Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«102 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007

Bote McBoteface. so what


Kheldarn posted:

I'm on Chrome 78(.0.3904.97), and it's no longer showing https or www in the address bar. Searching for how to make it show up again leads me to results saying to go to chrome://flags/#omnibox-ui-hide-steady-state-url-scheme-and-subdomains or chrome://flags/#omnibox-ui-hide-steady-state-url-trivial-subdomains, but neither of those exist for me.

Is there any way to bring that back?

It hides that info until you focus the address bar. It's a recent change, and I don't know that there's a way to revert is especially since it's just cosmetic.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Kheldarn
Feb 17, 2011



Lipstick Apathy

Atomizer posted:

It hides that info until you focus the address bar. It's a recent change, and I don't know that there's a way to revert is especially since it's just cosmetic.

Well, it sucks, because it screws things up when I browse reddit. I tend to click where https://www. is to replace it with old. and it selects part of it, and then either part of the [url]https://[/url] or part of the reddit. sections of the URL.

Oh well. Guess I'm stuck with it.

withak
Jan 15, 2003


Fun Shoe

my workflow!

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Kheldarn posted:

Well, it sucks, because it screws things up when I browse reddit. I tend to click where https://www. is to replace it with old. and it selects part of it, and then either part of the [url]https://[/url] or part of the reddit. sections of the URL.

Oh well. Guess I'm stuck with it.

there's a much smarter way to accomplish what you want
https://greasyfork.org/en/scripts/4...d-reddit-please

Lambert
Apr 14, 2018

Happily Shilling for China!



Fallen Rib

withak posted:

my workflow!

It's an unnecessary change no one asked for.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007

Bote McBoteface. so what


Lambert posted:

It's an unnecessary change no one asked for.

Again, it's only cosmetic. The full address appears when you click it in the bar.

Mr.Radar
Nov 5, 2005

You guys aren't going to believe this, but that guy is our games teacher.


Taco Defender

There is a bit more take on it where it's part of Google's plan to kill URLs and force people to use search to access everything (see also AMP). I personally consider seeing the full URL a vital part of a browser's UI but I already use Firefox so I won't have to deal with this until they inevitably decide to copy it next year

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Mr.Radar posted:

There is a bit more take on it where it's part of Google's plan to kill URLs and force people to use search to access everything (see also AMP).

Settle down, it only hides http and www at the front of a url. IE the parts that are entirely irrelevant to anyone that isn't Kheldarn or other weirdos who constantly re-type https://www.reddit.com to old.reddit.com by hand. If you go to any site that leads the domain with anything other than www, it shows the sub-domain title.


(Like, you know that if sign up a reddit account then you can just tell it to always use old reddit?)

Lambert
Apr 14, 2018

Happily Shilling for China!



Fallen Rib

Klyith posted:

Settle down, it only hides http and www at the front of a url. IE the parts that are entirely irrelevant to anyone that isn't Kheldarn or other weirdos who constantly re-type https://www.reddit.com to old.reddit.com by hand. If you go to any site that leads the domain with anything other than www, it shows the sub-domain title.


(Like, you know that if sign up a reddit account then you can just tell it to always use old reddit?)

So, basically, it hides the parts relevant to plenty of people for no gain to anyone. Got it.

Thermopyle
Jul 1, 2003

...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. —Bertrand Russell



Lambert posted:

So, basically, it hides the parts relevant to plenty of people for no gain to anyone. Got it.

Ehh, I think plenty of normal people are confused by all the technical stuff in the address bar, so I wouldn't say "no gain to anyone".


I'm not making any comments about whether the tradeoff is worth it or not.

xiansi
Jan 26, 2012

im judjing all goons cause they have bad leader, so a noral member is associated whith thoose crasy one

Personaly i would quit the goons if i was in cause of thoose crasy ppl

Clapping Larry

Kheldarn posted:

I'm on Chrome 78(.0.3904.97), and it's no longer showing https or www in the address bar. Searching for how to make it show up again leads me to results saying to go to chrome://flags/#omnibox-ui-hide-steady-state-url-scheme-and-subdomains or chrome://flags/#omnibox-ui-hide-steady-state-url-trivial-subdomains, but neither of those exist for me.

Is there any way to bring that back?

For now, yes - "Temporarily unexpire M76 flags" - that brings back the various settings starting with "Omnibox UI Hide" that you then disable.

https://www.reddit.com/r/chrome/com...ibox_chrome_78/

Obviously Google are determined to get rid of the full URL permanently though.

reddit posted:

At that point someone will just write a 3rd-party extension.
...to display the URL of a website.
...in a web browser.

Kheldarn
Feb 17, 2011



Lipstick Apathy

xiansi posted:

For now, yes - "Temporarily unexpire M76 flags" - that brings back the various settings starting with "Omnibox UI Hide" that you then disable.

https://www.reddit.com/r/chrome/com...ibox_chrome_78/

Obviously Google are determined to get rid of the full URL permanently though.

Ah, thank you.

Jippa
Feb 13, 2009


I was reading that this new update will kill ublock origin for good? Is that true?

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


Jippa posted:

I was reading that this new update will kill ublock origin for good? Is that true?

No, not yet. They just added manifest v3 to Canary (the alpha / testing branch of Chrome), which means it might go live in Chrome v80. But they're going to keep manifest v2 (what extensions use now) and v3 (the one that neuters adblock) both active at the same time.


And then "v2 end of life to be determined in the future" which you should actually read as "when we think the mass audience has forgotten about the uproar and we've used financial support of Adblock Plus to get them moved to v3, so we can fight back by pitting users against each other and blame gorhil for being a bad stick in the mud who refused to adapt like ABP".

In the meantime you have at least 6 months to try out other browsers and pick which one you like best.

Klyith fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Nov 12, 2019

Jippa
Feb 13, 2009


Cheers.

Stormgale
Feb 27, 2010



https://twitter.com/antumbral/statu...1888976896?s=19

This seems like a funny change that breaks a bunch of stuff

https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/ar...nies-worldwide/

Stormgale fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Nov 15, 2019

effika
Jun 19, 2005
Birds do not want you to know any more than you already do.

says it's so they can stop people from playing YouTube in the background without a YouTube music subscription

Thermopyle
Jul 1, 2003

...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. —Bertrand Russell



It's pretty useful for being able to throttle heavy CPU usage JS when the user isn't watching the fancy game/animation/spreadsheet.

Woebin
Feb 6, 2006



Why is vanilla Chrome even anyone's default browser at this point? It just seems to be getting worse.

101
Oct 15, 2012


Vault Dweller


Woebin posted:

Why is vanilla Chrome even anyone's default browser at this point? It just seems to be getting worse.

For me it's literally because scrolling feels weird and off in Firefox compared to Chrome on Windows.

Hipster_Doofus
Dec 20, 2003

Lovin' every minute of it.

effika posted:

says it's so they can stop people from playing YouTube in the background without a YouTube music subscription

I can totally believe this, since you already can't on Android without tricking it.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


This:
made me understand how they're doing this:

Hipster_Doofus posted:

I can totally believe this, since you already can't on Android without tricking it.

so now I have an addon for firefox-android that disables Page Visibility API rather than needing to force the desktop site (which my 720p phone can't really display).

Lambert
Apr 14, 2018

Happily Shilling for China!



Fallen Rib

101 posted:

For me it's literally because scrolling feels weird and off in Firefox compared to Chrome on Windows.

Disable smooth scrolling in Firefox.

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

effika posted:

says it's so they can stop people from playing YouTube in the background without a YouTube music subscription
So, uh, drop the relevant browser tab in its own window, and presto? Or are they going to do overlap checks?

Ghostlight
Sep 25, 2009

どこでもヒトラー
got ya now, kyanka-chan!


Overlap checks is what the twitter thread and all the recent replies are about.

Javid
Oct 21, 2004

My sole partiality is to that delectable spiced meat. Any additional confederation of vegetables shall not compromise the pie as I see it.

Hipster_Doofus posted:

I can totally believe this, since you already can't on Android without tricking it.

newpipe is the bee's knees for this.

Hipster_Doofus
Dec 20, 2003

Lovin' every minute of it.

drat straight. I don't even miss Vanced.

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

Ghostlight posted:

Overlap checks is what the twitter thread and all the recent replies are about.
I guess I should have said partial overlap. Power users tend more likely to work with everything in windowed modes on large screens. Say if a Youtube window is overlapped only 75% would it stop playing or not. If so, that'd be pretty mean.

Woebin
Feb 6, 2006



101 posted:

For me it's literally because scrolling feels weird and off in Firefox compared to Chrome on Windows.
I mean, in addition to Lambert's suggestion to disable smooth scrolling, there are tons of other Chromium-based browsers you could use that aren't pulling a lot of the poo poo Google is. Vivaldi's great these days, for instance.

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

I looked this WebContents occlusion poo poo up some more. These assholes over at Google want to hook into all running processes in the session, just to figure out if a window moved? gently caress that poo poo. Edgium was so nice, I guess not.

Thermopyle
Jul 1, 2003

...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. —Bertrand Russell



I guess I'm missing something about why everyone is bent out of shape on this.

It's been possible to detect if user has window focused or visible for many years, this just gives a better API for it.

