Comment by lucb1e | Hacker News Reader

Comment by lucb1e | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Things like [Google] YouTube, Google Docs, most Google [projects] work better in Chrome.

I wonder why that is.

> This isn't always intentional, even.

I don't think everyone at Google is evil. There are many passionate engineers and hackers like you and me. However, if a Youtube developer has an issue with something running extraordinarily slowly, it's a much shorter call to the Chrome department than it would be to Apple's Safari or Mozilla's Firefox. So while developers might not be actively hindering other browsers, they are developing for Chrome. That it technically works on other browsers is a requirement but optimizing for the competition's browsers is not something I imagine management allocates hours for.

The end result is that they are hindering competition in the browser market, and quite a few people saw that coming. Still, even more people (vastly more people) either did not care or know and recommended Chrome anyway.

> Nobody is complaining their Android or iOS phone has DRM, do they?

My Android phone does not have DRM beyond what it in the SIM and I am complaining about people whose phones do. Many friends and peers share my view on this, so it's at least not "nobody".

My Android phone does not have DRM beyond what it in the SIM

https://developer.android.com/reference/android/drm/package-...

"Added in API level 11". Maybe you have a custom build with this ripped out, but then we're stretching by calling it "Android".

I suppose you might be right. I actually realized after posting that there is probably something somewhere in my phone that still contains some kind of DRM. Assuming this is still in Cyanogenmod, you're probably right.

Then again, I'm not sure I have any apps that use this.

I use Firefox over any other browser precisely because I can "hack" it. I've changed so much under about:config that I have to document it for the next install. Firefox allows so many useful hacks that are truly in favor of the user. Chrome not so much. I don't use anything other than macOS or *nix, so I cannot speak to IE or other platforms.

Unfortunately, you are in a tiny minority in being able to do that, wanting to, and actualy getting round to it

Except that as of FF 48 you can't install unsigned addons, even if you allow it in the config.

It's like they're trying to give up every advantage.

> That it technically works on other browsers is a requirement but optimizing for the competition's browsers is not something I imagine management allocates hours for.

Youtube exists to sell ads, and a slow browsing experience on any device or browser does not serve that goal. So while Chrome may be their default testing environment, there's a very strong incentive to have it work well across the board.

Say in the YouTube app you perform a search for a song. The results come back very quickly and the first result is what you want so you tap it. An ad starts to play. Except its not an ad. Its a video from the advertised spot above your search results - wait a minute you didn't click that. So you go back and realize, it loads 1 second after your search results and pushes them downwards, so your tap ends up on the advertisement that wasn't even rendered yet. Hm.

That might drive short term revenue but would drive down their CPM/CPC rates and user engagement longer term. I don't think Google's culture is conducive to playing those sorts of tricks.

Maybe they don't do it on purpose, maybe they A/B test their way into a black hole of emergent anti-patterns.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com