Warren: Google’s experimental change to Chrome crashed the browser

[woody]

Lest you think Windows gets all the fun parts… Tom Warren at the Verge is reporting: Google left thousands of machines in businesses with broken Chr
[See the full post at: Warren: Google’s experimental change to Chrome crashed the browser]

2 users thanked author for this post.

AJNorth, armond

[anonymous]

Until there are regulations requiring Google, Microsoft, and others to properly notify(Well in Advance) the OS end users of any forced updates/silent patches then it’s open season for these companies to use their end users as BETA testers. I’d like there to be some academic research studies done to gauge the lost productivity of these silent/forced updates have to the overall economy.

Google(Android/Chrome)/Third Party Android users and Microsoft(Windows) pretty much represent the largest OS players with Apple coming as well with its MacOS(PC/Laptops) and iOS/iPadOS phones/tablets. And it’s about lost productivity with Browsers as well what with the levels of web based software that’s used to manage things in businesses cross platform. So removing the end user from having the final say regarding any update/patch is maybe needing some restrictions placed upon the big market players in the name of overall productivity.

If Google does this a few more times then maybe it’s time to move to another browser or at least have some other standards compliant browser certified as well for any business that can not afford any disruptions.

This Crowd Foisting of BETA testing is getting out of hand and maybe some lawsuits are in order to recover lost business/income. Really Google maybe add to the enterprise edition of the Chrome Browser some additional  permissions/notifications regarding any updates because in the enterprise market nothing gets tested on the production hardware, that’s why the IT department uses test computers/servers for properly vetting/certifying any changes.

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

gkarasik

[rc primak]

I disagree. Regulation is how we almost lost encryption. It is how we are losing access to EU copyrighted materials and American music and, films and television content. No, no, government cannot regulate anything in technology without [messing up] us all! (Edited for profanity by me.)

-- rc primak

1 user thanked author for this post.

Cybertooth

[armond]

Well, “Enable occlusion of web contents” actually. Mine was set to default.

For Whom the Bell Tolls: Google.

[anonymous]

Catalin had more details yesterday: https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-chrome-experiment-crashes-browser-tabs-impacts-companies-worldwide/

[Cybertooth]

Here’s a good comment from that ZDNet report:

The primary issue here is that Chrome is playing fast and loose with updates, which makes it entirely unsuitable for enterprise environments. The feature implementation was included with an update that was released a while ago, but it passed enterprise testing because the flag was turned off. The Chrome team can apparently turn this flag on for everyone later, without even going through the update mechanism. So even if your tightly controlled environment rolled out updates only after they were fully tested, you’d still be sc***ed. […]

 

Keep Running Windows 7 Safely for Years to Come  
Make Windows 10 look and work like Windows 7

• This reply was modified 10 months, 2 weeks ago by Cybertooth.

[b]

From the Verge comments (linked previously):

Google Chrome quality has gone lower on a PC with Windows in the past year, Edge Chromium feels so much fast, so only Google engineers know what silent features they are adding for other Windows 10 users like this one for Citrix. Microsoft has the advantage that they are always transparent with business users about new features, so Edge Chromium will have huge acceptance

From ZDNet comments (linked previously):

Despite all the cursing of Microsoft by employees, they’ve always been sticklers for letting enterprises have absolute and complete control of their environments. It probably helps that Microsoft makes most of their money from Enterprise, whereas for Google it’s less than 10 percent. Enterprises can’t (shouldn’t) trust a company that has so little at stake.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

[Alex5723]

armond wrote:

Well, “Enable occlusion of web contents” actually. Mine was set to default.

For Whom the Bell Tolls: Google.

My Chrome Version 79.0.3945.36 (Official Build) beta (64-bit) froze a couple of times on some sites.
I disabled the flag.

Don’t forget that Google is in the process of implementing Manifest V3

https://www.ghacks.net/2019/11/13/google-implements-controversial-manifest-v3-in-chrome-canary-80/

• This reply was modified 10 months, 2 weeks ago by Alex5723.

