works just fine on XP and Vista, just like Chrome. I'm sure Google would be happy if people switched to Chrome for Docs, but they're not forcing anyone to.

zobzu 13y ago
half the time i load gdocs in firefox, gdocs tells me firefox is not a supported browser and that i should download chrome right away. Of course i can ignore the warning, but its pretty clear and if you're a random user you'll be like "oh crap ive to upgrade or gdocs will break". so yeah, its close enough.
- nikbackm 13y ago
  Maybe that's because they only support the two latest versions of Firefox as well? I haven't gotten any such warnings from Google Docs while using Firefox (latest version) at least.
josteink 13y ago
But Google doesn't tell you to download Firefox on every other page they own across the entire internet. They do so for Chrome. "Upgrade your browser", "Get a faster browser" and all that bullshit we laughed at MS for doing with MSIE. But now it's Google doing it. Everywhere. With no anti-trust regulatory reactions in sight.
- DominikR 13y ago
  > But Google doesn't tell you to download Firefox on every other page they own across the entire internet. Why shouldn't they advertise their own products? And why in hell do you think they should advertise Firefox? Are you advertising your competitor on your property? > They do so for Chrome. "Upgrade your browser", "Get a faster browser" and all that bullshit we laughed at MS for doing with MSIE. For an IE user, Chrome is certainly an upgrade. Both in security and speed. > But now it's Google doing it. Everywhere. With no anti-trust regulatory reactions in sight. Google doesn't have a monopoly in browsers so what are you talking about?
  - josteink 13y ago
    For an IE user, Chrome is certainly an upgrade. Both in security and speed. I'm by no stretch an IE user, but MS have made great improvements to their browser. And some users may prefer it simply because it is familiar. And excuse me for saying so, but as someone who values my privacy I trust Microsoft a lot more than Google. To me, Chrome is the web browser where everything I do is leaked directly to the NSA. Sorry, but I don't consider that "secure" by any stretch of imagination. Disregarding that, as a Firefox user though, I still get the same crap ads. Basically they are shown to everyone not using Chrome. And for my needs, I think Chrome is a significant downgrade compared to Firefox. By using the word "upgrade" Google is being disingenuous. Google doesn't have a monopoly in browsers But they do have a near monopoly on internet advertising and they are using it to push their own products in a borderline dishonest way. I mean... If Microsoft merely bundling a web-browser with their OS (as opposed to leaving users needing to fiddle with command-line FTP to download one) was bad enough to warrant regulation, I can't see how this significantly worse.
    - DominikR 13y ago
      So basically your argument is that security is better on IE because you "trust" MS more than Google. (no proof) I don't know how you came to this conclusion, but I don't need to trust in Google because I can check the source code myself (link: http://www.chromium.org/ http://www.chromium.org/) And yes, they have a near monopoly on advertising, but in this case they are not using their advertising network to boost their Chrome installs. (even if they did it would be legal as long as they don't discriminate against their competition)
      - josteink 13y ago
        So basically your argument is that security is better on IE because you "trust" MS more than Google. (no proof) My argument is that IE, assuming everything else equal, is safer than Chrome. Yes. This is because I do trust that local software I run on my PC, without 200 known or unknown "(Google) cloud integrations" will leak less information about me to third parties than a browser with all those integrations, present and enabled by default. Did you know Chrome by default lets web-apps stay in the background even after you think you have exited your browser? Oh. You didn't? Well that's certainly not creepy, isn't it? When that browser to top it off is created by a company whose business model is gathering information about you and using that to sell ads, there's really not much to add. Those are facts. And from those facts, I can deduce that me and my privacy are most likely much safer using the browser not made by the advertising company. Do you honestly find that unreasonable? I don't know how you came to this conclusion, but I don't need to trust in Google because I can check the source code myself You are confusing Chromium for Chrome. Chromium is definitely open-source, but that's probably used by a overwhelming 0.1% minority. Most users are using Chrome, which is definitely 100% closed source and there is no guarantee that Google doesn't add any secret or additional proprietary bits into it outside what is found in Chromium. Chrome is about as open as MSIE, and gets none of the open-source defence arguments which could be used to defend Chromium and Firefox.

