Re:How a banner ad for H&R Block appeared on Apple.com witho...
by cmelbye on Monday April 08, 2013 @01:07PM
(#5512966)
That's not true. Google seamlessly supports both HTTP and HTTPS, and many other sites do too through simply using // as the protocol.
Re:How a banner ad for H&R Block appeared on Apple.com witho...
by driverdan on Monday April 08, 2013 @02:41PM
(#5513622)
Using 3rd party CDNs, like Google Hosted Libraries, are often slower anyway.
http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2013/03/18/http-archive-jqu...
Re:How a banner ad for H&R Block appeared on Apple.com witho...
by iy56 on Monday April 08, 2013 @01:19PM
(#5513037)
They are not making it necessary, only convenient. You're not harmed by seeing a few ads.
Re:How a banner ad for H&R Block appeared on Apple.com witho...
by brandon272 on Monday April 08, 2013 @01:23PM
(#5513062)
This point of view assumes that the injected code is harmless and never causes compatibility issues when viewing a website. The moment a JavaScript conflict occurs and Apple loses a sale or the ability to buy a product online is hindered, I think that there will be parties who certainly feel they are being "harmed" by this process of manipulating the content being delivered to end users.
HTTPS is manageable where needed for security. Sleazy ISPs are making it necessary even where security is not a concern -- for example, viewing Apple's homepage.