Yeah it is a web browser, and one of the oldest job of a web browser is to turn image files and markup into a visual representation. And if you want to somehow capture this visual representation as an image, the best way to do it is through the browser, since the broswer is the authority on how the pages are being rendered.
Previously you had to download an add-on to do this, which is a bit of a pain, and something the browser should support natively, if for no other reason than it is trivially easy for the browser to simply provide the data it already has.
No the browser shouldn't do everything. It should only do things that are browser related. This is browser related.
The article sure seems to describe what simply is a cropping-capable screen capture tool tied to a cloud-based, social web back-end. I believe this is another damn data grab and one disguised by a so-called needed feature. Even if not a grab per se, it is one more way to get the user-base locked into cloud-dependent services and applications. I'm certain that the mainstream user doesn't need or want this and that the user isn't taking and indexing screen grabs. If this was capable of dumping the entire page as rendered to something like a single PDF or image file, it might be useful since, as you've suggested, the browser would be best to do this. It seems to not do this, so why even add the feature?
Why add the PageShot feature to the browser when the OS already allows the user to easily capture what's on the screen and has an image editor? A side from the OS, countless add-on apps are available for installing that will grabbing screen captures all day long through the click-drag-and-highlight model that will do this regardless of what is running or displayed? While I am not a big fan of the extension model mostly because people attempt to make the browser do too much, the browser's core functionality should be supplemented this way to keep the application's file space and resource footprint as small as possible. It also keeps the browser's dev team focused on the core functionality. Let third parties cater to niches.
I have gotten by just fine in Windows with PRNT-SCRN and ALT-PRINT-SCRN. For other OSs, its just another key combo.
This is another unneeded feature that is to be implemented when resources should be focused on the core purpose of the application. It is a web browser before it is anything else and, in my opinion, should get back to just being this. I don't want any one application to have everything in the kitchen sink as long as I can run multiple applications.
What is your need for so many pages/sites loaded at one time? Surely most of those are never viewed most days. Aren't these enough of a resource waste to be worth not having opened?
This is functionality that nearly all, if not all, users want and will actively use.
There's at least one person that is in the no-tabs camp: Me! I do understand that many people like and use the tabs feature of browsers. I just am not among them and don't like tabs for two reasons, mostly. The tab bar makes for too much wasted vertical space on low vertical resolution displays like those in many laptops. Also, I like seeing a button on the taskbar for the apps and windows I have open, and using tabs within a single browser window doesn't make for all the buttons I want. So, this means I also don't like Windows' taskbar button combining feature.
Not buying isn't a practical choice in the general sense. It might be if all the shitty features and behavior was spelled out on the box. Since they aren't, the consumer must discover them after purchase.
While I do believe that ad-blocking will ultimately be done by a proxy server and have said this before, ABP as software as it is now is dependent on the browser's add-on architecture. The company/developer behind it could, of course, evolve both their core product and release something entirely different such as a ad-filtering proxy [service].
As for Mozilla and Firefox, yes, people will jump ship if it loses support for ad-blocking tech. If Mozilla were to cave, I'd expect the other major browsers to do so as well. Before a suggestion is made that people can always use a ad-block supporting browser growing from a fork, Jane and Joe Mainstream isn't even going to know that this is an option, let alone going to do it.
Of course not. Now, do understand the inconvenience and annoyance of ads as they are now and have been hasn't reached the level that such behavior of a car is at. The bigger problem is that it won't just be one make or model or browser, all major offerings will adopt this type of practice in a collusion-wrapped way if it serves their interest financially. Such a change may bring additional revenue or reduce legal expenses. Either way, it is money.
While I do believe that ad-blocking will ultimately be done by a proxy server and have said this before, ABP as software as it is now is dependent on the browser's add-on architecture. The company/developer behind it could, of course, evolve both their core product and release something entirely different such as a ad-filtering proxy [service].