by fpgeek 13y ago

Um, Firefox works just fine on XP and Vista, just like Chrome. I'm sure Google would be happy if people switched to Chrome for Docs, but they're not forcing anyone to.

zobzu 13y ago

half the time i load gdocs in firefox, gdocs tells me firefox is not a supported browser and that i should download chrome right away. Of course i can ignore the warning, but its pretty clear and if you're a random user you'll be like "oh crap ive to upgrade or gdocs will break". so yeah, its close enough.

nikbackm 13y ago
Maybe that's because they only support the two latest versions of Firefox as well? I haven't gotten any such warnings from Google Docs while using Firefox (latest version) at least.

josteink 13y ago

But Google doesn't tell you to download Firefox on every other page they own across the entire internet. They do so for Chrome. "Upgrade your browser", "Get a faster browser" and all that bullshit we laughed at MS for doing with MSIE. But now it's Google doing it. Everywhere. With no anti-trust regulatory reactions in sight.

DominikR 13y ago
> But Google doesn't tell you to download Firefox on every other page they own across the entire internet. Why shouldn't they advertise their own products? And why in hell do you think they should advertise Firefox? Are you advertising your competitor on your property? > They do so for Chrome. "Upgrade your browser", "Get a faster browser" and all that bullshit we laughed at MS for doing with MSIE. For an IE user, Chrome is certainly an upgrade. Both in security and speed. > But now it's Google doing it. Everywhere. With no anti-trust regulatory reactions in sight. Google doesn't have a monopoly in browsers so what are you talking about?
- josteink 13y ago
  For an IE user, Chrome is certainly an upgrade. Both in security and speed. I'm by no stretch an IE user, but MS have made great improvements to their browser. And some users may prefer it simply because it is familiar. And excuse me for saying so, but as someone who values my privacy I trust Microsoft a lot more than Google. To me, Chrome is the web browser where everything I do is leaked directly to the NSA. Sorry, but I don't consider that "secure" by any stretch of imagination. Disregarding that, as a Firefox user though, I still get the same crap ads. Basically they are shown to everyone not using Chrome. And for my needs, I think Chrome is a significant downgrade compared to Firefox. By using the word "upgrade" Google is being disingenuous. Google doesn't have a monopoly in browsers But they do have a near monopoly on internet advertising and they are using it to push their own products in a borderline dishonest way. I mean... If Microsoft merely bundling a web-browser with their OS (as opposed to leaving users needing to fiddle with command-line FTP to download one) was bad enough to warrant regulation, I can't see how this significantly worse.
  - DominikR 13y ago
    So basically your argument is that security is better on IE because you "trust" MS more than Google. (no proof) I don't know how you came to this conclusion, but I don't need to trust in Google because I can check the source code myself (link: http://www.chromium.org/ http://www.chromium.org/) And yes, they have a near monopoly on advertising, but in this case they are not using their advertising network to boost their Chrome installs. (even if they did it would be legal as long as they don't discriminate against their competition)
    - josteink 13y ago
      So basically your argument is that security is better on IE because you "trust" MS more than Google. (no proof) My argument is that IE, assuming everything else equal, is safer than Chrome. Yes. This is because I do trust that local software I run on my PC, without 200 known or unknown "(Google) cloud integrations" will leak less information about me to third parties than a browser with all those integrations, present and enabled by default. Did you know Chrome by default lets web-apps stay in the background even after you think you have exited your browser? Oh. You didn't? Well that's certainly not creepy, isn't it? When that browser to top it off is created by a company whose business model is gathering information about you and using that to sell ads, there's really not much to add. Those are facts. And from those facts, I can deduce that me and my privacy are most likely much safer using the browser not made by the advertising company. Do you honestly find that unreasonable? I don't know how you came to this conclusion, but I don't need to trust in Google because I can check the source code myself You are confusing Chromium for Chrome. Chromium is definitely open-source, but that's probably used by a overwhelming 0.1% minority. Most users are using Chrome, which is definitely 100% closed source and there is no guarantee that Google doesn't add any secret or additional proprietary bits into it outside what is found in Chromium. Chrome is about as open as MSIE, and gets none of the open-source defence arguments which could be used to defend Chromium and Firefox.