Thermopyle
Jul 1, 2003

...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. —Bertrand Russell



I mean they may or may not be wanting to do YT shenanigans, but prior to this API it was already possible

101
Oct 15, 2012


Vault Dweller


Lambert posted:

Disable smooth scrolling in Firefox.

but then it's a jumpy mess that still doesn't feel like Chrome

Woebin posted:

I mean, in addition to Lambert's suggestion to disable smooth scrolling, there are tons of other Chromium-based browsers you could use that aren't pulling a lot of the poo poo Google is. Vivaldi's great these days, for instance.

That's a fair point. I might give Vivaldi a try for a few days

Thermopyle
Jul 1, 2003

...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. —Bertrand Russell



101 posted:

That's a fair point. I might give Vivaldi a try for a few days

It's good but still needs polish. I now use it for maybe 75% of my browsing.

Combat Pretzel
Jun 23, 2004

No, seriously... what kurds?!

Thermopyle posted:

I guess I'm missing something about why everyone is bent out of shape on this.
The biggest issue I have is that they want to put Chrome's fingers into other processes, so it can figure out whether another application's window has moved, to reduce the amount of occlusion checking. Absolutely don't agree with this sort of fuckery.

I suppose in the case of Edgium, I can just run it permanently inside WDAG to wall it off, but I guess eventually I'll just switch to Firefox, until they do something stupid, too.

--edit:
Here's a quote from the Windows SDK documentation, that's probably relevant besides the principle of not wanting Chrome to snoop around among all processes:

quote:

Hooks tend to slow down the system because they increase the amount of processing the system must perform for each message. You should install a hook only when necessary, and remove it as soon as possible.

Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Nov 17, 2019

Hipster_Doofus
Dec 20, 2003

Lovin' every minute of it.

Woebin posted:

Vivaldi's great these days, for instance.

If Kiwi Browser had a windows port I'd cream my skivvies.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


For the rest of the thread, this doc is what Combat Pretzel is going on about. It isn't too technical for an average nerd to grasp. But the tl;dr is basically "oh the simple API that MS made for getting occlusion status isn't precise enough for us, we're gonna do it the hard way" and then lists a whole bunch of giant downsides of the hard way

However:

Combat Pretzel posted:

--edit:
Here's a quote from the Windows SDK documentation, that's probably relevant besides the principle of not wanting Chrome to snoop around among all processes:
I really can't see hooks like that as snooping, they're just getting messages about what's happening from the OS. It's a basic windows function. And I'm not sure if the performance is really as big a deal on modern computers -- it a basic Win32 function and I feel like that warning is maybe a decade out of date. As that google doc says, they have much more performance impact from calculating all the windows boundaries than the hook events.

Still, it seems like a dumb and fragile way to do things. You can't trust windows programs to tell you sane things about themselves, which is probably why it broke on terminal server. Even after their effort to discard stuff like complex or transparent windows, some program said that it had the entire screen region when it didn't so chrome thought it was occluded.

Thermopyle
Jul 1, 2003

...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. —Bertrand Russell



It's funny that I switched into my browser to take a break from developing a library for python that uses the exact same windows APIs that are talked about in that document. (I'm so tired of the limitations of AutoIT and AHK)

Hooking windows events is super common for many applications to do. It's not some shady weird thing. The APIs talked about in that document aren't peeking around into other processes. These are events that are broadcast to the whole system about the size and position of all the windows on the desktop.

Of course, it's true that if you do it wrong like hooking from EVENT_MIN to EVENT_MAX, not throttling/debouncing, and running CPU-intensive callbacks on events it can really impact your CPU load...but since it seems like the whole purpose of that document is to improve performance I would assume they won't do it wrong.

edit: I'm really struck by how much all of the thinking in that document are the same sort of things I've had to think about over the past many months working on this library of mine.

Thermopyle fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Nov 17, 2019

Cabbit
Jul 19, 2001

Is that everything you have?



Grimey Drawer

So my keyboard shortcuts for Atom and Google Play Music ran into a conflict, in as much as I wanted to trash my GPM shortcuts and use those for Atom. Go into Chrome to unbind them in the keyboard shortcuts section of the extensions window.. except Google yanked the ability to set keyboard shortcuts for GPM from the list, presumably in anticipating of killing it entirely in favor of YouTube Music.

So I guess I need to entirely uninstall Chrome in order to unbind those keyboard shortcuts.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lambert
Apr 14, 2018

Happily Shilling for China!



Fallen Rib

Cabbit posted:

So my keyboard shortcuts for Atom and Google Play Music ran into a conflict, in as much as I wanted to trash my GPM shortcuts and use those for Atom. Go into Chrome to unbind them in the keyboard shortcuts section of the extensions window.. except Google yanked the ability to set keyboard shortcuts for GPM from the list, presumably in anticipating of killing it entirely in favor of YouTube Music.

So I guess I need to entirely uninstall Chrome in order to unbind those keyboard shortcuts.

You need to got to about :flags (without the space the forums software adds) and disable "Hardware Media Key Handling"

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«102 »