Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by sahaj 3483 days ago
"All of Google's products are complementary products that create lock-in"

I disagree. Chrome was created to be a standards based browser, Android to unify the different phone operating systems circa 2004. I picked Google products because they allowed me to get out if I needed to. Gmail provides IMAP, POP. Docs and Music let you take out your data as needed. Google intentionally creates a way to get your data out. All of these things require foresight and work to pull off.

Does the lock-in exist because no one else is offering the same service? Potentially. But the intention of the company when they created these services was to create the best service, not a lock-in service.

2 comments

They're just ad distributing products.

Ever tried to install an adblocker on Android? There isn't anything you can do without rooting your phone. Seriously, it should be called Addroid.

Ever tried to install adblock/ublock on Chrome? only to find out that it doesn't exist in the chrome store or was removed again.

Well, actually Android is the most friendly mobile platform for ad-blockers, or other hacks.

What you're complaining about is Chrome for Android, but then again Android is also the only mobile platform supported by a real Firefox implementation that has plugins, including ad-blockers.

You're talking about rooting the phone, I guess you want /etc/hosts or something, but you know, even on the desktop that kind of solution requires sudo rights. This one is entirely about security and really, Android is not that hard to root.

And even though I'm a Firefox user on the desktop, I've also used Chrome with AdBlock Plus and then uBlock Origin and never had any problems.

> You're talking about rooting the phone, I guess you want /etc/hosts or something, but you know, even on the desktop that kind of solution requires sudo rights. This one is entirely about security and really, Android is not that hard to root.

You don't have to root your phone. You can install an Open Source VPS app which filters ads, no root required (and data stays on your phone).

Note: Firefox on android has only supported plugins since a few months ago.
Not true, it has supported add-ons on Android for years.
I've been using plugins on Firefox on Android for a lot longer than that -- there might not be so many plugins, but many of the important ones were there.

For example, AdBlock Plus added mobile support in version 1.1.2, supporting Fennec 1.0 Beta 6, released 2009/12/12.

> Ever tried to install an adblocker on Android?

Yes. Works across browsers and against in-app ads, too. https://block-this.com

> Ever tried to install adblock/ublock on Chrome?

Yes.

> only to find out that it doesn't exist in the chrome store or was removed again.

Under no circumstances. AdBlock Plus has never, as far as I know, been removed, nor has uBlock Origin.

Well. First commit 6 months ago, that thing is a novelty.

Next we'll see how it goes when you'll try to explain to your sister and your mother how to use that android VPN to block ads.

I've audited literally every line of code in it myself and it's not a novelty. It works and works correctly. You're just wrong--and desperate, because fictional nerd cred, to not be wrong. It's an ugly look. Be better.

My mother doesn't have a smartphone. If she did, I would install it for her and be done with it.

An android project that got its first commit 6 months ago is called a novelty whether you like it or not. You're just refusing to admit it, because fictional nerd cred, to not be wrong. It's an ugly look. Be better.
I use an adblocker on Android all the time, and I've never bothered to figure out how to root a phone. It was not at all difficult. Maybe it's hard with Chrome but that's no big deal - just use Firefox.
> Chrome was created to be a standards based browser

Then why not give money to firefox? Why not start contributing more?

instead they built their own, integrated it with google stuff, and pushed it heavily for years and years.

Google did give money to firefox. Lots and lots of it.

https://www.cnet.com/news/firefox-maker-mozilla-we-dont-need...

Why not Safari or Opera?

Competition is good. You can make a standards based browser and then add additional features that others can't or won't provide. Building it in house gives them more control. Do you think Mozilla would have developed V8 if google just threw money at them?