As for Mozilla and Firefox, yes, people will jump ship if it loses support for ad-blocking tech. If Mozilla were to cave, I'd expect the other major browsers to do so as well. Before a suggestion is made that people can always use a ad-block supporting browser growing from a fork, Jane and Joe Mainstream isn't even going to know that this is an option, let alone going to do it.
At least for Firefox, ABP is very dependent on Mozilla continuing to develop a browser that supports 3rd party add-ons. While this feature clearly makes their browser more appealing to people, ABP could be effectively shutdown if Mozilla cooperated with the Ad Industry and Content Providers in such a way that prevented their add-on(s) from working.
Well, I won't be scanning my rooms. When there is a need, I will take some measurements with one of those fancy, hand-held retractable tape thingies, use a pen and paper to take note of these, and then proceed with the project I have in mind. I can even use a pen and paper or spreadsheet application on my computer to whip up some mock drawings to play around with placement ideas. I know, so advanced! A bonus is that I still can do this when my do-everything-under-the-damn-sun phone is bitching about a low battery.
people too lazy to enter a zip code or a map program
I'm with you on this. I don't need or want a weather app on my mobile phone as long as the bookmark for Weather.com's page for my zip code continues to load in my web browser. This approach has been working just fine for along time and isn't wasting system resources while the page isn't loaded. And I only had to type the zipcode once. Hard work, I know.
A pizza should never be cooked by microwaves. Now, if the "microwave" happens to be a combination unit also supporting, perhaps, convection cooking, it is okay to use the "microwave" to cook the thing. The bonus of cnvection cooking is that having a slice or three doesn't have to come at the expense of a home security system failure between the press of start and the ding heard once the timer has counted down.
average/typical user doesn't CARE that any of this is taking place
Joe Sixpack might care if he knew and understood what was happening. He doesn't, because Microsoft and every other damn shading business and entity out there that is abusing him doesn't make clear their practices. This is all made worse, because far too many businesses have abusive policies. They all justify them internally by believing that it is okay since "all" their competitors are abusing. The consumer all too often doesn't have practical alternatives. So, simply leaving the correction to the market is not the right approach.
The problem isn't with usage as a specific monitored activity. The real issue is that damn slippery slope that it is on. In my opinion, it is not okay to collect data in this way and at the detail they do without each user on a given box opting in. The OS's monitoring and reporting back to Mother Microsoft shouldn't be turned on by default and require opting out in an inconvenient or otherwise discouraging way to be disabled. The opt-in prompt should be very obvious and make clear in few words what an opt-in allows. The prompt should reappear frequently. This behavior shouldn't be buried in a EULA or another widely disregarded document. People should have the choice to not participate even if doing so changes the cost of ownership. The consumer is forced to accept this type of abuse over and over from businesses, because there aren't practical alternatives to a very large degree.
Ooooh boy. We got ourselves a genuine Internet Badass here!
Yep! Life here is pretty good as a genuine Internet bad ass! The hands of people worldwide click and tap uncontrollably just from the fear that I will might engage them! I was an Internet bad ass long before all those mindless bandwagon hoppers started installing apps for everything under the sun on their mobile devices.
I bet the mainstream app user is a mindless consumer of bandwagon apps. They install too blindly and, likely, without a true need. I am not in the add-on App camp for the most part. Android gets Firefox. For work, it also gets a vendor's ticket management app. For my, CM Nook, it got Firefox, Pandora, and the Nook Reader. My iPhone 5S has no add-on apps.
This surely would only be available for a monthly fee, since they love plan add-ons. Five bucks this. Three bucks that. The customer will likely never see any type of ad filtering from a carrier until a revenue share model and agreements can exist. Such a service might cost $15 or more each month to provide enough money to offset the loss of ad revenue across an infinite number of websites. This hypothetical service will probably come from today's ad networks as a carrier resale.
I'd like to see a move away from the free model started across the industry. People may not balk at paying again if "every" service and product cost again. The change certainly would need to be an coordinated movement among competitors since the jumping ship from the X that now costs to the X that is still free would be a threat.
