[joshmoz]

I implemented the native OS X notifications in Firefox/Gecko some years ago. The native OS X API limitations were pretty frustrating (at least at the time, iirc), just didn't line up with the Web APIs all that well. Not blaming Apple, they weren't designing with our use cases in mind, just saying I can understand Google's temptation to avoid integration in order to retain control.

In the end it's a tough call about what you value more.

[okneil]

I just wrote in a thread over on reddit how I use Chrome specifically for its implementation of desktop notifications. Native notifications on OSX are lacking to say the least. They show very little information when compared to Chrome. I hope this is an option that can be switched off when rolled out to stable at a later date.

[heavymark]

Last year Chrome announced it's discontinuing support for it's notification center (http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/14/9531133/google-removing-c...) on Mac and PC, so I imagine they are replacing it with native versions of each OS. To note, Stable is always several weeks behind Canary, so you can see the latest build of the notifications which shows more info than the stable version.

[okneil]

But surely Google want to keep notifications more interactive. Native notifications on OSX only allow for minimal interaction and are truncated to a small number of characters. I really hope they allow for other options.

[coldtea]

How about NOT having notifications at all?

When did this became something that browsers needed to have? Seems more like a solution in search of a problem.

[oh_sigh]

You never have to allow notifications. AFAICT any site that wants to use notifications needs your consent first.

[coldtea]

How about the site NOT bothering me in the first place? Not even for my consent?

[BinaryIdiot]

> How about the site NOT bothering me in the first place? Not even for my consent?

So you'd rather no one have the ability to receive real time notifications from a web application just so you can't be bothered for a second from a permission request that you can actually ignore in its entirety?

I don't really understand your view point. Web applications can provide very rich functionality so why would you want to limit that to non-real-time?

[astral303]

Notification flag prompts interrupt my browsing flow.

A browser popping up a permission request to ask me whether I want to receive notification is very likely an annoying interruption, and is not relevant to my current task. It would be much better to indicate that the site is notifications-capable with an icon, heck the sites can have an opt-in button, just don't pop up that prompt and force me to acknowledge it.

[scrollaway]

Go to content settings in both firefox and chrome and you can block all notifications by default.

[cbsmith]

Well that battle was fought and lost a while ago with the W3C Web Notifications API Standard...

[coldtea]

>Web applications can provide very rich functionality so why would you want to limit that to non-real-time?

Because applications also provide very shallow functionality -- and especially most of the ones I see asking for notifications (makes sense too: marketers and spammers and the first to jump on such features).

Also because a user can always go to the settings of the application and explicitly enable it. That's why there are settings.

If they don't like settings pages, and think users would not find them, they could also have an "enable notifications" link/button somewhere prominent in the header/footer etc for the user to click, instead of directly asking users.

As for non-tech savvy people, notifications and popups just confuse most of them, and they blindly tend to click to dismiss them, either yes or no, often without even reading the message carefully (or at all). That's something that has been hammered on by UX experts since the dawn of time.

[Touche]

As already mentioned, there's already a setting for turning off notifications globally: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11433799

Having a web feature off by default is essentially damning it to not exist, so that's a non-starter. If you don't like the features that are enabled by web standards most of them can be globally disabled by turning JavaScript off.

[tw04]

I would say the middle ground would be an ability to default ignore/deny the requests. I get the fact some people just say "absolutely never".

And... apparently you can.

>Go to content settings in both firefox and chrome and you can block all notifications by default.

[tdicola]

Because I'm old enough to have seen stupid trends like this come and go. I like to browse the web on my terms and not be bombarded by useless information. I know it's a crazy concept for some young people these days but sometimes people don't want any interruptions or distractions like real time notifications. If anything notifications should be entirely opt in where you explicitly go to a page on a website and turn it on--not spamming every time you visit to ask if you want to turn them on.

[eertami]

Then just fucking disable them jesus nobody gives a shit. All you're doing is complaining. In case your time is too precious to lookup how (because complaining about meaningless shit on the internet is obviously more important) I've written you a nice guide:

- Open Chrome.

- In the upper-right corner of the browser window, click the Chrome menu Chrome menu.

- Click Settings > Show advanced settings.

- In the "Privacy" section, click Content settings.

- In the dialogue that appears, go to "Notifications" and choose the following:

- Do not allow any site to show notifications: You won’t see any notifications from websites.

[fooey]

How does the "explicit page" on a site ask for permission if your idea is that sites shouldn't be able to ask for permission?

