Right now, once you're done using the iOS-app-launched browser, you have to remember / find / relaunch the app that sent you to the web in the first place.
Yeah, because double tapping the home button is oh, so hard.
I have to use Chrome if I want to do some functions for online banking as Safari breaks. Probably the bank's fault but nevertheless Chrome works and Safari fails, but it is only a very specialized function in the out of bank wire transfer section.
Where I live most of the banks have enough resources to make their own Apps, which work quite well.
i have chrome installed, but i don't want it to be my default browser... so this is rather annoying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
If I read right it doesn't change your default browser, it would still be Safari. Developers would just have a choice of making a call to Chrome within their app, if Chrome is already installed. I think I have that right.
It can't change your default browser system-wide.
It however does have the default setting of checking to see if Chrome is installed, and if it is, using that rather than Safari to open hyperlinks in GMail.
This setting It is easily toggled to off if one so desires, but I guess Google is betting on the majority of users not knowing how to tweak their apps, which will give Google by default a "Google User Experience" of sorts on the iOS platform.
Right now, once you're done using the iOS-app-launched browser, you have to remember / find / relaunch the app that sent you to the web in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Yeah, because double tapping the home button is oh, so hard.
Yes, quite right, and that's what I find (slightly) inadequate about the whole experience - I would have thought that Chrome would incorporate a back-button using the same routine in reverse to send the user back to the calling Google app - but I quickly surmised that a double-tap of the Home button would also suffice.
Not quite a seamless "Google User Experience" after all... probably the next update will include this, if Apple approves it.
I have to use Chrome if I want to do some functions for online banking as Safari breaks. Probably the bank's fault but nevertheless Chrome works and Safari fails, but it is only a very specialized function in the out of bank wire transfer section.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Where I live most of the banks have enough resources to make their own Apps, which work quite well.
I very rarely access banks via a browser.
I initially had problems with my Mac's Safari browser accessing my Bank sites via https, so I installed Chrome and used that for a while.
However with regular testing I found out that these problems have largely disappeared as Safari iterated; better still my bank now has very comprehensive mobile apps that allow almost instantaneous and secure access to any functions.
i have chrome installed, but i don't want it to be my default browser... so this is rather annoying.</div>
It can't change your default browser system-wide.
It however does have the default setting of checking to see if Chrome is installed, and if it is, using that rather than Safari to open hyperlinks in GMail.
This setting It is easily toggled to off if one so desires, but I guess Google is betting on the majority of users not knowing how to tweak their apps, which will give Google by default a "Google User Experience" of sorts on the iOS platform.
<div id="user_ynano_hooks_page" style="display:none;">
<div id="user_callsToClient_page" style="display:none;"> </div>
The problem with the gmail implementation is that if you check yes to open chrome, clicking a link in gmail opens immediately in chrome. If you have it checked to no, it should open immediately in safari. But it doesn't. It opens in the gmail in app browser, with a button to open in safari.
In ther words? Google is getting the clicks it wants anyway and reducing the quality of the user experience if you just so happen to to not want to use their browser.
In app browsers are no longer needed. iOS 4 in 2010 introduced fast app switching. I hope Apple sets an expiration date for this feature. At minimum I hope they start requiring in app browsers to have an option to turn them off. Safari on iOS is the best experience. I understand that is due to Apple rules, but that doesn't change the fact it is true. I always end up needing an extra tap to view in Safari. I'd love that to change
So yes, in 2010 Android did (and does) stand in opposition to Apples philosophy and people are free to choose what system they like. That does not change the reason of why Google bought Android in the first place.
Google bought Android in 2005... The iPhone was released in 2007... How can you even remotely claim this is a counter to 'big brother' Apple? In 2005, Apple was a company that made PC's that few people used and had that nifty iPod thing. More or less a rather highly regarded nobody in the tech world.