There needs to be an equivalent of an "app browser" to run "apps" everywhere.
I'd rather we not appify everything and, instead, get back to having just websites. I'd also like see everyone accept that every application used by Joe User doesn't need to be reimplemented as a damn website or made dependent on the cloud.
You apparently haven't spent enough time around or supporting end users that are both smart and unable to understand and do simple tasks on the computer. They are tools to most people. I was once surprised when an engineer, even the young ones that grew up with tech everywhere, needed help for something simple enough where only reasoning through was needed. I am no longer surprised, because it only comes easy mostly to those of us working in IT.
A side from believing that Microsoft has long been lost since they really started losing market share in various spaces to a long list of vendors, products, and services and not being the company bringing new offerings to market first, it is a need to move to a better revenue model that is what motivates them now.
Companies of all types and sizes sold something to a stream of customers. This model works as long as they keep coming in sufficient numbers. I think companies in the computer and even consumer electronics sectors eventually realized that there isn't a reliable need to replace. What we have now still serves the need. So, they needed to move to model such as subscription with a reliable revenue stream.
Again, I think Microsoft is lost. They seem to approach business strategy by copying the models of other supposedly successful companies without consideration of long-term impact to both the customer and their own business. I believe a free model wrapped in ads, data gathering and selling, and app store cuts is not the right fit for a desktop operating system. I especially believe forcing a user to upgrade to Windows 10 is wrong and a mistake. They need to leave my Win7 install alone. I have used Win8 and Win10 and want neither.
Maybe it's about time we got fucked a little for a while
I do believe that the U.S. has been exploiting the more desperate outside its borders for a long time and not just taking advantage in a fair way of opportunities encountered in a global economy. While I do believe we need to pay the cost of these policies and, for instance, our meddling around the world, I do still try to understand why the powerful among us remain willing to weaken the U.S. through such policies and business dealings while simultaneously strengthening all of the peoples and countries that are to one day come for our collective ass. A side from true ignorance and naivety, the only explanation that makes sense is that the powerful's ass isn't to get fucked, ever. The powerful makes its money through investing, not real work, real risk, and sweat. Thus, they can make money everywhere without significant loss long-term and live anywhere. One day, the American will be the desperate if he or she exists that is exploited by the economic and political superpower of the times.
Only by hitting them where they notice - their profit - will they change their behavior
Not buying a particular device is not always a practical choice. Often, the choice is between having to compromise to get the product or service or not get anything, because "all" vendors have incorporated the same unwanted feature(s). This notion that consumers have ultimate control in the market is a falacy. First, the consumer can only choose from what companies choose to bring to market, and this rarely is what he or she deems to be most ideal. Second, many to most purchases made by the middle and lower classes happen in response to actual need, practically speaking, and aren't really optional. Those of us here at Slashdot and running in similar circles tend to be more looped in on features of concern and options that exist or might exist to address said concerns. It is everyone else that blindly fall victim.
I don't like the tab UI design mostly, because the tab bar is vertical-space-wasting. I probably never have more than 10-12 browser windows open at one time in that rare instance when there are a lot. What about your workflow or usage warrants 27 tabs?
Firefox is my primary browser both on my Win7 laptop, Mac, and B&N Nook HD+ tablet running CM12. I also use on a Linux box. Many changes have been made to Firefox in recent years that cost it points, and many of these are UI-centric. The UI is a lot like that for Chrome now, at least for the Android apps. I don't use Chrome, because its worse for what bothers me. Another reason is Google's primary business of Big Data. Although the UI for IE throughh v11 is the least offensive for me, it is my secondary browser. I tend to only fall back to it when Flash is needed or something seems to not be working in Firefox. I keep Firefox configured in such a way that it doesn't some commonly implemented crap design features.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah it is a web browser, and one of the oldest job of a web browser is to turn image files and markup into a visual representation. And if you want to somehow capture this visual representation as an image, the best way to do it is through the browser, since the broswer is the authority on how the pages are being rendered. Previously you had to download an add-on to do this, which is a bit of a pain, and something the browser should support natively, if for no other reason than it is trivially easy for the browser to simply provide the data it already has. No the browser shouldn't do everything. It should only do things that are browser related. This is browser related.
