Millisecond Online Community

Chrome support?

rated by 0 users
This post has 11 Replies | 2 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 58
Rickardcarlsson Posted: 05-02-2009 9:47 AM
Hi!

When (if ever) will Inquist work with Google Chrome?
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 1,084
It sort of does already.

If you install the Inquisit Mozilla plugin, then shut down Chrome, restart it, and return to the launch page, you can launch the experiment. I realize this is not a suitable user experience. I believe it's a bug in Chrome that will hopefully be fixed soon.

Also, if you install the latest beta of the Java runtime, the Java Web Start version of Inquisit should work as well. As this new version of the runtime becomes more widely installed, more and more Chrome users will be able to launch Inquisit experiments.

Finally, Chrome doesn't yet support ClickOnce. Presumably it will at some point - even Firefox supports ClickOnce as of version 3.5 of the .NET Framework - but that will depend on Chrome implementing an extensions model like Firefox has.

So, Chrome support for Inquisit is happening. It's largely just a matter of waiting for the next version of Java and for Chrome's feature set to mature.

-Sean
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 1,084
Ok, just uploaded a change to the launch page for 3.0.4.0 that enables Chrome to work with the Mozilla Plugin version of Inquisit. No longer any need to restart the browser, it should just work.

-Sean
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 191

A quick follow-up on this topic.

Although the Mozilla plugin does work fine, there is no way a non-tech savvy person could figure out what to do when using Chrome.

I just tested a web experiment using Chrome. It took me minutes to realize that Chrome offering me to download a *.jnlp file was actually something that fell into the realm of "having trouble" with a web experiment and that I should try the Mozilla plugin although I was running Chrome.

Wouldn't it be a welcome addition if the launch page did some browser detection and informed Chrome users that they should try "this plugin". There is no need to label it as Mozilla. Most people I know wouldn't even know what Mozilla is. Just say: "Hey, it appears you are using the Chrome browser. You need a plug-in to participate in this experiment. Please click here."

Just a thought.

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 3,437

As a matter of fact, there are two launch methods available when using Google's Chrome browser:

- JavaWebStart, which is the preferred method and will work on virtually all browsers if you've got a JRE (Java Runtime Environment) installed (and enabled in the respective browser). Your JRE is able to handle those JNLP files.

- Fallback: The NPAPI (aka. Mozilla) plugin which will work on most browsers which properly implement the NPAPI (Internet Explorer isn't one of them).

Also, the launch page does plenty of browser sniffing to determine the most suitable / available launch method(s) for the given browser.

Regards,

~Dave

"To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion."  - Unknown Zen Master

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 191

Yes, I am aware of these things. What I am suggesting is merely a more prominent information text on the launch page, i.e., different layout & wording of the launch page.

Take this web experiment, for example: http://research.millisecond.com/sydney_psych/StudentEF.web

What happens when I try to start this in Chrome (although I have the latest version of JRE installed), is the following: after entering the code, Chrome opens a Save dialog prompting to save a file called "Inquisit.jnlp". That's it.

This does not come across as particularly user friendly and won't not help in acquiring as many and diverse participants as possible - which is the pivotal reason for using web experiments. I would never have guessed that I was to install a Mozilla plugin in Chrome.

My sole recommendation is to make the hint box at the bottom of the launch page more prominent and change the wording in order to tell the user explicitly: "You are running Chrome. You may require a plug-in. Just click here." There is no need to a) make the box so small and b) confuse the user with a reference to Mozilla.

Best, Malte

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 3,437

Blackadder:
What happens when I try to start this in Chrome (although I have the latest version of JRE installed), is the following: after entering the code, Chrome opens a Save dialog prompting to save a file called "Inquisit.jnlp". That's it.

This does not come across as particularly user friendly [...]

You can blame how JavaWebStart and Chrome work for that. It's not anything that could be changed programmatically. The same argument can be made against the NPAPI plugin, though. Chrome (or alternative browser X) will download an executable. People still need to navigate to the downloaded file double-click to get the plugin installed. In a perfect world, there'd be a way to get the necessary code onto people's machines without much user interaction. But in a world full of malware, ever-changing, more and more restrictive mitigations / protection mechanisms implemented by browser vendors, that's not going to happen (which is a good thing from a security standpoint).

Blackadder:
My sole recommendation is to make the hint box at the bottom of the launch page more prominent and change the wording in order to tell the user explicitly: "You are running Chrome. You may require a plug-in. Just click here." There is no need to a) make the box so small and b) confuse the user with a reference to Mozilla.

Personally, I'm not disputing here. Thanks for the feedback. However, I'm willing to make any bet that the next person will argue a larger box would be *too* prominent. At last, note that everyone is, of course, free to put as many and as detailed (non)technical instructions on the launch page as she/he may wish or may deem appropriate for the respective target population.

Regards,

~Dave

"To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion."  - Unknown Zen Master

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 191

You're completely right about the double-clicking. However, most people these days doubleclick within the browser's download window, at least dispensing with the need to browse local folders.

Making the box more prominent may well be disputed but not the fact that alluding a Chrome user to a Mozilla plugin is flatout confusing.

Particularly in light of the browser detection algorithms already in place, just have the launch site say: "You are using Chrome. You need a plug-in. Just click here." will probably retain 50% of the uneasy Chrome users.

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 3,437

Blackadder:
You're right about the double-clicking. However, most people these days doubleclick within the browser's download window, dispensing with the need to browse local folders.

Same applies to the downloaded JNLP file in case of JavaWebStart. Just pointing this out for the sake of completeness.

Blackadder:
Particularly in light of the browser detection algorithms already in place, just have the launch site say: "You are using Chrome. You need a plug-in. Just click here." will probably retain 50% of the uneasy Chrome users.

Potential name confusion aside, I'm not convinced the plugin should be the default option for Chrome and thus I don't think the launch page should display any such prompt. IMO (and as argued above and throughout the thread), it's neither easier to use than JavaWebStart nor is it more reliable, etc. Your personal preference may be towards the plugin launch method, but would everyone agree? Finally, note that if you don't want JWS available for your web experiments (and thus default to the plugin method in Chrome), you can disable it via the Web Script Wizard.

Best,

~Dave

"To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion."  - Unknown Zen Master

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 191

Wait, I'm supposed to download the jnlp file and then double-click on it to invoke Java Web Start? Good to know! Maybe I should tell that to my participants... Tongue Tied

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 3,437

Blackadder:
Maybe I should tell that to my participants..

Yes, maybe you should. I appreciate the subtle irony :) Regardless, though, you do realize that many people are outright *scared* by downloaded executables (i.e., *.exe files on Windows) and will absolutely *refuse* to (double-)click them, don't you?

"To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion."  - Unknown Zen Master

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 191

Oh, they are indeed. Although I suspect a U-shaped curve, just as everywhere in Psychology. On the lower end, there roam the completely clueless who will click on anything. Then come the scared and mildly uninitiated who won't click at all, and finally the folks with sufficient expertise to have developed the illusion that they can differentiate the good from the ugly.

 

Page 1 of 1 (12 items) | RSS
Powered by Community Server (Non-Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems