this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2023
960 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59086 readers
3755 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Can you blame it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mojo@lemm.ee 31 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is one of those things that is great in theory, but proper execution is going to be hard

[–] lud@lemm.ee 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why? In windows you already have a dozen selection screens during installation, just adding one for the browser would be a huge deal.

OEMs could just install every popular browser.

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

What determines a popular browser?

Would smaller browsers like LibreWolf make the cut? What is the prerequisite? Should every small fork of a few dozen users be shown?

Should security patch speed and security defense be shown? What about number if CVE's

Which order are they shown in?

Do they have descriptions, and how do you accurately describe the difference in web browsers in a short description?

Should Firefox mention they're the only non-Chromium browser engine, and should it be grouped by browser engines instead?

Is it really diverse if they're all just Chromium skins?

If Firefox is going to be buried at the bottom of the list, is that really as fair as the first one in the list?

What about if they unfairly resize their Edge browser as half the screen and preselect it as a default, while making the alternatives smaller and harder to see at a glance for people that just want to go quickly through the options.

How do you accurately describe what the browser defines "private" as?

At what point is the user too informed or too little informed? You don't want to information overload.

This is why it's more complicated then just "show every popular browser".

[–] SnowdenHeroOfOurTime@unilem.org 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

There's not really much here that isn't pretty easily solved. Alphabetical order, descriptions yes, written by each vendor. Yes Firefox would be required to be listed since it's one of the handful not based on chromium. Design literally is just solving these exact kinds of problems and it happens every day, no need to make it a harder problem than it is.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

I can't wait to start using Aardvark browser.

[–] And009@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

If they really wanna provide options they can.

[–] mojo@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It is a hard problem, for all the reasons I listed lol. Alphabetical order would be a terrible idea, browsers would be punished because of their name. Randomized order would be better. Obviously Firefox would be there, that doesn't even need to be stated. This isn't easily solved, and we do not have browser neutrality or anything close to it in any form or platform. How does your solution help against the blink monopoly that is killing the internet?

These are things you need to figure out, there's no "no need to make it harder problem than it is" when it comes to designing these very important things. That's just how you have straight up bad design that isn't thought out.

If you want to compare to how app stores do it, which are still no neutral at all, they still are constantly changing. Mobile app stores recently got the privacy nutrition label, some desktop ones have the same for security. Install base is going to skew numbers. Imagine putting Palemoon as an option and not giving massive security warnings all over the product page. Should there even be a product page for just one selection screen?

As someone who struggles with decision paralysis all the time, you obviously get that but much worse.

And yes you are 100% making this harder than it is.

"This is how you get bad design"

Ok and your way is how we get complete inaction

[–] Ravi@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All of that points are valid questions to be solved for an implementation. I want to add another one: Which part of the users profit from this?

Most users don't give a fuck which browser they use as long as it's working. They cannot comprehend most information you described in your questions and want a simple solution. The other part of users usually knows how to install and select a browser of their choice on a PC. After all it's not that hard with the current OS choices available anyway.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I agree, mostly. let OS have a default choice; sure, even make it not uninstallable (as a failsafe so that noone accidentally ends up with no browser whatsoever). but also FORBID them from ever automatically switching back after user makes their choice and FORBID them from prompting the switch in any place in the OS. opt-out is opt-out, not opt-out-but-maybe-will-change-my-mind-at-some-point-or-just-misclick. and this doesn't only go for browser. any "restore microsoft recommended settings" should be fucking banned. if I want to open my PDFs in sumatra, I want it to stay that way and not be prompted to use fucking edge for that. sure, ask my once whether I'm sure about it. but that's it

I remember there was a debate over iOS sideloading and someone made a very good point. Apple can lock me out of their eco-system, stop updates, void warranty. but let users use their fucking devices as they wish.

[–] GigglyBobble@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, Chrome and Edge? No thank you.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Firefox would obviously also be included.

Maybe even brave and opera too.

[–] lemann@lemmy.one 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a shame Opera dumped their in house rendering engine, but it's understandable when the ~~market leader~~ monopoly keeps making changes that are hard to keep up with... not to mention the "Not compatible with your browser" stuff

[–] Gamey@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

A shame Opera is a privacy nightmare sending data directly to China!

[–] GigglyBobble@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's not so obvious to me. Companies might refer to usage statistics to exclude the ones you mentioned.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

top 5 is a common metric

[–] lloram239@feddit.de 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not really. We already did it with BrowserChoice.eu, just do it again. Just this time don't cancel it. It doesn't need to be perfect, as anything is better than what we have today.

[–] optissima@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One issue I can think of is that, if you list "all browsers," most are still chrome under the hood, thus stacking the seemingly "equal" choice.

[–] golli@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

They could make groups based on enginey and then randomly shuffle those. And within those either list browsers by popularity or again shuffle.

Would also help to educate people how little actual choice there is