

Why Chrome has No NoScript - Mathnerd314
http://hackademix.net/2009/12/10/why-chrome-has-no-noscript/

======
brodie
[http://www.chromium.org/developers/design-
documents/extensio...](http://www.chromium.org/developers/design-
documents/extensions/extension-manifesto)

"The following lists some types of extensions that we'd like to eventually
support:"

[...]

* "Content filtering: Adblock, Flashblock, Privacy control, Parental control"

~~~
snprbob86
Thanks! I was just about to go look that up. I was certain I had seen it
before. This is just another conspiracy hunt.

------
orblivion
I may be naive, but the sandboxing makes me feel more secure, so I may happily
roll without noscript. (I don't care about ads, and I can live with annoying
flash, especially if it means I don't have to deal with annoying unblocking of
things)

~~~
grhino
Unfortunately, Flash can be a huge resource hog on Linux and can cause
usability problems as well. It's certainly better on chrome since it runs in a
separate process. I'm hoping the next stable version of flash reduces the
resources needed for flash to run on Linux.

~~~
weaksauce
Same with osx. When Flash hits my browser it acts as kryptonite for my
battery.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
For Mac OS X you have clicktoflash for blocking flash but it isn't a browser
add-on, rather a plugin (similar to Flash, Silverlight etc.)

Technical details: [http://boredzo.org/blog/archives/2009-01-29/how-
clicktoflash...](http://boredzo.org/blog/archives/2009-01-29/how-clicktoflash-
works)

I'd love to see a similar plugin on Linux for Firefox, Chromium etc.

[http://boredzo.org/blog/archives/2009-01-29/how-
clicktoflash...](http://boredzo.org/blog/archives/2009-01-29/how-clicktoflash-
works)

------
mpk
Could someone post some meaningful numbers of the percentage of users that
browse the web with extensions like AdBlock and/or NoScript?

I know a lot of people that run AdBlock, but outside the hardcore techie crowd
I know very few who run NoScript.

Anecdotal observation doesn't mean much, so numbers would be appreciated.

Also, NoScript requires a _lot_ (relatively speaking, of course) of
interactively applied knowledge about web technologies. I'm fairly certain the
people who use it make up a very small segment of Google's target audience.

~~~
bumblebird
Last time I measured, on a largely firefox userbase, adBlock was used by about
6%. Not enough really to bother about.

I'd expect the number who use NoScript to be 1-2% if that.

Note this is out of a mainly firefox userbase. For the general web those %'s
would be far lower.

------
technomancy
I have been really disappointed with the Chrome team's approach to
flexibility. While I can't stand up for Gecko when compared to Webkit, the
fact that Mozilla is a toolkit for building apps rather than an application
itself means it's far better for hackers who like things like Conkeror and
Vimperator. Chrome is great for people who lack the imagination to come up
with a better UI than what you get out of the box.

"Write some C++ code and spend two hours recompiling" is not a reasonable
answer to "how do you modify the browser's UI?", especially for tasks that can
be done in seconds without restarting in Mozilla.

~~~
pyre
> _Chrome is great for people who lack the imagination to come up with a
> better UI than what you get out of the box._

Huh? So... If I like Chrome the way it is and don't want to turn my browser
into Emacs, I 'lack the imagination to come up with a better UI?'

~~~
jodrellblank
If you cannot imagine a better UI then you lack the imagination to come up
with a better UI. That holds as a statement without being insulting, doesn't
it? Though it could be argued to be begging the question (properly, I hope).

Instead, I suggest the weak bits of the claim are the omission - Chrome is
also great for other people too - and the unjustified implication that being
unable to come up with a better UI is a problem (it applies to most of us).

~~~
Locke1689
I'm not sure begging the question is the term you were looking for. Perhaps
tautological.

------
antirez
Narrated in this way it looks like:

Google guy 1: we really have to figure how to prevent people from building
noscript-alike extension.

Google guy 2: hey, I have an Idea! Let's ask the author what are the important
API to do so in order to avoid the development of such APIs!

Google guy 1: you are a genius! I'm phoning him just now.

That's not what happened I guess.

------
Mathnerd314
Chrome doesn't want Adblock, so they don't put in the hooks for NoScript to
work either. (or else they're just slow...)

~~~
smallblacksun
Agreed. I don't see why people think an advertising company would want to make
it easy to block ads in their browser.

~~~
gyardley
Google developer Peter Kasting's comment on this is here:

[http://hackademix.net/2009/12/10/why-chrome-has-no-
noscript/...](http://hackademix.net/2009/12/10/why-chrome-has-no-
noscript/#comment-17007)

That comment points to a Chromium tracking bug, here:

<http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=16932>

It looks like while a developer at Google was working on this project, that
developer left Google in October and there's been no replacement.

While this doesn't suggest the feature is the highest priority for Google, it
also doesn't suggest Google is deliberately intending to prevent JavaScript or
advertising blocking. Sometimes things that didn't get done just didn't get
done.

~~~
pavs
To be fair, if they wanted to be hostile towards ads blocking extensions in
general they would have made it really hard or impossible to develop them in
the first place; or wouldn't even allow them to be hosted on Google extensions
website.

To my last count they currently have 5 ad blocking extensions on Google
extensions gallery. One of the is the second most downloaded Chrome Extension.

Generally speaking Google has done so much with Chrome browser in such a short
time, I don't mind giving them the benefit of doubt that they didn't get
around fixing or implementing the said bug/feature.

------
Semiapies
This would be better titled "Why doesn't Chrome have NoScript?", instead of
misleadingly giving the impression the writer actually knows why.

And yes, I'm aware the misleading title is the blogger's work - no need to
perpetuate it.

------
raintrees
Lack of NoScript is the reason Chrome still asks about being the default
browser on my consoles...

------
xtho
Starring G Maone as Aristotle. This would put Google in the role of Plato
then?