The article sure seems to describe what simply is a cropping-capable screen capture tool tied to a cloud-based, social web back-end. I believe this is another damn data grab and one disguised by a so-called needed feature. Even if not a grab per se, it is one more way to get the user-base locked into cloud-dependent services and applications. I'm certain that the mainstream user doesn't need or want this and that the user isn't taking and indexing screen grabs. If this was capable of dumping the entire page as rendered to something like a single PDF or image file, it might be useful since, as you've suggested, the browser would be best to do this. It seems to not do this, so why even add the feature?
Why add the PageShot feature to the browser when the OS already allows the user to easily capture what's on the screen and has an image editor? A side from the OS, countless add-on apps are available for installing that will grabbing screen captures all day long through the click-drag-and-highlight model that will do this regardless of what is running or displayed? While I am not a big fan of the extension model mostly because people attempt to make the browser do too much, the browser's core functionality should be supplemented this way to keep the application's file space and resource footprint as small as possible. It also keeps the browser's dev team focused on the core functionality. Let third parties cater to niches.
I have gotten by just fine in Windows with PRNT-SCRN and ALT-PRINT-SCRN. For other OSs, its just another key combo.
This is another unneeded feature that is to be implemented when resources should be focused on the core purpose of the application. It is a web browser before it is anything else and, in my opinion, should get back to just being this. I don't want any one application to have everything in the kitchen sink as long as I can run multiple applications.
maybe 60 tabs open in two windows
What is your need for so many pages/sites loaded at one time? Surely most of those are never viewed most days. Aren't these enough of a resource waste to be worth not having opened?
This is functionality that nearly all, if not all, users want and will actively use.
There's at least one person that is in the no-tabs camp: Me! I do understand that many people like and use the tabs feature of browsers. I just am not among them and don't like tabs for two reasons, mostly. The tab bar makes for too much wasted vertical space on low vertical resolution displays like those in many laptops. Also, I like seeing a button on the taskbar for the apps and windows I have open, and using tabs within a single browser window doesn't make for all the buttons I want. So, this means I also don't like Windows' taskbar button combining feature.
Not buying isn't a practical choice in the general sense. It might be if all the shitty features and behavior was spelled out on the box. Since they aren't, the consumer must discover them after purchase.
That would force them to make ABP a proxy server
While I do believe that ad-blocking will ultimately be done by a proxy server and have said this before, ABP as software as it is now is dependent on the browser's add-on architecture. The company/developer behind it could, of course, evolve both their core product and release something entirely different such as a ad-filtering proxy [service]. As for Mozilla and Firefox, yes, people will jump ship if it loses support for ad-blocking tech. If Mozilla were to cave, I'd expect the other major browsers to do so as well. Before a suggestion is made that people can always use a ad-block supporting browser growing from a fork, Jane and Joe Mainstream isn't even going to know that this is an option, let alone going to do it.
Would you buy a car that slammed on the brakes
Of course not. Now, do understand the inconvenience and annoyance of ads as they are now and have been hasn't reached the level that such behavior of a car is at. The bigger problem is that it won't just be one make or model or browser, all major offerings will adopt this type of practice in a collusion-wrapped way if it serves their interest financially. Such a change may bring additional revenue or reduce legal expenses. Either way, it is money.
While I do believe that ad-blocking will ultimately be done by a proxy server and have said this before, ABP as software as it is now is dependent on the browser's add-on architecture. The company/developer behind it could, of course, evolve both their core product and release something entirely different such as a ad-filtering proxy [service].
