
Google drops the http:// from Chrome - Roridge
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1601917/google-drops-http-chrome
======
adamtj
People seem to be under the impression that Chrome has a location bar. It
doesn't. It only has a search box with a "smart" I'm Feeling Lucky feature. If
it detects that your query matches a url, it will re-write your query to the
normalized url it matched and show you the corresponding page. Otherwise, it
shows you all search results as you would expect of a search box.

To use the url-mapping feature, you need to start your search with either a
top-level domain name or a protocol specifier, or end it with a "/". If you
just type a hostname on your LAN, it won't try to visit that location, because
it's not a location bar. It'll search, and fail to trigger the Lucky feature
because a single word isn't specific enough to be detected as a url.

Though, it seems if you put a "/" at the end, then next time you type the
word, it matches against the history and gets it right.

Anyway, it's too smart for me. I have trouble figuring it out sometimes.

------
tszming
The issue has been closed by Google, they no longer accept new comment from
now.

<http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=41467>

------
pasbesoin
I wish they would at least make it optional, e.g. turn-off-able in the
browser's settings. Yes, more functionality to maintain. But this would
provide the option of continuing consistency with other browser UI's and with
existing workflows.

Remember, Google? "Opt-in". Or in this case, at least "opt-out-able".

~~~
Gormo
There seems to be a bit of a recent trend toward hard-coded one-size-fits-all
UIs in software.

MS Office is a good example - the UI was customizable almost down to the pixel
in Office 2003 and earlier. But in Office 2007, the redesigned UI - with the
exception of a single small toolbar - is completely unconfigurable. An MS
employee told me at the time that it was a deliberate decision to compromise
customizability in order to simplify the interface for the plurality of users.

It's a shame to see Google making the same decisions. But least Chromium is
open-source.

~~~
locopati
It's understandable though. That level of customization requires an increase
in dev resources, QA resources, turnaround time, bugs. And the payoff only
pleases a small percentage of your users who probably aren't making a purchase
decision based on that functionality alone (it's nice if it's there but it may
not cause you buy something else). So, understandable that they may want to
focus resources on more important features.

