Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Chrome Google Software Upgrades

Chrome 42 Launches With Push Notifications 199

Posted by Soulskill from the douglas-adams-edition dept.
An anonymous reader writes: Google today launched Chrome 42 for Windows, Mac, and Linux with new developer tools. Chrome 42 offers two new APIs (Push API and Notifications API) that together allow sites to send notifications to their users even after the given page is closed. While this can be quite an intrusive feature for a browser, Google promises the users have to first grant explicit permission before they receive such a message.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chrome 42 Launches With Push Notifications More

Chrome 42 Launches With Push Notifications

Comments Filter:

  • After all the problems with popups... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by danomac ( 1032160 ) on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @05:47PM (#49474587)

    So after all the problems with malware-ridden popups and other unwanted crap Google gives us this?

    Sure, there's no way it's going to get abused. Or cracked.

    • Accidentally visit a pr0n site?
      Even after you leave
      And clear your browsing history
      Don't you be deceived

      You give your presentation
      On the conference room screen
      Up pops a message
      "More from the gay porn scene!!!"

      "You're into coprophagia"
      "Here's some more new sh*t!"
      "Wow, your wife gives you anal"
      "With her strap-on dick?"

      "We need some more nude photos"
      "Like you sent us the last time."
      "Need more bestiality?"
      "We've got it all on line"

      You claim your innocence
      And protest "It's not mine!"
      But you still end up
      In the unemployment line.

      Burma Shave "Come back to our

    • So after all the problems with malware-ridden popups and other unwanted crap Google gives us this?

      Does that really surprise you? How does Google make their money?

    • So after all the problems with malware-ridden popups and other unwanted crap Google gives us this?

      I doubt it will be a simple popup, most likely it will go through some kind of notification manager and the notification will appear in a very restricted type of user interface (like they did on Android).

      And yes, the push notifications on Android were abused initially (especially by advertisers), until Google made an update to its notification manager (and also back-ported it).

      That update allowed the user to long press on a notification, immediately see who sent the notification, and from that screen allowe

      • Not sure when they implemented this, but it never got backported to my phone. The again, I'm still running Android 2.3. My phone was released 6 months for Android 4 came out and I never saw an update. You can blame the manufacturer (LG), but I also blame Google as well. They allowed their name to be engraved on the back of the phone. The current status with Android updates is appauling. I'm getting a new phone soon. Apple is too expensive, and I'll probably get Android. But this time I'm not going high en
    • It probably explains why our IT department decided to finally move from IE8 to a much modern browser like Chrome.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

      So after all the problems with malware-ridden popups and other unwanted crap Google gives us this?

      The problem with pop-ups was that there was no authorization required. Any random website could easily spawn a pop-up window. Even once those were set to default deny, any website could set links to "target=_blank" or execute Javascript when you click on something.

      As long as Google have done as they claim to have and made it require up-front authentication then I don't see a problem. Other similar services, such as location awareness, have used the same mechanism and it has proven both reliable and secure.

  • Why chrome? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I can't think of a single reason why I would use a browser with google's snooping technology baked right into it.

  • Fuck No (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sexconker ( 1179573 ) on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @05:55PM (#49474645)

    Can we go back to the web being "Hey can I get your page at site.tld/page.ext ?" and "Sure, here is what you asked for, and not an entire cart of horseshit jammed in with it, alongside it, or after it! Thank you for visiting our website, valuable reader / customer!"?

    • Can we also get rid of the fucking obnoxious TLDs? I learned that .today is a valid TLD. It's bullshit. There's so many TLDs that ICANN should just throw in the towel and say "Okay people, register whatever the hell you want." Either that or go back to a small set of TLDs that actually mean something as God intended.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

      That wouldn't solve anything.

      If done right the current set up will save bandwidth. No need to include all the CSS in every page, just reference it and download once, then use the cache.

      The problem is the abuse. Even if you forced everyone to send just a .html file they would still abuse it. Encoded images, extremely slow load times as the server compiles everything into a single file every time it is loaded etc. Abuse is the problem, not the tech.

    • No, we can't. That ship has sailed.

  • Shades of Marimba (Score:3)

    by pthisis ( 27352 ) on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @05:57PM (#49474655) Homepage Journal

    Push technology was one of the hottest buzzwords going c. 1997-1998.

    http://news.cnet.com/Marimba-s... [cnet.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Push technology was one of the hottest buzzwords going c. 1997-1998.

      http://news.cnet.com/Marimba-s... [cnet.com]

      Remember the Pointcast network?

    • Yup.

      Polling strikes back.

      I'm looking forward to "Revenge of the Polling" in 2020

    • And even back then people saw it's a crappy idea and didn't want it.