As for Mozilla and Firefox, yes, people will jump ship if it loses support for ad-blocking tech. If Mozilla were to cave, I'd expect the other major browsers to do so as well. Before a suggestion is made that people can always use a ad-block supporting browser growing from a fork, Jane and Joe Mainstream isn't even going to know that this is an option, let alone going to do it.
ABP is not going away
At least for Firefox, ABP is very dependent on Mozilla continuing to develop a browser that supports 3rd party add-ons. While this feature clearly makes their browser more appealing to people, ABP could be effectively shutdown if Mozilla cooperated with the Ad Industry and Content Providers in such a way that prevented their add-on(s) from working.
Many people will probably scan their whole home
Well, I won't be scanning my rooms. When there is a need, I will take some measurements with one of those fancy, hand-held retractable tape thingies, use a pen and paper to take note of these, and then proceed with the project I have in mind. I can even use a pen and paper or spreadsheet application on my computer to whip up some mock drawings to play around with placement ideas. I know, so advanced! A bonus is that I still can do this when my do-everything-under-the-damn-sun phone is bitching about a low battery.
people too lazy to enter a zip code or a map program
I'm with you on this. I don't need or want a weather app on my mobile phone as long as the bookmark for Weather.com's page for my zip code continues to load in my web browser. This approach has been working just fine for along time and isn't wasting system resources while the page isn't loaded. And I only had to type the zipcode once. Hard work, I know.
A pizza should never be cooked by microwaves. Now, if the "microwave" happens to be a combination unit also supporting, perhaps, convection cooking, it is okay to use the "microwave" to cook the thing. The bonus of cnvection cooking is that having a slice or three doesn't have to come at the expense of a home security system failure between the press of start and the ding heard once the timer has counted down.
average/typical user doesn't CARE that any of this is taking place
Joe Sixpack might care if he knew and understood what was happening. He doesn't, because Microsoft and every other damn shading business and entity out there that is abusing him doesn't make clear their practices. This is all made worse, because far too many businesses have abusive policies. They all justify them internally by believing that it is okay since "all" their competitors are abusing. The consumer all too often doesn't have practical alternatives. So, simply leaving the correction to the market is not the right approach.
Time used means NOTHING
The problem isn't with usage as a specific monitored activity. The real issue is that damn slippery slope that it is on. In my opinion, it is not okay to collect data in this way and at the detail they do without each user on a given box opting in. The OS's monitoring and reporting back to Mother Microsoft shouldn't be turned on by default and require opting out in an inconvenient or otherwise discouraging way to be disabled. The opt-in prompt should be very obvious and make clear in few words what an opt-in allows. The prompt should reappear frequently. This behavior shouldn't be buried in a EULA or another widely disregarded document. People should have the choice to not participate even if doing so changes the cost of ownership. The consumer is forced to accept this type of abuse over and over from businesses, because there aren't practical alternatives to a very large degree.
Ooooh boy. We got ourselves a genuine Internet Badass here!
Yep! Life here is pretty good as a genuine Internet bad ass! The hands of people worldwide click and tap uncontrollably just from the fear that I will might engage them! I was an Internet bad ass long before all those mindless bandwagon hoppers started installing apps for everything under the sun on their mobile devices.
I bet the mainstream app user is a mindless consumer of bandwagon apps. They install too blindly and, likely, without a true need. I am not in the add-on App camp for the most part. Android gets Firefox. For work, it also gets a vendor's ticket management app. For my, CM Nook, it got Firefox, Pandora, and the Nook Reader. My iPhone 5S has no add-on apps.
done on the carrier side
This surely would only be available for a monthly fee, since they love plan add-ons. Five bucks this. Three bucks that. The customer will likely never see any type of ad filtering from a carrier until a revenue share model and agreements can exist. Such a service might cost $15 or more each month to provide enough money to offset the loss of ad revenue across an infinite number of websites. This hypothetical service will probably come from today's ad networks as a carrier resale.