Google thought mobile was going to be the 'next big thing' Everybody in 2005, if they had to pick a horse that was going to win the mobile race, was betting on Microsoft. Nobody at that time could fathom or predict the sheer ineptitude Microsoft would display on this front. They had actually displayed the same ineptitude on the 'internet' era but had managed to come out and scratch out a win purely by their market dominance. The consensus so far on the mobile front is 'too little, too late' and it looks like they've lost their mojo.
Microsoft had just released 'Microsoft Search' (it wasn't Bing yet). In their browser they made Microsoft search the default search engine and built in a 'search box' at the top so you wouldn't have to use a url (where you might be tempted to type in www.google.com). Fresh in everyone's minds (especially Googles!) was that Microsoft had put netscape out of business even with an inferior product simply by virtue of making it the 'default' in Windows. Deja vu!
Microsoft was predictably sued and forced to let users select other search engines easily. They obliged by not only adding a feature to let users pick their search engine, but provided a list of possible engines to choose from... several hundred of them... the goal being to make it more difficult for users to select Google by burying alongside many others. Its the type of behavior that made a lot of people Microsoft haters and reluctant to go back to anything Microsoft. Google's existence and survival was threatened by that prospect. Unfortunately for Microsoft their search product was so inferior that most people did take the time to select Google as their search engine.
The huge fear for Google was that Microsoft would dominate 90+% of the mobile market and lock Google out of the search business. Google scrambled to avoid that. They bought Android, open sourced, and the sole plan was to give it away free so that it proliferated and users would have access to Google search. That is why Android by design was never intended to make a profit. It was intended to ensure Google search would reach the widest audience possible. Apple was still years away from releasing the iPhone and people then would probably laugh at you if you tried to call Apple 'Big Brother'
Daniel Eran Dilger, perhaps Apple's most rabid supporter, absolutely agrees with us both that Google's Android plans were aimed at Microsoft not Apple.
Mr Dilger didn't consider Android nor even a "Google Phone" to be targeting the iPhone but rather plainly intended to blunt Microsoft's mobile plans. It wasn't until after a couple of Mr. Jobs well-publicized supposed tirades against Android that the opinions of Apple fans started to flip over. Prior to that I don't know of anyone here who said Apple had to rid their platform of them. If there's any "revisionist history" being written it's by a couple of members here trying to rationalize their new-found hatred of "all-things-Google".
For those in doubt here's a couple of 2007/2008 blog articles from DED, before the Big Bang. There's not even a hint that he believed Google's intent was to compete with Apple.
"As reports began to leak out about talks between Google and hardware makers throughout 2007, rumors began to fly about “the GPhone,” a competitive offering that was supposed to take on the iPhone. Some phone enthusiasts hoped Google would jump in to rescue the struggling OpenMoko project and turn it into a viable project that could attack Apple’s new smartphone.
In October 2007, I printed the Great Google GPhone Myth, taking apart the idea that Google would be directly competing against the iPhone, and describing that Google was really working on a free alternative to Windows Mobile as a conduit for getting its search and related services on a broader variety of mobiles. Google’s services were already on the iPhone.
In November, Google played its hand: it had organized a consortium of companies called the Open Handset Alliance to develop open standards for mobiles. The first product from the group would be Android, a mobile operating system built on the Linux kernel.
Google wasn’t getting into the phone handset business at all; it was only making sure that its mobile search products would not risk being marginalized by the threat of Windows Mobile on phones in the same way Microsoft had been working to leverage its PC monopoly to push Google search off the Windows desktop. "
I saw that. How is that a security hole? Explain. It is standard URL schema functionality. Without it so much expected behavior works.
This isn't like accessing private data or being able to do something behind your back. In fact in iOS 6 Apple introduced new APIs for inter app communication which if you customize to offer more options requires this scheme functionality to work.
And for anyone who says that the app should ask or iOS should ask the user like for contacts, location, calendar, photos, etc. you have no idea how bombarded you will be because this is a fundamental part of code. It's like an app can inquire the device type, it's OS, it's wifi IP address -many things. You'd get dozens of "allow" messages if that kind of stuff was requested.
