I was on a webinar yesterday and the user was presenting their cool prez running from their browser. I was able to see the url, visit it and learn about their project without having to spend time asking for a link.
I wonder if the Chrome team is currently doing some kind of A/B testing with the address bar? I’m on version 90.0.4430.85 and I see the normal address bar (i.e. the URL minus protocol://).
I love that the grand masters of surveillance capitalism is messing up their browser. At this point I don't understand why any geek with some pride would chose Chrome over Firefox.
I did try moving over to Firefox a few months ago but the lack of custom keyword-based search engines was a deal-breaker for me, and I'm back with Chrome.
I also dislike the truncated URLs (although I don't use Chrome), and I dislike that truncated relative time tagging too (HN should be corrected to avoid this; perhaps by using the HTML <TIME> command to specify the exact time, or a user setting or whatever). When saving a local copy or printing out a document, specifying the exact date/time is especially more useful.
33 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 85.9 ms ] threadI was on a webinar yesterday and the user was presenting their cool prez running from their browser. I was able to see the url, visit it and learn about their project without having to spend time asking for a link.
The url is valuable information to me.
Along with FLoC, a continued march towards Google’s interest, not your interests.
If that is all, then no, I don't hate it. Hadn't even noticed it was different.
Show what? Https? They still don't include www the acronym and symbol of World Wide Web.
https://superuser.com/a/7336
Just as I hate the bizarre truncated relative time tagging.
"A month ago" , "15 minutes ago" , "An hour ago" ?! That's f-n useless.
ISO 8601 or die! YYYY:MM:DD hh:mm:ss How hard is that? Just leave the time stamp alone, geeze.