I'd like to see a move away from the free model started across the industry. People may not balk at paying again if "every" service and product cost again. The change certainly would need to be an coordinated movement among competitors since the jumping ship from the X that now costs to the X that is still free would be a threat.
There needs to be an equivalent of an "app browser" to run "apps" everywhere.
I'd rather we not appify everything and, instead, get back to having just websites. I'd also like see everyone accept that every application used by Joe User doesn't need to be reimplemented as a damn website or made dependent on the cloud.
You apparently haven't spent enough time around or supporting end users that are both smart and unable to understand and do simple tasks on the computer. They are tools to most people. I was once surprised when an engineer, even the young ones that grew up with tech everywhere, needed help for something simple enough where only reasoning through was needed. I am no longer surprised, because it only comes easy mostly to those of us working in IT.
A side from believing that Microsoft has long been lost since they really started losing market share in various spaces to a long list of vendors, products, and services and not being the company bringing new offerings to market first, it is a need to move to a better revenue model that is what motivates them now.
Companies of all types and sizes sold something to a stream of customers. This model works as long as they keep coming in sufficient numbers. I think companies in the computer and even consumer electronics sectors eventually realized that there isn't a reliable need to replace. What we have now still serves the need. So, they needed to move to model such as subscription with a reliable revenue stream.
Again, I think Microsoft is lost. They seem to approach business strategy by copying the models of other supposedly successful companies without consideration of long-term impact to both the customer and their own business. I believe a free model wrapped in ads, data gathering and selling, and app store cuts is not the right fit for a desktop operating system. I especially believe forcing a user to upgrade to Windows 10 is wrong and a mistake. They need to leave my Win7 install alone. I have used Win8 and Win10 and want neither.
Maybe it's about time we got fucked a little for a while
I do believe that the U.S. has been exploiting the more desperate outside its borders for a long time and not just taking advantage in a fair way of opportunities encountered in a global economy. While I do believe we need to pay the cost of these policies and, for instance, our meddling around the world, I do still try to understand why the powerful among us remain willing to weaken the U.S. through such policies and business dealings while simultaneously strengthening all of the peoples and countries that are to one day come for our collective ass. A side from true ignorance and naivety, the only explanation that makes sense is that the powerful's ass isn't to get fucked, ever. The powerful makes its money through investing, not real work, real risk, and sweat. Thus, they can make money everywhere without significant loss long-term and live anywhere. One day, the American will be the desperate if he or she exists that is exploited by the economic and political superpower of the times.
Only by hitting them where they notice - their profit - will they change their behavior
Not buying a particular device is not always a practical choice. Often, the choice is between having to compromise to get the product or service or not get anything, because "all" vendors have incorporated the same unwanted feature(s). This notion that consumers have ultimate control in the market is a falacy. First, the consumer can only choose from what companies choose to bring to market, and this rarely is what he or she deems to be most ideal. Second, many to most purchases made by the middle and lower classes happen in response to actual need, practically speaking, and aren't really optional. Those of us here at Slashdot and running in similar circles tend to be more looped in on features of concern and options that exist or might exist to address said concerns. It is everyone else that blindly fall victim.
> Right now I have 27
I don't like the tab UI design mostly, because the tab bar is vertical-space-wasting. I probably never have more than 10-12 browser windows open at one time in that rare instance when there are a lot. What about your workflow or usage warrants 27 tabs?
Firefox is my primary browser both on my Win7 laptop, Mac, and B&N Nook HD+ tablet running CM12. I also use on a Linux box. Many changes have been made to Firefox in recent years that cost it points, and many of these are UI-centric. The UI is a lot like that for Chrome now, at least for the Android apps. I don't use Chrome, because its worse for what bothers me. Another reason is Google's primary business of Big Data. Although the UI for IE throughh v11 is the least offensive for me, it is my secondary browser. I tend to only fall back to it when Flash is needed or something seems to not be working in Firefox. I keep Firefox configured in such a way that it doesn't some commonly implemented crap design features.