So I stand by my assertion that this is not a security hole or risk. And I do so by my experience developing on multiple platforms for the last 15 years.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Right now, once you're done using the iOS-app-launched browser, you have to remember / find / relaunch the app that sent you to the web in the first place.
Yeah, because double tapping the home button is oh, so hard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I have to use Chrome if I want to do some functions for online banking as Safari breaks. Probably the bank's fault but nevertheless Chrome works and Safari fails, but it is only a very specialized function in the out of bank wire transfer section.
Where I live most of the banks have enough resources to make their own Apps, which work quite well.
I very rarely access banks via a browser.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers
i have chrome installed, but i don't want it to be my default browser... so this is rather annoying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
If I read right it doesn't change your default browser, it would still be Safari. Developers would just have a choice of making a call to Chrome within their app, if Chrome is already installed. I think I have that right.
It can't change your default browser system-wide.
It however does have the default setting of checking to see if Chrome is installed, and if it is, using that rather than Safari to open hyperlinks in GMail.
This setting It is easily toggled to off if one so desires, but I guess Google is betting on the majority of users not knowing how to tweak their apps, which will give Google by default a "Google User Experience" of sorts on the iOS platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Right now, once you're done using the iOS-app-launched browser, you have to remember / find / relaunch the app that sent you to the web in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Yeah, because double tapping the home button is oh, so hard.
Yes, quite right, and that's what I find (slightly) inadequate about the whole experience - I would have thought that Chrome would incorporate a back-button using the same routine in reverse to send the user back to the calling Google app - but I quickly surmised that a double-tap of the Home button would also suffice.
Not quite a seamless "Google User Experience" after all... probably the next update will include this, if Apple approves it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I have to use Chrome if I want to do some functions for online banking as Safari breaks. Probably the bank's fault but nevertheless Chrome works and Safari fails, but it is only a very specialized function in the out of bank wire transfer section.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Where I live most of the banks have enough resources to make their own Apps, which work quite well.
I very rarely access banks via a browser.
I initially had problems with my Mac's Safari browser accessing my Bank sites via https, so I installed Chrome and used that for a while.
However with regular testing I found out that these problems have largely disappeared as Safari iterated; better still my bank now has very comprehensive mobile apps that allow almost instantaneous and secure access to any functions.
The problem with the gmail implementation is that if you check yes to open chrome, clicking a link in gmail opens immediately in chrome. If you have it checked to no, it should open immediately in safari. But it doesn't. It opens in the gmail in app browser, with a button to open in safari.
In ther words? Google is getting the clicks it wants anyway and reducing the quality of the user experience if you just so happen to to not want to use their browser.
In app browsers are no longer needed. iOS 4 in 2010 introduced fast app switching. I hope Apple sets an expiration date for this feature. At minimum I hope they start requiring in app browsers to have an option to turn them off. Safari on iOS is the best experience. I understand that is due to Apple rules, but that doesn't change the fact it is true. I always end up needing an extra tap to view in Safari. I'd love that to change
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood
So yes, in 2010 Android did (and does) stand in opposition to Apples philosophy and people are free to choose what system they like. That does not change the reason of why Google bought Android in the first place.
Google bought Android in 2005... The iPhone was released in 2007... How can you even remotely claim this is a counter to 'big brother' Apple? In 2005, Apple was a company that made PC's that few people used and had that nifty iPod thing. More or less a rather highly regarded nobody in the tech world.
Google thought mobile was going to be the 'next big thing' Everybody in 2005, if they had to pick a horse that was going to win the mobile race, was betting on Microsoft. Nobody at that time could fathom or predict the sheer ineptitude Microsoft would display on this front. They had actually displayed the same ineptitude on the 'internet' era but had managed to come out and scratch out a win purely by their market dominance. The consensus so far on the mobile front is 'too little, too late' and it looks like they've lost their mojo.
