[PragmaticPulp]

There weren’t actually any issues with Incognito Mode. It was a manufactured crisis from people who wanted to claim that Incognito Mode was misleading about hiding internet activity from upstream network providers when it clearly explains otherwise on the Incognito Mode new tab.

I don’t even know what the Incognito Mode opponents even wanted. Built-in free VPN service? Total removal of Incognito Mode?

Google didn’t have any nefarious intent or actions in this. I don’t see why it would be wrong for them to downplay exaggerated allegations.

[chrononaut]

> I don’t even know what the Incognito Mode opponents even wanted. Built-in free VPN service? Total removal of Incognito Mode?

Agreed. I think this is a case of individual users deriving their own set of functional requirements and assumptions on what it means to be in "Incognito mode", which many people will have a differing opinion on, rather than a specific issue with the functionality provided by the browser.

If it can't be called Incognito mode, I am not sure what other positioning or branding can be applied. There is merit for the current feature set, and gating those features until a significantly high bar is met seems unreasonable.

[akersten]

Yeah, the plaintiffs really need to lose this case. "It doesn't do what I imagined it did based on my uneducated misinterpretation of a brand name and refusal to read what the product clearly states every time I use it" is such a horrible basis for potential litigation that it boggles the mind it was allowed to proceed. Next up they'll be suing AstroGlide because applying the lube doesn't turn them into roller-skating cosmonauts.

[DelightOne]

"We change the way we track you"-mode?

[rvnx]

Nice idea, a Google-powered VPN to "protect your privacy" (from competitors eyes).