Google to funnel all Chrome for Mac extensions through Chrome Web Store

Posted:
in Mac Software edited May 2015
All Mac and Windows users of Chrome will soon have to get their browser extensions from the Chrome Web Store, regardless which release channel they're on, Google announced on Wednesday.




The company originally adopted the restriction for most Windows users a year ago, as a way of preventing complaints about unwanted and potentially malicious extensions being installed. This reportedly caused a 75 percent drop in related customer support requests.

Until now, though, the Windows Developer channel of Chrome wasn't subject to the policy. Google said today that some parties were exploiting the gap, pushing people to install the Dev software for the sake of extensions, creating the additional problem of leaving them in a version of Chrome they may not have wanted.

Beginning Wednesday, Google will be enforcing the extension policy for all Windows users. The tactic should extend to Macs in the near future, and Google has promised to make all channels compliant starting in July.

Extensions will still be supported outside of the Web Store while they're in development, or if they're installed according to enterprise policy.

The policy is similar to Apple's approach to iOS and the App Store. Although containing most iOS distribution to the App Store limits the freedom of developers, Apple's screening system theoretically prevents malicious apps from reaching the public.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 26
    bubbaonebubbaone Posts: 11member
    As a Windows 8.1 Chrome User (and a user of extensions) and an Iphone and Ipad owner (I use Safari on my IOS devicces) this is a good thing.
  • Reply 2 of 26
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,317member
    And again, Google continued to shift their policies to those that they've been mocking and shitting on Apple for from the very beginning (WALLED GARDEN!!). But of course, the Google syncophants will never admit or realize this.
  • Reply 3 of 26
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,471member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post



    And again, Google continued to shift their policies to those that they've been mocking and shitting on Apple for from the very beginning (WALLED GARDEN!!). But of course, the Google syncophants will never admit or realize this.



    You should hear them griping about the Galaxy S6 and its lack of a SD card slot, its non-removable battery, its metal case. How quickly they turn... and forget.

  • Reply 4 of 26
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,382member
    slurpy wrote: »
    And again, Google continued to shift their policies to those that they've been mocking and shitting on Apple for from the very beginning (WALLED GARDEN!!). But of course, the Google syncophants will never admit or realize this.

    They are too busy rewriting history. :D
  • Reply 5 of 26
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,471member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    They are too busy rewriting history. image



    I fully expect that rewritten history to be “Google saved Apple” instead of “Microsoft saved Apple.” You know that’s coming some day.

  • Reply 6 of 26
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,740member

    Open!  LOL

  • Reply 7 of 26
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    john.b wrote: »
    Open!  LOL

    You do realize that your also critizing Apple as they're doing the same thing. This is a good move and frankly about time. This has nothing to do with being opened or not as you can still write custom extensions for personal use without going through Google, it's just when the extension is made public that it would need to go through Google's Store. I'm not sure why this needs to he critized, it's a good thing. Oh wait, because it's Google, gotcha.
  • Reply 8 of 26
    relic wrote: »
    You do realize that your also critizing Apple as they're doing the same thing. This is a good move and frankly about time. This has nothing to do with being opened or not as you can still write custom extensions for personal use without going through Google, it's just when the extension is made public that it would need to go through Google's Store. I'm not sure why this needs to he critized, it's a good thing. Oh wait, because it's Google, gotcha.

    He's not criticizing Apple. He's laughing at Google and how they're slowly backing away from being "open" because it was the one major differentiator from Apple. But anyone who remotely cares about privacy or security would never consider anything Google, which is why they're closing up.
  • Reply 9 of 26
    suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,794member
    relic wrote: »
    You do realize that your also critizing Apple as they're doing the same thing. This is a good move and frankly about time. This has nothing to do with being opened or not as you can still write custom extensions for personal use without going through Google, it's just when the extension is made public that it would need to go through Google's Store. I'm not sure why this needs to he critized, it's a good thing. Oh wait, because it's Google, gotcha.

    He's not criticizing Google for not being open, he's criticizing Google for feigning openness when it suits their image and closed when it doesn't. The clever trick they played is that they labeled both open and closed products the same: Android. It's an umbrella term for both AOSP and closed-sourced, and tightly controlled GMS that OHA members agree to use and support exclusively. Google is so "open" see what happened when Acer, an OHA member, tried to sell an Aliyun OS-based phone. Oh, right: Google pulled rank on them, not in the spirit of openness and competition, but to protect closed-source Android from competing AOSP-based forks. Well you can't embrace openness and fight it at the same time. Why aren't you holding Google to their principles? Oh wait, because it's Google: they get a free pass on being evil. Gotcha.
  • Reply 10 of 26
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    lkrupp wrote: »

    You should hear them griping about the Galaxy S6 and its lack of a SD card slot, its non-removable battery, its metal case. How quickly they turn... and forget.

