Hacker News Reader

Comment by untog | Hacker News Reader

"a browser that isn't supported by Google"

But still a browser that was created by Google and was bundled with the OS until 12 months ago, never mind how long it takes OEMs to roll it out. Android <=4.3 accounts for 75% of Android users:

https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html?ut...

Just because Google decided not to support it any more doesn't mean they shouldn't. Pointing out Firefox and Opera is all very well, but this is the default browser on Android <=4.3, and very few users explore alternative browsers (Chrome being the exception, to a point).

It's also the browser engine used in embedded webviews, don't forget.

View on HN

Could they update it, though? I thought part of the reason they went to Chrome is that the AOSP browser is baked into the OS and so not updateable without updating the whole OS. So to patch it, they'd have to update the OS, but if you're doing that, then why not just move to the latest OS, which is already fixed?

Yes they can update it. Android provides an update mechanism for system apps.

They can update the "Android Browser" app, but the flaw is in a system level component (the Android WebView). They might be able to mitigate the flaw with an update to the app, but all other applications (including any OEM shipped browser that utilises the system web view) would still be vulnerable.

I imagine this would be fixable with an Android OS patch, no? I think this is critical enough to warrant that.

Chrome only supports Android 4.0+ (Ice Cream Sandwich), so people with older Android devices don't have that choice. OTOH, Firefox supports Android 2.3+ (Gingerbread). Mozilla only recently dropped Froyo support.

Very few people explore other browsers? Alt browsers are often the first app that people download. Chrome is included in gapps.

Alt browsers are often the first app the people download.

Which people? I'll grant that Chrome is an exception, given that it's bundled, but I've never seen usage number of other alternative Android browsers hit any meaningful numbers.

Who, engineers? Certainly not my wife or anyone else I have ever met who isn't technical.

Haha, I'm sure we've all had tunnel vision moments at one point or another.

My grandmother managed to switch entirely to Chrome on her PC without the help of anyone in our family. Anecdotal evidence works both ways. It isn't 1998. Most people know what a browser is and which one they are using on their desktop. Making the leap to a second browser on a phone (where they can easily get it from Google Play) isn't that ridiculous.

Who's talking about PC? We're talking about phones here, and it is different. Also, it's not anecdotal; we have data. The only reason that IE still has such a large share of the browser market is because people are unaware of and/or don't care about other (better) options.

Not sure what fantasy land you're living in. But most people are not downloading alternate browsers en masse for their phone. Especially not when there isn't a compelling reason to do so.

Chrome on Desktop has adapted several malware techniques to get installed without the user noticing. Bundled by default in many installers, including Flash, installs with user permissions only.

Example? I worked quite hard to get my grandma to install Chrome.

>Bundled by default in many installers, including Flash, installs with user permissions only

Not saying I agree with the Malware comment, though the bundling is annoying.

Isn't that what you are for, if you're computer-literate?

The first thing I install on my gf's computer or phone is Firefox and configure it to sensible settings (turn off third-party cookies, install ABP and Ghostery and stuff like that).

I've played tech support to many people in my circle of friends and family who have no idea that alternate browsers even exist. The vast majority of users use what comes on the phone by default.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com