Microsoft had just released 'Microsoft Search' (it wasn't Bing yet). In their browser they made Microsoft search the default search engine and built in a 'search box' at the top so you wouldn't have to use a url (where you might be tempted to type in www.google.com). Fresh in everyone's minds (especially Googles!) was that Microsoft had put netscape out of business even with an inferior product simply by virtue of making it the 'default' in Windows. Deja vu!
Microsoft was predictably sued and forced to let users select other search engines easily. They obliged by not only adding a feature to let users pick their search engine, but provided a list of possible engines to choose from... several hundred of them... the goal being to make it more difficult for users to select Google by burying alongside many others. Its the type of behavior that made a lot of people Microsoft haters and reluctant to go back to anything Microsoft. Google's existence and survival was threatened by that prospect. Unfortunately for Microsoft their search product was so inferior that most people did take the time to select Google as their search engine.
The huge fear for Google was that Microsoft would dominate 90+% of the mobile market and lock Google out of the search business. Google scrambled to avoid that. They bought Android, open sourced, and the sole plan was to give it away free so that it proliferated and users would have access to Google search. That is why Android by design was never intended to make a profit. It was intended to ensure Google search would reach the widest audience possible. Apple was still years away from releasing the iPhone and people then would probably laugh at you if you tried to call Apple 'Big Brother'
Daniel Eran Dilger, perhaps Apple's most rabid supporter, absolutely agrees with us both that Google's Android plans were aimed at Microsoft not Apple.
Mr Dilger didn't consider Android nor even a "Google Phone" to be targeting the iPhone but rather plainly intended to blunt Microsoft's mobile plans. It wasn't until after a couple of Mr. Jobs well-publicized supposed tirades against Android that the opinions of Apple fans started to flip over. Prior to that I don't know of anyone here who said Apple had to rid their platform of them. If there's any "revisionist history" being written it's by a couple of members here trying to rationalize their new-found hatred of "all-things-Google".
For those in doubt here's a couple of 2007/2008 blog articles from DED, before the Big Bang. There's not even a hint that he believed Google's intent was to compete with Apple.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/10/20/the-great-google-gphone-myth/
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/08/25/will-googles-android-play-dos-to-apples-iphone/
"As reports began to leak out about talks between Google and hardware makers throughout 2007, rumors began to fly about “the GPhone,” a competitive offering that was supposed to take on the iPhone. Some phone enthusiasts hoped Google would jump in to rescue the struggling OpenMoko project and turn it into a viable project that could attack Apple’s new smartphone.
In October 2007, I printed the Great Google GPhone Myth, taking apart the idea that Google would be directly competing against the iPhone, and describing that Google was really working on a free alternative to Windows Mobile as a conduit for getting its search and related services on a broader variety of mobiles. Google’s services were already on the iPhone.
In November, Google played its hand: it had organized a consortium of companies called the Open Handset Alliance to develop open standards for mobiles. The first product from the group would be Android, a mobile operating system built on the Linux kernel.
Google wasn’t getting into the phone handset business at all; it was only making sure that its mobile search products would not risk being marginalized by the threat of Windows Mobile on phones in the same way Microsoft had been working to leverage its PC monopoly to push Google search off the Windows desktop. "
(Huh. . .I think I said the bolded part myself)
I saw that. How is that a security hole? Explain. It is standard URL schema functionality. Without it so much expected behavior works.
This isn't like accessing private data or being able to do something behind your back. In fact in iOS 6 Apple introduced new APIs for inter app communication which if you customize to offer more options requires this scheme functionality to work.
And for anyone who says that the app should ask or iOS should ask the user like for contacts, location, calendar, photos, etc. you have no idea how bombarded you will be because this is a fundamental part of code. It's like an app can inquire the device type, it's OS, it's wifi IP address -many things. You'd get dozens of "allow" messages if that kind of stuff was requested.
So I stand by my assertion that this is not a security hole or risk. And I do so by my experience developing on multiple platforms for the last 15 years.
And anyone asking for in-app browsers to be removed have no idea what they are asking for technically.
If you don't like it - don't use apps that use them. For many others its a better experience, is more private, and they want it.
Just because you don't - don't punish everyone else.