    What does that have to do with what Slurpy wrote? What does Web browser extensions have to do with a device built by Samsung?
  • Reply 11 of 26
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    He's not criticizing Google for not being open, he's criticizing Google for feigning openness when it suits their image and closed when it doesn't. The clever trick they played is that they labeled both open and closed products the same: Android. It's an umbrella term for both AOSP and closed-sourced, and tightly controlled GMS that OHA members agree to use and support exclusively. Google is so "open" see what happened when Acer, an OHA member, tried to sell an Aliyun OS-based phone. Oh, right: Google pulled rank on them, not in the spirit of openness and competition, but to protect closed-source Android from competing AOSP-based forks. Well you can't embrace openness and fight it at the same time. Why aren't you holding Google to their principles? Oh wait, because it's Google: they get a free pass on being evil. Gotcha.

    Acer willfully joined the OHA. They could've very easily built there own OS using Android had they not done so just like Amazon, and One Plus did.

    As far as the extensions for Chrome goes, people were buying abandoned extentions, and then using them to inject malicious code into a user's computer. Closing that loophole became a necessity. IMO that loophole should have never existed. Open will never work if you don't keep an eye on the door.
  • Reply 12 of 26
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,740member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Relic View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post



    Open!  LOL




    You do realize that your also critizing Apple as they're doing the same thing. This is a good move and frankly about time. This has nothing to do with being opened or not as you can still write custom extensions for personal use without going through Google, it's just when the extension is made public that it would need to go through Google's Store. I'm not sure why this needs to he critized, it's a good thing. Oh wait, because it's Google, gotcha.

     

    The irony is obviously lost on you.

     

    Google has made a living shouting from the mountain tops how they're open and Apple is closed. 

     

    Remember the famous Andy Rubin tweet (long since deleted):

     

    Quote:

     the definition of open: “mkdir android ; cd android ; repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git ; repo sync ; make”


     

    It's the hypocrisy of years of criticizing "walled gardens" only to have to (finally) implement their own.

  • Reply 13 of 26
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    john.b wrote: »
    The irony is obviously lost on you.

    Google has made a living shouting from the mountain tops how they're open and Apple is closed. 

    Remember the famous Andy Rubin tweet (long since deleted):


    It's the hypocrisy of years of criticizing "walled gardens" only to have to (finally) implement their own.

    This is not Android though.
  • Reply 14 of 26
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,471member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    What does that have to do with what Slurpy wrote? What does Web browser extensions have to do with a device built by Samsung?



    I believe we were talking about Google sycophants and their tendency to forget what they whined about Apple doing when Google decides to do the same thing.

  • Reply 15 of 26
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,001member
    lkrupp wrote: »

    I believe we were talking about Google sycophants and their tendency to forget what they whined about Apple doing when Google decides to do the same thing.

    That would be true if Google had a say in what Samsung did with their devices.
  • Reply 16 of 26
    bubbaonebubbaone Posts: 11member

    Why the hate?  Anything that improves internet security is a good thing.

  • Reply 17 of 26
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    This is not Android though.
    lkrupp wrote: »

    You should hear them griping about the Galaxy S6 and its lack of a SD card slot, its non-removable battery, its metal case. How quickly they turn... and forget.

    Yes, thank you, I was just about to say that. Chrome for Android doesn't have installable extensions which means this has nothing to do with Android what's so ever. I actually think it's because of Chrome OS more than Chrome on OSX or Windows.
  • Reply 18 of 26
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    lkrupp wrote: »

    I believe we were talking about Google sycophants and their tendency to forget what they whined about Apple doing when Google decides to do the same thing.

    You do realize that this has nothing to do with Googles mobile platform as Chrome for Android has no extensions. This is about the desktop version of Chrome and this is a good thing. I also just checked, you can still install extensions to Safari, desktop version, without going through the official Apple extension gallery, so who exactly is Google copying? You can find lots of Safari extensions here -http://safariextensions.tumblr.com
  • Reply 19 of 26
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,740member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

     

    This is not Android though.


     

    This is Google.

  • Reply 20 of 26
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,382member
    lkrupp wrote: »

    I fully expect that rewritten history to be “Google saved Apple” instead of “Microsoft saved Apple.” You know that’s coming some day.

    I wouldn't doubt it. Maybe when Google finally get around to paying the fine for stealing Apple's IP, it will be claimed by Google acolytes as Apple's saving moment.
Sign In or Register to comment.