Slashdot Mirror
Google To Force Basic HTML Gmail On Older Chrome Versions (computerworld.com)
Earlier this week, Google quietly announced that Gmail will only be partially supported on older versions of Chrome browser soon. From a report: Users of Chrome version 53 and older editions of the browser could start being redirected to the basic HTML version of Gmail as early as December, the company said in a blog post. Starting next week, users who will be affected by the change will start seeing a banner at the top of Gmail telling them to upgrade to an up-to-date version of Google's browser. The affected browser versions include Chrome v49, the last version of the software that supports XP and Vista. While Microsoft officially ended support for XP more than two and a half years ago, Gmail has continued to work with it. Vista Service Pack 2 will reach the end of its extended support period on April 11.
Some other browser, like Opera or FireFox
Or don't use GMail in the first place
I will continue to use XP on my desktop and if Google doesn't like it, they can release a newer version for XP. Screw 'em.
I will continue to use XP on my desktop and if Google doesn't like it, they can release a newer version for XP.
Screw 'em.
I don't think they particularly care if you use XP. They just don't want to support XP in chrome or gmail anymore.
If the user agent string is configurable in those older Chrome versions, that should solve the problem. If changing the user agent doesn't solve the problem, then perhaps Google has been doing something shady in their browsers all along.
Also, if Google is going to stick users of older Chrome versions with basic HTML, I wonder what they'll get up to with other brands of browser.
I'm so glad I never liked Chrome and never liked Gmail, so I never used them. It's bad enough that their search engine has mostly become a steaming pile of irrelevancy that can't tell the difference between a user trying to drill down through the clouds of shit they throw up, and a bot. I'm getting really sick of being forced to go through endless captchas as a result of Google's 'lowest common denominator' philosophy.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
enough of these luddites
There are millions of PCs in the 3rd world running XP, 512Mb RAM is very common, cutting them off because they are deemed "old" would be rather an arrogant move, most of the world can't afford to stay on the upgrade wagon.
I didn't know there was a basic HTML version of it. So I looked at it, and it's much nicer than their usual version.
I'm still not going to use it, because webmail is stupid, and I'm going to keep using a proper MUA, like anybody with any sense does.
If you don't have your own domain to use in email addresses, so that you can change email providers when they pull stuff like this on you, get one now. It's cheap, it looks more professional than a freemail address and it gives you more control.
My point was that they won't release an updated version of Chrome for XP, so I have to use what they left for it.
And we use Vista which supports up to version 49.0.2623.112 m. Vista is the newest version of Windows that supports two of the Microsoft apps we have to run, so we cannot upgrade.
I prefer the HTML only sometimes. On slow computers anything else can bog things down.
It's faster, and lower attack surface for vulnerabilities.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
At some point, every team has to make a decision on how much effort should go into supporting "legacy systems." Maybe they made internal changes that don't work under XP, require Microsoft libraries that weren't released for Windows XP, etc. At that point you then have to write and maintain two different code paths, one for XP and earlier and one for 7 and later. The point eventually came where they decided the XP codepaths were too much for too little benefit. I don't know what challenges they had to face, but this is a choice that just about every software project makes eventually.
My goodness, gmail's interface is so freaking bad that perhaps going back to a simple HTML it may become useful. Some good news at last.
I don't think they particularly care if you use XP. They just don't want to support XP in chrome or gmail anymore.
There's nothing for Google to "support". Saying that Chrome "doesn't support XP" is completely backwards. Applications don't "support" operating systems. It's the other way around, operating systems support applications.
True story: Just the other day I installed 14 year old Office 2003 on Windows 10 and it works perfectly fine.
The only way Google can make a browser that won't run on XP or Vista is to do something stupid and/or deliberately break something so that it doesn't work.
Just use the basic html version (or use an external client that connect to gmail through POP3 or IMAP). Problem solved and works much better.
But yeah, not sure why you would use chrome in the first place though.
The JS version of Gmail is fucking horrific.
It is written by retards that don't understand the foundations of WHY JavaScript sucks. (which is ironic since Google are also the reason for JavaScripts massive improvements since V8 onwards)
Namely that high-enclosure code is SLOW AS HIGH HELL to run because the overhead is through the roof.
This is one thing that can't easily be fixed unless the core of JS is rewritten. WebASM will come before that.
This is the reason pretty much most Google services have gotten insanely slower in recent years. Not a problem if you use a modern machine. HUGE problem if you use older devices.
Youtube is near impossible to use on Netbooks now. The new video player is the worst thing ever. The Flash player works perfectly fine. The MOBILE player works perfectly fine, weirdly. The desktop one is trash.
Google Maps became both uglier and slower on that most recent update a year or so ago. Everything is now pixelated as fuck, especially when zooming. But Street View is just straight up no. Constant 100%, a rare thing to see indeed. It's a Powerpoint of houses.
I mean, seriously.
I liked the more basic interface while I had to use it recently for a short time. (The newer interface kept crashing Firefox at work, but they finally upgraded the version on our work computers.) Unfortunately, I don't believe it has much support for folders, which Gmail has renamed to "Labels". I couldn't figure out how to move messages out of the Inbox and into other folders. (You could ADD other labels, but not remove the Inbox one.) Maybe I'm just stoopid.
Actually it goes both ways. For an operating system that is no longer being updated like XP, it takes extra work for an application to be allowed to run on that operating system. Google will develop for the modern system, and then have to ensure that things still work on older ones. This can be very costly. And development will be much slower to attempt to support multiple operating systems from the beginning.
And yes, when windows made windows 10, they had to put some time into making sure they didn't break users of old versions of Office. Maybe they got lucky and didn't change things enough so that they still work, maybe office is a simple enough application that it was shepherded in with other backwards compatible things Microsoft made to support older applications with their newer OS versions, and maybe they actually put in some special effort to make sure Office 2003 still runs. (Since it is their own app maybe the third one)
It is very easy to break compatibility with systems that aren't your lead system. And it makes sense for developers to make their lead system match their user base. My guess is the XP user base for most modern apps is dwindling. It's the price of progress.
The day I no longer needed my website to support internet explorer 9 or less is one of the happiest moments of my career. It is an extra day or 2 of productivity for every major change made to the site.
Applications don't "support" operating systems. It's the other way around, operating systems support applications.
The app author makes the decision of what to put in and what to leave out. Compatibility with different OS versions is really up to them.
That said, I don't use Windows, Chrome, or Gmail.
Google interfaces are shit but you're right, you are stupid.
Archive the email after giving it a label.
Put away those pitchforks; and douse those flaming torches gents. THIS UI is so much better.. Go ahead, punk, try Compose; it doesn't take up the entire window, etc. The reason there was a group devoted to it, until they disappeared. (oldcompose.com, if i recall correctly) But now, it's back. Rejoice.
I am pretty sure not a single person give 1 single shit what free email you use, let alone google, to them you are a burden and I think the message is pretty clear... its google telling you go fuck off
Just be glad you don't have to support MSIE 6 like we do since we use SharePoint.
Occasionally if Google Search decides that your recent queries look like those of an abusive bot, such as pasting in your credit card number to see if it's on any public list, it'll return a CAPTCHA and/or links to popular Windows antivirus software instead of search results.
Yes indeed, I've been using the basic HTML GMail interface for years now, never liking their slow JS version that blocks every time you click on anything.
I've posted instructions to do so before:
http://pipedot.org/2TPQ
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
I don't see why this is a problem. I went to great lengths to figure out how to stop Google updating my Gmail from the old simple HTML version. It's simple, fast (even on dodgie wifi connections) and does everything I want to do.
The "Basic" interface has always been more useful. It works on more web browsers, including embedded ones (I think I once used it on a PS3) and it isn't slow. I'd use it if I didn't use Gmail with real e-mail clients over IMAP (on both mobile and desktop).
"Do no evil"
There's an OS that I'm wondering if anyone here's ever heard of, it's called Guh-New Lynn-Ukks, or something like that... from what I've heard, it's gaining in popularity, and I was just wondering, has anyone used it, and of those who have, have you ever been FORCED to upgrade anything or had anyone break something that worked on your Lynn-Ukks Bochs, or whatever, making it unusable to you AFTER installing it?
Also, when you answer, what dys-chroeh do you use? I hear people liky Debby-in, Red-dat, Oo-boon-too, and something called "Mindt" or something.
Surely someone here has heard of this and can comment?
Please?
That is their normal practice.
Is there a reason other than megalomania why Google should want to force users to one option or another?
No, thought not.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
You are conciously using an operating system that is so unsupported, it's like me getting all bent out of shape yelling "I'll still drive my leaded gasoline consuming Chevy Corvair, If the seat cover manufacturer's don't like it, they can release a newer set of seat covers for the Chevy Corvair!"
Or to simplify it, "If they don't want to release for my platform, I'm still going to use it, they can release for my platform!" Which makes little sense because your singular opinion in the matter can't compel them to change their mind.
Now, if Windows XP was a supported OS, with a major chunk of the market they wouldn't have dropped the platform. It's a niche player, sure it used to be the major player, but after decades, the majority has moved on.
Perhaps you should too. Or, you in another five years, we will be making the same analogy, but using the Ford Model A instead of the Chevy Corvair.