Google Chrome

Shoseki said:
I love how everyone is an amateur economist :D

If everyone charged for content, then it is possible that people would pay for it - but as soon as one website started offering it for free, where would the incentive for people to pay for "premium" content come from ?
Click to expand...
rafster said:
I love it how everyone on the internet makes assumptions.

BSc Economics and MSc Economics with Distinction. I also lectured Econometrics/Microeconomics to UG 1st years. I now work for an Investment Bank.
Click to expand...
Ouch, feel the burn :)
 
yantorsen said:
no full screen F11 mode either :(
Click to expand...

The fact that you've got hardly any toolbars, there's no status bar in the bottom as well...

Do you really need a full screen mode?

Oh and I've noticed they've got a little dictionary tool as I type (ala Firefox) and I can see that it doesn't recognise "toolbars" or "ala Firefox" in this piece I've written.

How do I change the spelling or add to dictionary?
 
If people are getting errors or buggy sites, are they finding sites are generally broke... are you reporting it to them through the "control the current page" -> "Report bug or Broken Website" link?
 
I actually quite like it... :)

Feels very fast here! Never been a firefox fan :( But i usually do like IE... except recently i get a pause when opening new tabs or windows, its been driving me crazy lol

So yeah, Chrome seems quite nippy i must say... havent done too much with it yet tho!
 
rafster said:
I have no interest in extra bits or buttons, nor in addons amending webpages.

If everyone was to use ad blocking tools, then we'll end up with websites charging for content.
Click to expand...
Wow, aren't you a paragon of virtue.

Quite frankly, I find it obscene that given that I'm paying a monthly fee for broadband I'm expected to happily sit by whilst garish adverts consume my screen space and bandwidth. Not to mention the added security.
 
platypus said:
Quite frankly, I find it obscene that given that I'm paying a monthly fee for broadband I'm expected to happily sit by whilst garish adverts consume my screen space and bandwidth.
Click to expand...
So the fact someone pays for Sky mean they shouldn't have any to watch any adverts on it? :rolleyes:

So the fact you purchase a newspaper means you shouldn't see any adverts in it? :rolleyes:

And if a million people visit a website costing its owners a fortune in server/bandwidth costs, they should recoup their costs by what means?

...meanwhile in the real world... :)
 
NeilFawcett said:
So the fact someone pays for Sky mean they shouldn't have any to watch any adverts on it? :rolleyes:

So the fact you purchase a newspaper means you shouldn't see any adverts in it? :rolleyes:

...meanwhile in the real world... :)
Click to expand...
The fact that they do doesn't mean that it's right. There is an inherent difference.

Meanwhile, in the real world - if I can empower myself to take steps in certain areas to blot out adverts, I will.
 
platypus said:
The fact that they do doesn't mean that it's right. There is an inherent difference.

Meanwhile, in the real world - if I can empower myself to take steps in certain areas to blot out adverts, I will.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point...

A popular website costs money. Many such websites cover the cost with adverts. If these adverts are not shown or hidden, then either the site will close or have to charge more directly... Simple really...

TBH the current adverts are better than the alternatives...

You pay to use the internet... But remember EVERY site you visit is costing someone money to run. Don't take them for granted.
 
No I didn't miss the point. I skirted it.

If charging for content sees the demise of advertising, I will happily pay - especially for websites that are worth it. I don't mind paying.

I don't deem Sky/VirginMedia/Subscription television to have any worth, so I don't subscribe. Quite easy really.
 
platypus said:
No I didn't miss the point. I skirted it.

If charging for content sees the demise of advertising, I will happily pay - especially for websites that are worth it. I don't mind paying.

I don't deem Sky/VirginMedia/Subscription television to have any worth, so I don't subscribe. Quite easy really.
Click to expand...

So you're happy that the cost of the newpapers and magazines you buy tripple or quadrupple in cost for example, so the adverts can be removed? Just like the internet, I'm happy to flick past/over a few adverts, if it means a cheaper experience...
 
NeilFawcett said:
You're missing the point...

A popular website costs money. Many such websites cover the cost with adverts. If these adverts are not shown or hidden, then either the site will close or have to charge more directly... Simple really...

TBH the current adverts are better than the alternatives...

You pay to use the internet... But remember EVERY site you visit is costing someone money to run. Don't take them for granted.
Click to expand...

I think they have a right to put ads on their websites, just like I have the right to ignore them or block them.

Burnsy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom