Comments on: xkcdAlt

By: TPReal

TPReal — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:17:51 +0000

Syockit,
Current Chrome version supports direct installing user scripts and wraps them in extensions on the fly. So I’m not creating more of them, but please stop complaining about this one – when it was made, it was one of the first extension and user scripts were not supported at all.

By: Syockit

Syockit — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:32:15 +0000

If extensions like this keeps on cropping up, we will soon have all kinds of scripts from userscripts.org moved here.

Maybe this website could also offer to install scripts alongside extensions, and have the install button display “Install Script” instead? Having it as an extension is an overkill, though I’m not sure just how much load it gives.

By: BloodyT

BloodyT — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:20:07 +0000

though i may agree in it should be a user script… freaking out about it isnt the way to go..
Userscripts are also 1click install, on the latest chromium.. which means theres no difference between them not (other than extensions can have severe security flaws, that userscripts just cant have)
although extentions still have other features, that make up for their vulnerability..
things that can be done as a userscript, should be done as a userscript
userscripts for the most part are site specific.., and therefore not useful to a majority of the browsing experience. There are 50,000+ userscripts out there, while plugins are very general, and useful to many..
Now Imagine if all those userscripts were plugins… it wouldnt necessarily be hard to find what we were looking for (if we knew what it was), but it would be alot harder to find that hidden gem, you never knew you needed.

By: Reeson

Reeson — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:35:36 +0000

Listen to the good advice Spencer, and stop assuming everyone is into playing with Chrome, or trying to force your view of the world onto others.

By: TPReal

TPReal — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:08:18 +0000

Thanks, Richard. You expressed very accurately what I think.
The problem is not with me learning how to write scripts, but with users preferring a one-click instalation to using them.

By: richardschwarz.oz

richardschwarz.oz — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 08:56:53 +0000

You devs just keep on forgetting that the *users* out there just dont give a rats arse if there is a way to script it… A user shouldn’t have to. I agree with TPReal, what’s your problem? You’ve got to remember that Chrome/Chromium is for real, ordinary, every day, don’t know the meaning of type people. They (we) don’t want to have to go and get greasemonkey, write some shonky-donky code (which they couldn’t do anyway). An extension is there to ensure that they *don’t* have to get their fingers dirty with code.

Get over yourself and admit that the user should drive the experience, not some coder.

BTW: I code. I like coding. My users don’t.

By: Spencer

Spencer — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:56:44 +0000

@TPReal User-scripts are already implemented in a greasemonkey-like fashion. You can enable their use with the –enable-user-scripts switch. I would suggest you start there.

By: TPReal

TPReal — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:50:03 +0000

That’s true that this could be done using a user script, but what’s your problem? Why do you think it’s not a good idea to wrap it in an extension? I don’t even know how to install a user script, and installing an extension is just clicking “Install”. Not to mention the autoupdate functionality. So thanks again for your constructive comment.

By: Bapabooiee

Bapabooiee — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:40:08 +0000

Another one of these?

This is just another really simple user script using an extension as its vessel. This is quite unnecessary, and should be kept as only a user script.

I swear, we need a http://www.chromescripts.org website, or something. These kinds of “extensions” don’t belong here, and are just clutter.