Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google Forking WebKit to Create New Web Rendering Engine for Chrome

rmwebs said:
About 6 months ago. Looks like there are a few more extensions now, but still nowhere near the likes of Chrome or Firefox. Not by a long shot.
Click to expand...

Your point was the lack of plugins. There are.

rmwebs said:
Yup, and it works the same way with chrome. It only calls home if you log into your gmail/google account in the browser. In comparison, Safari iOS calls home regardless. If you trace the network on it, it connects to Apple for virtually every page load. If thats not tracking I dont know what is.
Click to expand...

Use Little Snitch. Chrome always calls home, I checked.
Now, maybe there is a way, I don't know. But I don't expect the wide public to look this up and know how to turn it off.
iCloud on the other hand is something that gets checked if I specifically ask for it.

rmwebs said:
Yup, Google did do that, and they shouldn't have done. There really is no excuse for it, at the same time Apple isn't innocent, they knew it was a bug, they knew it was possible. Google were obviously a lot more at fault, but Apple aren't innocent bystanders here.
Click to expand...

Makes no sense. Apple develops something knowing it's not gonna work? Which is just making a default on your browser to bypass all cookies, etc. Then Google spends time finding ways to circumvent that (not easy BTW). And Apple is at fault?

This thing only came recently because security researchers found out what Google was doing.


rmwebs said:
Given that it was a one-time incident, if Apple had been caught doing that once, I assume your anti-trust views would then be aimed at them for life, as they ar with Google, correct?
Click to expand...

Apple would have no business incentive doing that. Google does.

rmwebs said:
I only ask, as in 2011 Steve Jobs has to make an apology, as it was discovered that Apple had been tracking users locations in an unencrypted file on every iOS device, allowing any app to access all your location data. It was probably down to 1 silly mistake by a developer at Apple....shockingly, just like the Google incident.
So as it stands, both companies have a level record when it comes to user privacy.
Click to expand...

Caching cell towers in a database is hardly the same. Do your homework.

rmwebs said:
You'd be a fool to trust ANY online service with your data, Apple's included. I dont trust any of them, I just have to put faith in their operations.

Do I believe Google, Apple, Microsoft, Yahoo, etc do the right thing when it comes to privacy? Yes. Again, you'd be a fool to think otherwise. No company will last long if it starts violating user's privacy as part of it's business.
Click to expand...

I trust businesses that don't make money selling my personal info.
 
samcraig said:
Safari calls back as per another users post on this forum. True or not - I don't know. Do you?
Click to expand...

I think he meant iOS Safari, which I don't know as I've never checked. We should.

samcraig said:
And you're not convincing me of anything. If target tracks all my purchases and then uses that info when, for example, Coke comes to them and says "we'd like to sell more coke at Target. We want to send a coupon to a certain demographic at your store to entice them. Here's 100K to get our coupons in the hands of customers who fit that profile" - That's different, how?
Click to expand...

Right now, Macrumors, this very website uses Google Analytics, like almost all savvy websites. You can check it.
My browser calls it.

http://www.google-analytics.com/__utm.gif?utmwv=5.4.1&utms=12&...

This means what? It means I am now making Google aware that I read Macrumors.
1_ Say for Google I'm just an IP address. Google will serve me an ad in my language specific to my country. For most people online, an IP address is already plenty of info to disclose.

2_ Say Google can access my cookies. It is now a little clearer who I am, what I've looked at, etc. (the whole Google tracking debacle was for that very thing, cookies, hence the big media hoopla).

3_ Say I logged in to any Google services, not even recently, I am now ME, or at least a much more complete version of me. Possibly with my name and address.

(Please feel free to correct me concerning the above. I don't mind learning something new.)

Now, no one is saying Google sells your name and address. But it certainly has that info available, and if not readily available, it can get it very easily. Again, selling ad demographics, habits etc so that their clients can better reach you is their main business.

As for Gmail, this is a nice read for anyone interested.
http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/gmail/nbu5a676b9g
 
RobertD63 said:
Why the hell would you switch back to Safari if Chrome is Forking WebKit and creating Blink? You would never know the difference.
Click to expand...
I actually agree with this part. But I think there are other reasons why others (myself included) don't use chrome. Developing for . . . that's a different story though.
 
sillypooh said:
This means what? It means I am now making Google aware that I read Macrumors.
1_ Say for Google I'm just an IP address. Google will serve me an ad in my language specific to my country. For most people online, an IP address is already plenty of info to disclose.

2_ Say Google can access my cookies. It is now a little clearer who I am, what I've looked at, etc. (the whole Google tracking debacle was for that very thing, cookies, hence the big media hoopla).

3_ Say I logged in to any Google services, not even recently, I am now ME, or at least a much more complete version of me. Possibly with my name and address.
Click to expand...
This is exactly how they can narrow down to work out who you are. It's been done. They add in google searches with the same IP address and the search trends etc etc and they have all the information they need to work out who you are.

I would not be surprised to hear that police out to get online criminals use this kind of information. Yes that's a good thing to rid the world of crime. But it's just one example. What can be used for good can also be used for bad too.
 
sillypooh said:
I think he meant iOS Safari, which I don't know as I've never checked. We should.



Right now, Macrumors, this very website uses Google Analytics, like almost all savvy websites. You can check it.
My browser calls it.

http://www.google-analytics.com/__utm.gif?utmwv=5.4.1&utms=12&...

This means what? It means I am now making Google aware that I read Macrumors.
1_ Say for Google I'm just an IP address. Google will serve me an ad in my language specific to my country. For most people online, an IP address is already plenty of info to disclose.

2_ Say Google can access my cookies. It is now a little clearer who I am, what I've looked at, etc. (the whole Google tracking debacle was for that very thing, cookies, hence the big media hoopla).

3_ Say I logged in to any Google services, not even recently, I am now ME, or at least a much more complete version of me. Possibly with my name and address.

(Please feel free to correct me concerning the above. I don't mind learning something new.)

Now, no one is saying Google sells your name and address. But it certainly has that info available, and if not readily available, it can get it very easily. Again, selling ad demographics, habits etc so that their clients can better reach you is their main business.

As for Gmail, this is a nice read for anyone interested.
http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/gmail/nbu5a676b9g
Click to expand...

Opt out. Don't use gmail. Google's privacy policy is nearly identical to Apple's.

And gmail scans emails for more than just serving ad content. It does it so when you search your email - you get results quickly and efficiently.

Again - you can use whatever email service you want. I'm not sure Yahoo or others will serve you any better as to not capture data you don't want. Your mail is on their servers.

The argument falls apart as soon as someone intimates that Google sells your personal data. They don't. Advertisers pay for access to demographics and Google places an ad for them that meets their criteria. If you fail to understand how the transaction works - that's your issue and maybe (you) and others shouldn't debate the issue with paranoid FUD.

Apple does exactly what Google does when it comes to iAds. Sadly (for Apple) iAds isn't nearly as successful.

----------
sillypooh said:
But it's not web browsing.
Click to expand...

Let me know if you want help moving your goalpost.

You said "I trust businesses that don't make money selling my personal info."

iAds delivers ads for client based on the exact type of demographic data that Apple has collected as Google does.

So you don't trust Apple either then?
 
sillypooh said:
This means what? It means I am now making Google aware that I read Macrumors.
1_ Say for Google I'm just an IP address. Google will serve me an ad in my language specific to my country. For most people online, an IP address is already plenty of info to disclose.

2_ Say Google can access my cookies. It is now a little clearer who I am, what I've looked at, etc. (the whole Google tracking debacle was for that very thing, cookies, hence the big media hoopla).

3_ Say I logged in to any Google services, not even recently, I am now ME, or at least a much more complete version of me. Possibly with my name and address.
Click to expand...

Not sure if it includes your IP address

https://developers.google.com/analytics/resources/concepts/gaConceptsTrackingOverview
 
the8thark said:
You sir get it. Thank you. This is exactly why I don't use Chrome. I am willing to try it out on a different computer, different IP with stuff I never usually search for stuff not typical of my age bracket to search for. Just to see how good Chrome is these days. But at home downloading and using chrome today? Not a chance in heaven or hell.
Proof of this data stealing (just two examples of many)
http://www.praguepost.com/business/4531-google-under-investigation-for-stealing-private-data.html
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...te-googles-bypass-of-safari-privacy-settings/
I just did a bing search and those were the top results.

And about the tabs issue in Safari. I often have around 10 tabs open. (One time I had like 30 tabs open, sure that maxed out the ram usage but no crash) And I've never had a tab related crash in safari. The only crashes I have had in safari are the few very rare random websites that don't like safari. But firefox or opera or camino, one of those works. So I'd call the safari tab issue - non existant.

So again thank you to the person I quoted. You speak the truth. And are not afraid to say it.


I don't. And everyone else should not either.
Click to expand...

FUD. THat one article you point to is from 2010. It was totally explained but obviously when you have conspiracy nutjobs reading this stuff, it's all evil Google this and that. It's been explained many times but I'm sure you just don't buy it.

Also, Europe has a huge erection for Google for some reason and they go after them all the time. Maybe legit reasons, maybe overbearing reasons. But look at Germany...or better called "Blurmany" as they want Google to blur out people's homes from street-view.

I'm sure that Safari doesn't "phone home" or keep tabs on you, though we don't know because we don't have the source code for all of Safari. If you want total control of your privacy though, there's nothing better than Firefox. With NoScript, CookieMonster and other privacy settings and add-ons, it's much more robust than Safari ever is. Why don't you use that? Or better yet, use TOR, The Onion Router. I mean, they're out there spying on you! LOOK, there's one over there! WATCH OUT!

I've had it with this forum. You people are a bunch of conspiracy nuts. When I first joined years ago it was a tad more civil. Now it's just turned into....into this.

Yeah yeah, I won't be missed....blah blah.

PS. If you have ANY type of email service...not just gmail or yahoo, but any email service that "filters for spam", then it's reading your emails too. It has to, to work the spam filters. Unless you're getting totally unfiltered, spam filled email boxes, then you're giving away your privacy to that too. You all realize this, yes? OH NOES!!! THEY BE SPYING ME!
 
An interesting read.

http://www.zdnet.com/the-real-reason-why-google-forked-webkit-7000013514/?s_cid=e539

Particularly this commentary:

It seems like Google has given this a lot of thought, and the company believes that it will be able to remove seven build systems and delete more than 7,000 files from its rendering engine compared to WebKit, which means some 4.5 million fewer lines of code.

....
But there's more to this switch than meets the eye.

The fact that Google focused on simplifying the WebKit is telling. Sure, Google is interested in adding new features, but in such a multi-platform world, the idea of filling Blink with features that are incompatible with other rendering engines is almost unimaginable.

The reason Google wants Blink is down to one thing — the post-PC era. WebKit is long in the tooth, and is a product of PC thinking. Google wants to change that.

There's no doubt that Apple has effectively managed the project and transformed it into a capable post-PC era rendering engine, but it is clear that if Google can eliminate 4.5 million lines of code from the project, then there's a lot of dead wood in there. And while having all that dead wood buried in the codebase might be fine on desktop and notebook systems with a beefy processor and bags of RAM, on mobile systems with limited processing power, storage, RAM and power, a more focused, streamlined rendering engine would be better for all.
 
ksgant said:
PS. If you have ANY type of email service...not just gmail or yahoo, but any email service that "filters for spam", then it's reading your emails too. It has to, to work the spam filters. Unless you're getting totally unfiltered, spam filled email boxes, then you're giving away your privacy to that too. You all realize this, yes? OH NOES!!! THEY BE SPYING ME!
Click to expand...

Duh that's obvious. The issue is about who does what once they have your information. Getting your information is not hard. The question is who do you feel most safe holding your information. And then you use the services (ie give your information to) of the companies you trust more.
 
samcraig said:
Opt out. Don't use gmail.
Click to expand...

I know that, you know that. Does your mum know that? My mum doesn't, as don't the vast majority of people.

samcraig said:
And gmail scans emails for more than just serving ad content. It does it so when you search your email - you get results quickly and efficiently.
Click to expand...

Scanning for your name and ad keywords is such a stretch?

samcraig said:
Again - you can use whatever email service you want. I'm not sure Yahoo or others will serve you any better as to not capture data you don't want. Your mail is on their servers.
Click to expand...

That's why I don't use them. Knowing others might do it doesn't excuse Google.
And none of them have the market share Google has, nor the weight.

samcraig said:
The argument falls apart as soon as someone intimates that Google sells your personal data. They don't. Advertisers pay for access to demographics and Google places an ad for them that meets their criteria. If you fail to understand how the transaction works - that's your issue and maybe (you) and others shouldn't debate the issue with paranoid FUD.
Click to expand...

The argument is that Google, an online media agency, has intimate knowledge of who you are and what you do to better serve its customers.
It goes through many methods go harvest this information.

No one is saying they're handing a list with your name on it to anybody.
But this is data that can be readily available to them.
And I wouldn't trust any company with such power in their hands, whose main business is selling this type of info, do just do the right thing.

samcraig said:
Apple does exactly what Google does when it comes to iAds.
iAds delivers ads for client based on the exact type of demographic data that Apple has collected as Google does.
So you don't trust Apple either then?
Sadly (for Apple) iAds isn't nearly as successful.
Click to expand...

iAds is for apps. And no, thankfully, it's not doing that well.
Apple doesn't make most of its money selling ad demographics data. G does.

samcraig said:
Let me know if you want help moving your goalpost.
You said "I trust businesses that don't make money selling my personal info."
Click to expand...

Sweet! Let's just say
"I trust businesses that don't make most of its money selling my personal info."
 
sillypooh said:
No one is saying they're handing a list with your name on it to anybody.
But this is data that can be readily available to them.
And I wouldn't trust any company with such power in their hands, whose main business is selling this type of info, do just do the right thing.

iAds is for apps. And no, thankfully, it's not doing that well.
Apple doesn't make most of its money selling ad demographics data. G does.

Sweet! Let's just say
"I trust businesses that don't make most of its money selling my personal info."
Click to expand...

Yes. People in this thread ARE saying they are selling PERSONAL information.

This type of data is collected by many companies. No it doesn't excuse Google. But some ARE acting as if Google is unique. Or that Apple doesn't do the same thing.

Ok - so you're "punishing" google for being successful. If Apple's iAds were doing as well - you'd not trust them as well then?

How about you just stick to your original statement. It's better. It's all inclusive. Not to mention - we both just agreed Google does not SELL your PERSONAL information.

Do you realize you're talking in a circle?

Google doesn't sell personal information. Do they have access to personal information - you can argue. Just like any other company collecting data.

Until you or someone can prove that Google has made money from SELLING PERSONAL information (and understands what that transaction looks like) - then any attempts to state otherwise is FUD.
 
maxosx said:
This is a good move on Google's part. It will bring enhanced, richer results to all. The mentality at Google is improve, improve, improve. While certainly not perfect, I give them credit for a positive attitude and willingness to take risks.
Click to expand...

Then why not improve on WebKit?

Bad move Google. You're a wolf in sheeps clothing and the only people you're fooling are your sheep.
 
sillypooh said:
Now, no one is saying Google sells your name and address. But it certainly has that info available, and if not readily available, it can get it very easily. Again, selling ad demographics, habits etc so that their clients can better reach you is their main business.
Click to expand...

Except you have been saying throughout most of this thread that Google sells your data. Now you are back peddling and agreeing Google does not sell your personal data. However it seems you do not quite grasp it completely. Again, can you show us a source where Google sells anything to agencies instead of just receiving ads and cash from an agency and targeting the ad? Can you show us proof that data leaves Google?
 
google is becoming a really good software company.

only if they refine android and hardware to be more fine tune like apple. :)

tbh I wish I can move on from apple but I wont until android becomes some what usable.
 
Google wouldn't have dared to fork if Steve Jobs was still around. Apple it's time to retaliate: drop Google as the default search engine.
 
slffl said:
Then why not improve on WebKit?

Bad move Google. You're a wolf in sheeps clothing and the only people you're fooling are your sheep.
Click to expand...

Go read the blog post I linked to a few posts up. It will tell you WHY.

glis said:
Google wouldn't have dared to fork if Steve Jobs was still around. Apple it's time to retaliate: drop Google as the default search engine.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Or is this satire?

----------
ReneR said:
someone made an amazing summery of Google motivation: http://prng.net/blink-faq.html ;-)
Click to expand...

That's not even funny or clever? It's also poorly written.
 
samcraig said:
Go read the blog post I linked to a few posts up. It will tell you WHY.



Seriously? Or is this satire?

----------



That's not even funny or clever? It's also poorly written.
Click to expand...

Well, I find it funny and well written, ... but then I'm not an employee at google, nor a particular fan of forks, or world domination, ... in that order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back