One day the different parts of the body were having an argument to see which should be in charge.
The brain said “I do all the thinking so I’m the most important and I should be in charge.”
The eyes said “I see everything and let the rest of you know where we are, so I’m the most important and I should be in charge.”
The hands said “Without me we wouldn’t be able to pick anything up or move anything. So I’m the most important and I should be in charge.”
The stomach said “I turn the food we eat into energy for the rest of you. Without me, we’d starve. So I’m the most important and I should be in charge.”
The legs said “Without me we wouldn’t be able to move anywhere. So I’m the most important and I should be in charge.”
Then the rectum said “I think I should be in charge.”
All the rest of the parts said"YOU? You don’t do anything! You’re not important! You can’t be in charge."
So the rectum closed up. After a few days, the legs were all wobbly, the stomach was all queasy, the hands were all shaky, the eyes were all watery, and the brain was all cloudy.
They all agreed that they couldn’t take any more of this and agreed to put the rectum in charge.
The moral of the story: You don’t have to be the most important to be in charge, just an asshole.
But they not only have updates, they also have form filling, a password manager (wink wink), sync between devices and so many more basic features that Firefox has too
With other browsers, you need to update them from time to time. Chrome one has all the updates already built in from day one, so you never need to update it. Isn’t that great. The devs at Google are so good that they decided to do all the updates at once so they never need to worry about updates ever again.
If you ever use SQL Server Management Studio, you can experience the opposite. Whenever there’s an update, you’ll get a notification in the application, but to actually install it, you need to go to Microsoft’s website to download the latest version and install it yourself. Chrome, on the other hand, updates itself upon restart without requiring anything special from the user.
As a software developer, I really like that part. It means that websites I work on only need to consider the features supported in the latest version of major browsers rather than the last several (as was the case with Internet Explorer).
So, it’s nice and something that I remember really appreciating when Chrome was getting popular. But it’s still a weird thing to brag about.
I remember when this was a huge thing back when Chrome was really new.
Other browsers always needed admin permissions to be installed and to be updated at the time. Chrome installed by-default in the user context, didn’t even ask for an installation location (which sucked 😅) and could also update without adminstrative privileges.
Of course, nowadays this is entirely normal. But while it wasn’t the the first software to do it back then, it was the first one where the average user say something being done without a popup about changed system settings.
it really updates a lot. also it does it very sneaky. i think on windows it uses a background service running as admin. it’s rare it shows a tab that it updated. probably because they sneak stuff in like more tracking and pre downloaded google assets, so their pages load faster than the competition.
for comparison firefox sometimes prompts for admin permission to update and very often displays the “we added more bloat you will never use” tab.
Chrome almost got a monopoly because for a time, it was legitimately better than most the competition. Now you have consumer inertia, and the things that make chrome dogshit are unfortunately not things that the average person cares out.
The one that hate as a sysadmin is how Microsoft Defender is always telling me to disable Chrome features such as continue running in the background, third party cookies and password manager but never recommends those actions for Edge.
This is Microsoft Defender for Endpoint that is part of the Microsoft 365 admin portal. It looks for security issues like out of date software and insecure configurations.
Yes and no because the dev would have to maintain two different browsers, one for the eu and one for the rest of the world. It would double the cost of development and testing for something that regular people won’t even notice
Add comment