Notebook (Posts about vendor lock-in)/categories/vendor-lock-in.atom2019-05-05T21:20:57ZToni MüllerNikolaThe Case Against Google Chrome/posts/the_case_against_google_chrome/2011-08-25T16:16:00+02:002011-08-25T16:16:00+02:00Toni Mueller<div><p>There are two web browsers, based on the Google Chrome codebase:</p>
<ul>
<li>Google Chrome (of course)</li>
<li>Chromium</li>
</ul>
<p>The latter is a free-software-only version of Google Chrome, having
the spyware features of the original Google Chrome ripped out, and
that can be eg. installed in Debian using apt-get.</p>
<p>Today, I wanted to try the extensions, since the original browser is
suitable for not much more than simply looking at a web page. But if
you want any kind of extensions, like eg. maybe <em>AdBlock</em>, or the
<em>SpeedMeter</em>, or the <em>SessionManager</em>, or whatever else would benefit
you as a user, you immediately find yourself locked out of Google's
Webstore. By the way... the name is already giving away what the
problem really is: Google, like about any other vendor I am aware of,
wants to reduce <strong>you</strong> to a user, and cut down on <strong>your abilities</strong>
to create, or use the software in ways you deem fit, instead of only
ways <strong>they</strong> deem fit. So, there is eg. no simple way to download the
extension to your hard disk drive, maybe for later digestion - no, you
can, at best, install the extension online, into your current
profile. And if you somehow lose that, you get to try again. So they
can not only track every move of you, they can also manage the
availability of their extensions to you as they choose. Like eg. Ad
sales going down? Poof, no more AdBlock for you.</p>
<p>This way, you sell out your freedom and your privacy in the same way
to Google than you probably did before, to Microsoft and Apple, and a
plethora of other companies.</p>
<p>Now my question to you is: <strong>Are you prepared to accept that, and if so, why?</strong></p></div>