Remember when Google said Chrome would be a standard web browser and not incorporate features that only benefit Google? Yeah they were lying.



  • @insanitybit said:


    @blakeyrat said:

    Yes. Which is why I want Chrome to stop naggnig me about it.







    When does it nag? I sign in, so the only time I've had Chrome not signed in is in a VM for testing and I haven't seen it, but I'm assuming it's due to the short time.
     

    I can't speak for blakeyrat, but I've seen (non-technical) users install Chrome on a new PC (or have it installed for them) and never click on the not-very-prominent "Skip For Now" link.   They tend to just close the tab or load another page into it.  Thus, they get the sign-on page every time they open a fresh instance of Chrome. 

    I am not saying this is happening to blakeyrat (I have no idea why he's seeing the sign-on page more than once).  Only that, since we're on the subject of the sign-on page, the UI could be designed a bit better (e.g. "skip for now" could be a gigantic button reading 'Don't ask me again").  I'm guessing that google would prefer to make the "skip for now" link as subtle as possible.

    Personally, this is not a problem for me (because I know to press the button), but I can understand how non-technical users (again, not referring to blakeyrat) might use Chrome on an ongoing basis and never dismiss the sign-in screen properly.  (Because they don't want to read the UI, they don't want to learn anything new, and they won't remember or care, even if someone tells them how to skip it.  They would prefer to just manually dismiss the page every time they see it.)

    Note: none of this is a slight on non-technical users at all.  In fact, I noticed that a lot of UIs are explicitly designed to take advantage of this kind of user.  (e.g. Installers which default all the adware/malware checkboxes to "please install me!", counting on the fact that most users will just furiously click "next" without reading any of the prompts.)  To me, it's more a shady practice on the part of application vendors.  Chrome could easily make it so that closing the sign-on tab would either:

    1) Have the same effect as clicking "skip now"

    2) Would at least prompt the user to decide whether they ever want to see that page again

    But obviously google wants to make it as hard as possible to "accidentally" dismiss that page on a permanent basis.



  • Yeah I definitely agree. The "skip for now" looks like hyperlink text and isn't particularly prominent.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    The problem is … I just want … Gmail … and I don't want features or … Google services, … yeeehaw.

    Gmail without Google? Next you'll be telling me you want a car without the moving or a drink without the liquid. What you're asking for doesn't exist. Just use a different product.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    Google, you're really suck ass.
    If you left out the your entire post would bee 100% spot on.

    inlined that for you



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @insanitybit said:
    So, uh, why do you want multiple accounts then?

    I don't. Miff brought that up, not me.


    @blakeyrat said:

    Of course I'd gladly do this if Google pulled their heads out of their
    ass and finally admitted that, hey, maybe a single person has more than
    one identity! Maybe Blakeyrat-at-work is a different person than
    Blakeyrat-at-home! But no.

    Uh-huh, you didn't mention the possibility of different accounts at home and at work.

    @blakeyrat said:

    Yes but I have to be careful not to sign-in to Chrome because if I accidentally do, it'll suddenly sync my bookmarks and passwords and shit which are not something I want on the work network.
    Sounds like you've got stuff to be guilty of...

     


  • :belt_onion:

    @ASheridan2 said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    Yes but I have to be careful not to sign-in to Chrome because if I accidentally do, it'll suddenly sync my bookmarks and passwords and shit which are not something I want on the work network.
    Sounds like you've got stuff to be guilty of...
    So people that care about their privacy are automatically guilty of something? Welcome to the United States of America


  • Garbage Person

    @bjolling said:

    So people that care about their privacy are automatically guilty of something? Welcome to the United States of America
    Yep. And long haired beardy people who are nervous talking to cops are going to jail for the night. Because that's the way it should be in Gosh Darned God-Fearing Merika!



  • @ASheridan2 said:

    Sounds like you've got stuff to be guilty of...

    I have things I'm innocent of, like not putting porn links on the company network. I'd like to remain innocent of them.


  • Considered Harmful

    Wait, you're innocent of not putting porn links on the company network?



  • I knew one of you pedantic dickweeds would notice the double negative. Took long enough.



  • There's nothing wrong with not wanting your information streamed to your workplace, I wouldn't want that. I'm not 'guilty' of anything, but I also don't leave the curtains open and run around the house naked - some things are best to keep private.



  •  Well I would like to suggest two factor authentication in Google apps .. Try it..It shows favorable results to you...



  • @EdwardKayle said:

     Well I would like to suggest two factor authentication in Google apps .. Try it..It shows favorable results to you...


    Some friendly advice for the future: if you arrive at a thread via some search engine like Google, check the date of the last reply before replying.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @anonymous234 said:

    Filed under: It's always best to lurk for a week before posting

    Not for spammers. Though if you weren't already subscribed by email, you probably wouldn't have noticed that the mods removed the spammy link.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @boomzilla said:

    ...you probably wouldn't have noticed that the mods removed the spammy link.
    Mods didn't remove the link.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @PJH said:

    @boomzilla said:
    ...you probably wouldn't have noticed that the mods removed the spammy link.
    Mods didn't remove the link.

    Did the spammer de-spam himself?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @boomzilla said:

    @PJH said:
    @boomzilla said:
    ...you probably wouldn't have noticed that the mods removed the spammy link.
    Mods didn't remove the link.

    Did the spammer de-spam himself?

    Yup.



  • @blakeyrat, about a year ago said:

    Google, you're really starting to suck ass.
    Sigh.

     

    You know, the night after I dreamt Google had become Skynet I found out they've been acquiring robotics companies.


Log in to reply