If you bury it in the browsers settings it might as well not exist as a feature

[Artemis2]

That's the case for most implementations, just clicking "Block" will forbid the website from asking ever again.

[lessQQman333]

Seems like someone put a lot of effort into thinking through the use case.

Browser based chat apps like Slack, webmail, among other things are the sort of stuff I like some notifications on. Yeah there's a "app" for Slack, but it's a web view. Easier for me to have it as a pinned tab and always know where it is since it's either Chrome or terminal where I spend most of my time.

[coldtea]

That's a valid point for such apps as Slack or Gmail etc.

But then:

a) the majority of the apps asking for notifications are spammy sites (as always the louder offenders).

b) Slack, Gmail etc can have its notifications enable toggle hidden in Settings (and Slack indeed has significant customization options for notifications there).

If we start saying "ok, Slack is useful, so it's OK to allow it to show an unsolicited popup asking to show notifications" then next thing we have half the useless web also doing the same.

It's not a slippery slope either -- it's just how the web and spam works, with spammer sites/ads/etc exploiting any given opportunity to be loud and soliciting to the max...

[Touche]

If you're so easily annoyed you should really be surfing with JavaScript off. The reality is that sites can do any number of things to annoy you because you are giving them permission to execute code on your machine. If you don't trust them with this permission then don't give it to them.

[smussmann]

There's a setting for this! Chrome allows you to deny all notifications requests automatically, without even a prompt coming up.

See https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/3220216 for the method.

[tdicola]

Awesome, now how about we make this default to on just like we default on pop up blockers etc?

[scrollaway]

If people didn't want web notifications, they wouldn't have been explicitly added in to the specs.

This thread is getting ridiculous. I appreciate people don't like notifications but the very few sites that request them are sites like gmail, discord, irccloud etc which the majority of people absolutely do want notifications from.

[rictic]

Do you see sites asking for notification permission that often?

For me it's very rare, and >75% of the time that a site asks for that permission I want to grant it.

[oh_sigh]

Then you can set your consent to always deny. This isn't that hard.

[eertami]

Obviously but I mean why disable it when you can instead post snide, edgy, holier-than-thou diatribe on the internet?

/s

[coldtea]

Because sane and non-intrusive defaults matter.

And also because "always deny" or "turn off" is too blunt a tool.

And because the HN crowd is full of people that design and code such defaults in their apps (including lots of browser developers), and their webpages.

It's not a forum with people merely looking for the quickest solution to solve a personal problem with how their browser behaves.

But why think about those issues when you can instead post snide, edgy, holier-than-thou snark on the internet?

[tdicola]

I agree entirely. Maybe we'll be lucky and they rip the feature entirely out soon like the app launcher no one wanted: http://blog.chromium.org/2016/03/retiring-chrome-app-launche...

[pcwalton]

I like knowing when I have new e-mails.

[tdicola]

I don't, I like having long stretches of time without distractions. Then I can choose when I want to catch up on mails and when I want to get to work. Please let me keep browsing the web like this too.

[Touche]

Turn off JavaScript. Websites can only distract you if you give them permission to execute code on your computer.

[tdicola]

You keep suggesting this in replies but I don't know if you're actually serious or not. Disabling Javascript will break the vast majority of websites today from even rendering. Asking users to break rendering of the web just to stop annoying notification permission requests is silly.

[Touche]

I don't understand what you want.

You say you don't like distractions but there are dozens of ways a webpage can distract you. They can throw an alert() at you and you are forced to deal with it. This is much worse than an ignorable permission prompt.

If browsers were to remove alerts, remove all types of features that need notification dialogs, web pages could still throw a modal dialog over its content.

What you are asking for: a web with JavaScript but somehow with "distractions" prevented, is impossible. The second you allow someone to execute code on your computer, you are allowing them to do things that you might dislike.

[coldtea]

-- My head aches.

-- Cut it off.

Ever occurred to you that people might want behavior X without something else that often accompanies it, but doesn't necessarily goes along with it?

[jameslk]

I like to use Facebook chat on the web and get the same benefits of FB Messenger (e.g. notifications) without having to use the mobile app. The app strips away far more privacy rights than I'd like where as I have a lot more control with browsers.

[mkhalil]

The way I see it, I'd rather a notification than an email.

In a child comment you write: "How about the site NOT bothering me in the first place? Not even for my consent?"

They ask for my email all the time, which IMO is more annoying.