[EP]

epic fail on Google’s part, woody 🙂

[anonymous]

Really setting some switch and not indicating that and IT departments managing things by the version number to assure proper vetting/certification with Google coming in under the RADAR and setting that experimental switch. And The Register(1) has a good write-up across the pond and some very interesting forum posts on the subject.

The Register article also has some very interesting back and forth from the Chromium bug tracker mailing list that is really a great example of Google’s attitude towards its end users. And there are several choice replies from IT managers that are up in arms about not being in the loop when it’s those IT managers feeling the heat.

Just a small sample of some the back and forth quoted at The Register:

“Google software engineer David Bienvenu jumped in to explain:

“The experiment/flag has been on in beta for ~5 months. It was turned on for stable (e.g., m77, m78) via an experiment that was pushed to released Chrome Tuesday morning.”

At 1824 UTC last night, Bienvenu rolled back the experiment change, noting “I’m not sure how long it takes to go live, but once it’s live, users will need to restart Chrome to get the change.”

This prompted one admin to snap back:

“I am stunned by your response … Do you see the impact you created for thousands of us without any warning or explanation? We are not your test subjects. We are running professional services for multi million dollar programs. Do you understand how many hours of resources were wasted by your “experiment”? Not acceptable..” ” (1)

I really hope the EU steps up with some regulations and the US as well but It’s getting a little bit excessive with the experimentation foisted onto the end users at no small cost for fixing the disruptions by Google/Other too big interests.

(1)

“White Screen of Death: Admins up in arms after experimental Google emission borks Chrome
Change rolled back, but it’s not a good look”

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/11/15/chromium_silent_experiment_breaks_citrix_and_more/

[jabeattyauditor]

anonymous wrote:

I really hope the EU steps up with some regulations and the US as well but It’s getting a little bit excessive with the experimentation foisted onto the end users at no small cost for fixing the disruptions by Google/Other too big interests.

This is not a problem for government to “solve” – unless you’d rather be stuck with something like Internet Explorer 6.

How much do you pay to use Google Chrome? Exactly.

If you’re not forking over cold, hard cash to use a software package, you and your information are the product.

If you don’t like it, switch. If you’d prefer a browser that gives you more control, use one. If you think one of the big data mining companies owes you something, complain to them (like the admin quoted in the article).

Nobody forced these companies to use Google Chrome, and nobody is forcing them to continue using it.

4 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, wavy, Microfix, PKCano

[Microfix]

jabeattyauditor wrote:

If you’re not forking over cold, hard cash to use a software package, you and your information are the product.

Exactly! with google ‘security’ as a comforting reassurance. aka telemetry to google servers

Win8.1 Pro | Linux Hybrids | Win7 Pro O/L | WinXP O/L

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

[anonymous]

It’s will be the Government Regulators if Google/MS/Others do not back off with the foisting of their BETA testing on the enterprise/public end users and just because the product is free does not help your argument against Google/MS/Others if it affects the productivity of such a large portion of the market.

Radio and Television are ad funded as well like Google and its software/OS ecosystem but those markets are regulated and  public utilities can be declared so if the OS is a public necessity as well as the Browser what with Government/Private industry having turned to the Internet to deliver services. Then  it may  take regulations for privacy and some OS end user guaranteed control over their own computers(Update fairness and opt-in as the default rule instead of forced updates and opt-out after the fact) and the creation of some new public utilities if that serves the public good.

It sure looks like Enterprises need to have at least 2 browser options available and supported at the same time or risk similar disruptions.

This sure may be good for some of the other Browsers being offered up to compete with Google’s Chrome variant and Firefox/Other browser offerings may soon get more installs, even if that’s just needed as a readily available fall back to Google’s Chrome variant if that experimentation is not limited to volunteers only.

[rc primak]

Again, please take a look at the track record of actual and proposed government regulation of technology and communication media. This is not something in the USA, the EU or anywhere else which I would want replicated in any of my operating systems or third party software.

The open source community has it just about right. Instead of imposing rules and regulations, the (developer and user) community apply our own pressures upon anyone who isn’t playing by what we believe are reasonable standards. Self-regulation works if the whole development and testing ecosystem is open and transparent. Which in the closed-source world it is definitely *not*.

The answer is not more regulation. The answer is more openness, less obfuscation, and less arrogance by vendors and developers toward *all* their customers — even we who are not paying for the use of certain products.

-- rc primak

1 user thanked author for this post.

Cybertooth

[anonymous]

well, there’s the rub: a “million $” operation trying to tell a “billion $” operation it disapproves of something it does…  google is laughing at you. However, I agree their mode of operation shows little regard for entities that use their ‘products’… and US policy makers thought certain financial institutions & auto manufacturers were “too big to fail” – how google now dwarfs those in terms of data control and the unknown power that control may wield…

2 users thanked author for this post.

Steve, rc primak

[OscarCP]

Just curious: so this is, for some reason (???) a problem only for companies and government organizations? Only for those running Windows 10? On virtual machines?

I am a private user and have not encountered the problem this thread is about, although I use Chrome daily (in my Mac laptop, because its 15″ Retina screen is better than the 16″ one in my old Win 7 PC laptop), including every day of this week, so far, to stream video from Netflix and other uses for which Chrome works better than my default browser, Waterfox. And, reckless adventurer me, I let Chrome update itself automatically.

Windows 7 Professional, SP1, x64 Group W (ex B) & macOS + Linux (Mint)

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

[b]

OscarCP wrote:

Just curious: so this is, for some reason (???) a problem only for companies and government organizations?

Yes, and all three articles linked earlier explain why:

Business users accessing Chrome through virtual machine environments like Citrix kept seeing white screens on open Chrome tabs, blocking access to the browser and leaving it totally unresponsive.

It didn’t impact all Chrome users, but only Chrome browsers running on Windows Server “terminal server” setups — a very common setup in enterprise networks

The issue affected thousands of businesses’ terminal servers, with multiple users on the same server experiencing “white screen of death” at the same time.

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, OscarCP

[warrenrumak]

Not to put too fine a point on this, Oscar, the answer to your question is in the article that you should’ve read.  I shall quote the salient part here for you: “Business users accessing Chrome through virtual machine environments like Citrix kept seeing white screens on open Chrome tabs”

It has nothing to do with Windows 10.

 

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

[OscarCP]

Hey, warrenrumak (and b): I actually read the article in The Verge, but missed that sentence — because it was not there. Sorry, I deeply apologize for not reading every single article other people posted here, with much bowing and scraping, bending at 45 degrees at the waist while on my knees, until someone up there says “enough!”.

Also, quite smugly pleased to know that this Chrome problem is not supposed to show up in machines like mine.

Windows 7 Professional, SP1, x64 Group W (ex B) & macOS + Linux (Mint)

1 user thanked author for this post.

Alice

[rc primak]

It doesn’t show up on our versions of Chrome. But other Google decisions do show up for us. With things like ad blocking (deprecated APIs), color and screen brightness rendering (munged some time ago for me in Chrome, now mysteriously restored to a previous condition), and a host of settings which are more and more under Google’s control, not ours. Enough ranting (from me) for one post.

-- rc primak

[b]

OscarCP wrote:

Hey, warrenrumak (and b): I actually read the article in The Verge, but missed that sentence — because it was not there.

Are you really saying the second sentence in that article was added after you read it, or should we not take your words at face value?

[rc primak]

Not saying this has happened this time, but articles and postings do get updated from time to time.

-- rc primak

[anonymous]

People might have read the EULA or just clicked the “I Agree” button.

Either way, I’m sure Google had phrased in there somewhere that “there are no guarantees that the browser will work 100% all the time; and we are not obliged to supply any services without disruption: The product may not be fit for your particular purpose.” or some such words to that effect…

Soooo… you get what you pay for!

[jabeattyauditor]

anonymous wrote:

People might have read the EULA or just clicked the “I Agree” button.

From Google Chrome’s Terms of Service:

4.2 Google is constantly innovating in order to provide the best possible experience for its users. You acknowledge and agree that the form and nature of the Services which Google provides may change from time to time without prior notice to you.

4.3 As part of this continuing innovation, you acknowledge and agree that Google may stop (permanently or temporarily) providing the Services (or any features within the Services) to you or to users generally at Google’s sole discretion, without prior notice to you. You may stop using the Services at any time. You do not need to specifically inform Google when you stop using the Services.

11.1 The Software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google. These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the Services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new software modules and completely new versions. You agree to receive such updates (and permit Google to deliver these to you) as part of your use of the Services.

13.2 YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT YOUR USE OF THE SERVICES IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK AND THAT THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE.”

13.3 IN PARTICULAR, GOOGLE, ITS SUBSIDIARIES AND AFFILIATES, AND ITS LICENSORS DO NOT REPRESENT OR WARRANT TO YOU THAT:

(A) YOUR USE OF THE SERVICES WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS,

(B) YOUR USE OF THE SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, TIMELY, SECURE OR FREE FROM ERROR,

(C) ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY YOU AS A RESULT OF YOUR USE OF THE SERVICES WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE, AND

(D) THAT DEFECTS IN THE OPERATION OR FUNCTIONALITY OF ANY SOFTWARE PROVIDED TO YOU AS PART OF THE SERVICES WILL BE CORRECTED.

14.1 SUBJECT TO OVERALL PROVISION IN PARAGRAPH 13.1 ABOVE, YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT GOOGLE, ITS SUBSIDIARIES AND AFFILIATES, AND ITS LICENSORS SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR:

(A) ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES WHICH MAY BE INCURRED BY YOU, HOWEVER CAUSED AND UNDER ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY.. THIS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, ANY LOSS OF PROFIT (WHETHER INCURRED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY), ANY LOSS OF GOODWILL OR BUSINESS REPUTATION, ANY LOSS OF DATA SUFFERED, COST OF PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES, OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSS;

(B) ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY BE INCURRED BY YOU, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OR DAMAGE AS A RESULT OF:

(I) ANY RELIANCE PLACED BY YOU ON THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY OR EXISTENCE OF ANY ADVERTISING, OR AS A RESULT OF ANY RELATIONSHIP OR TRANSACTION BETWEEN YOU AND ANY ADVERTISER OR SPONSOR WHOSE ADVERTISING APPEARS ON THE SERVICES;

(II) ANY CHANGES WHICH GOOGLE MAY MAKE TO THE SERVICES, OR FOR ANY PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY CESSATION IN THE PROVISION OF THE SERVICES (OR ANY FEATURES WITHIN THE SERVICES);

[rc primak]

And this is the company whose browser engine Microsoft is going to include as the core of the New Edge? Well, at least MS may be able to fork their Chromium core and possibly avoid Google’s fun and games. Maybe, that is…

-- rc primak

[b]

Didn’t Microsoft fork Chromium open source nearly a year ago?

Microsoft Edge and Chromium Open Source: Our Intent

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

[rc primak]

Perhaps yes. Is this the Chromium version being used in the New Edge?

And, is Microsoft’s Chromium fork truly independent of Google’s telemetry?

-- rc primak

• This reply was modified 10 months, 2 weeks ago by rc primak.

[b]

Yes:

Microsoft is removing or replacing more than 50 Chromium services in building its new Chromium-based Edge browser,

“Our users expect Edge to be only communicating with Microsoft services,”

How is Microsoft’s Chromium-based Edge really different from Chrome?

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, PrivacyPhreak

[rc primak]

Sounds good so far. Only the usual Microsoft snooping to deal with.

-- rc primak

[Author]

Posts