      But hey, maybe people today are stupider than they were like 17 years ago, let's try it again!

  • I see enough of this crap on Safari - random web sites wanting permission to display "notifications" on my system when it's extremely unlikely anyone would find said notifications useful ("Hey! James Johnson just published a new article!" "Hey! BluePooper7 just commented on a story you read!"),

    Thanks, Chrome, for taking it a step further!

    Really, the only sites I think this might be marginally useful for is Gmail and Google Calendar - and they used to offer a much smaller footprint, targeted "biff" applicati

  • I Closed the Frikkin' Page for a Reason! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Irate Engineer ( 2814313 ) on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @06:06PM (#49474705)
    Oh great, so if I stumble on a page so full of crap that I decide to backtrack the hell away, the site can still shove notifications in my face, even though I clearly don't want that content? Yeah, I have to explicitly allow it, that's awfully nice of them. But how long will opting out last when the advertisers realize they can force a few more eyeballs? Is there another browser out there that hasn't been bloated to death with "features"? I jumped from Firefox to Chrome when they started churning versions, but Chrome just jumped the shark by doing the same thing.
    • How long before malware opts in for you "for your convenience"?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Bogtha ( 906264 )

      Yeah, I have to explicitly allow it, that's awfully nice of them. But how long will opting out last when the advertisers realize they can force a few more eyeballs?

      You realise that it's the browser vendor that decides this, not the website, right? Do you think it's only a matter of time before browsers remove their popup blockers as well?

      It's also opt-in, not opt-out. The system doesn't work unless the user grants permission. It doesn't work automatically until the user switches it off.

      • Now. Let's wait a few versions.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dave420 ( 699308 )
          Throw your computer out the window NOW, as in a "few versions" of any software they might decide to do something you don't like. Great logic, sparky!

  • Actually, it's worse than that. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rob from RPI ( 4309 ) <xrobau@gmail.com> on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @06:14PM (#49474755) Homepage

    Java is Broken in Chrome 42. Totally. There is no way to run Java in the browser, at all. In any way.

    Trying to run any Java app results in this: http://i.imgur.com/Imuxmay.png [imgur.com]

    There's a ticket open here:
    https://code.google.com/p/chro... [google.com]

    • Re:Actually, it's worse than that. (Score:5, Informative)

      by The MAZZTer ( 911996 ) <megazzt.gmail@com> on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @06:37PM (#49474867) Homepage

      It was a design decision to improve browser security (NPAPI model is horribly outdated). Almost no one uses Java on the web any more so it was decided it was acceptable. Oracle is free to port Java to NaCl or PPAPI if they want to continue supporting Chrome.

      Yeah it sucks for the small % of users who still want to use it, but it's necessary to move security forward.

      • Hmm, according to Chrome's on stats, 10% of people use Java. That's not 'almost no-one'.

        • 10% is almost no one (as far as Chrome Developers are concerned). Tab Mix Plus for FF (with side tabs) has 1,000,000+ users. Tree Style Tab (which is probably the most functional of all the side-tab clones) has only 100,000+ users. Vertical/Side tabs will never be native in Chrome [expertreviews.co.uk] :: too much effort for too few users.

          Which is pretty interesting, I bet less than 1% of Chrome's Users have any interest whatsoever in "DevTools/Inspect Element". I wonder when that will get removed from Chrome.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tepples ( 727027 )

        Oracle is free to port Java to NaCl or PPAPI

        Does this Native Client even support JITs at all? I thought it was strict W^X, where a page can't be flipped from writable to executable for security reasons.

      • Tell that to my bank.

    • That sounds like they are doing you a favor. Java web plugin is an insecure pile of shit.

  • Circa 1995 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dmaul99 ( 1895836 ) on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @06:17PM (#49474773)

    Way back in the day when Microsoft was unleashing IE onto the world, everybody howled that they were introducing new IE specific things for websites to be able to provide, eg ActiveX. Now it seems that google is doing the same thing with Chrome. In both cases the idea is to take ownership of the web...

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by msobkow ( 48369 )

      Yeah, but you're not allowed to complain about Google on anything other than "privacy" issues. 'Cause, like, "do no evil" and all that.

      See, if you give away your attempt to dominate the world, you're automatically a "good" guy because you're not using it for profit (pay no attention to the ad push on every single thing you do, nor the tracking of your every action.)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by msobkow ( 48369 )

        I've got to thank the moderators for the "Troll" rating, which just proves my point. :P

    • Re:Circa 1995 (Score:5, Informative)

      by Lennie ( 16154 ) on Wednesday April 15, 2015 @06:55AM (#49477341)

      Chrome ?

      These APIs have been created by organisations working together at the W3C.

      It was actually the person from AT&T which did the most work on getting Push API adopted by the W3C.

  • Some fluke allows it when you install 15+ over the top of it :)

    I still have my bookmarks and very few sites don't allow it now it's been blessed by Opera 15+. But it has started opening a new page instead of a tab and really becoming distracting (not what I'm used to).

    Opera 15+ is just Chrome in a different GUI.

    As for these push API's it appears more important than ever to delete ones cookie after leaving the site, Opera does this as does Firefox (my back up browser) or it's claimed to.

  • >Chrome 42 offers two new APIs

    I don't like change.

    • >Chrome 42 offers two new APIs

      I don't like change.

      There is always IE. You know just saying for those who don't and do not care about new things

  • How about a working middle button? (Score:4, Informative)

    by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @06:47PM (#49474919) Homepage Journal

    Lately the middle button in Chrome has been deprecated, and it doesn't do what it says on the tin. Sometimes I middle-click on something and the page just begins scrolling, for example Youtube videos (even when not yet loaded!) especially in G+, which is a place you especially don't want to scroll accidentally. Also, image galleries which are probably hosted by google are just coming up as a slideshow in the current tab instead of opening a new tab. Google reserves the right to change the behavior of Chrome only for their sites, and up yours.

    I wouldn't use Chrome at all, but some Google sites sometimes only work properly in it. Youtube is the primary example. Sometimes a given resolution will choke in Firefox, sometimes in Chrome, and there's no apparent rhyme or reason to it.

  • Fucking fantastic. One more thing I'll need to turn off in every account on every computer I use.

    I wish there was one great browser, and not three OK ones.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Dog-Cow ( 21281 )

      Why would you need to turn off a feature that starts that way? What kind of fucking moron are you, and why does anyone let you near a computer?

    • Re:Ooh yay, great! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by dave420 ( 699308 ) on Wednesday April 15, 2015 @06:17AM (#49477185)
      You are complaining that you have to turn something off which is disabled by default. You just told everyone you prefer being upset to being well-informed, and that is not very becoming.

  • I wouldn't be too worried. I looked into this for a web app for chat notifications, and the API is kind of a disaster IMO. From what I saw, it's very opinionated on how the data is acquired and passed on through a ServiceWorker to a notification, to the point that applications would likely have to be built from the ground-up with it mind.

  • Push technology is for phones, not computers (Score:3)

    by Akaihiryuu ( 786040 ) on Tuesday April 14, 2015 @08:47PM (#49475489)
    Yes, push is great for mobile devices. Because you can close the application and put the device to sleep, and you can still get notifications. That said, even on my phone, the browser does not have this. Why would it? Push is for things like messaging programs, so you can get messages without keeping the device awake and using battery. For computers? Not a chance. There is ZERO reason to have this on desktop PC's even for things like IM programs.

    • There is ZERO reason to have this on desktop PC's even for things like IM programs.

      Why? Do you like having to keep browser tabs open for your IM, e-mail, calendar, etc? Or to use some extension or plugin? I always keep gmail (actually, inbox) and calendar tabs pinned, but with push notifications I might not have to bother with that any more.

  • Now in addition to getting websites popping up windows that ask you to subscribe to their email they are going to be sending you notifications asking you to do the same. (And it's not pop-up windows which I have turned off but some HTML or CSS that comes up which the ad blockers don't stop. I probably don't want to subscribe but I never will know if you never give me the chance to read the article on your site because you block it out asking me to subscribe!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dave420 ( 699308 )
      You have to enable this in your browser first to be able to receive notifications, just as when a website asks for your location. Your fears seem rather baseless.
  • I've been mesmerized why I can't configure Chrome to show notifications on work hours only. It's as if whole tech industry assumes we use phones to get our notifications and that's where the most comprehensive settings are for notifications. I upgraded to Chrome 42, and it still can't tune notifications for only work hours, damn it.

  • I don't have a FirefoxOS device to experience it, but they say they added that feature in an 1.x version. I remember thinking that crap, I thought it's the smartphone for normal people and should be a less intrusive smartphone : if you want to check mail go to the mail app. But you do have legitimate notifications on a phone : SMS and missed calls.

    So.. is the web notification feature somewhat old already?
    Found this on push notification, says it's supported by no desktop browser
    https://developer.mozilla.org/ [mozilla.org]

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • I think asking a user permission for push notifications isn't strict enough. IMO, I'd require approval by a 3rd party, much like how mobile apps need to go through an app store. As an alternative, I'd implement a rating system.

    If we allow any web site to ask to allow push notifications, every time we visit a new web site, it's going to ask us if it can do push notifications. Without some kind of rating system or centralized approval system, push notifications will just be another venue for spam.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes. -- Henry David Thoreau

Close