Jason Bassford wrote:
> However. I still argue for having them in place because I can
> easily imagine situations where it COULD help somebody with what they
> want. Just because *I* wouldn't use the feature is, AFAIK, not a very
> good reason to say that it shouldn't be made part of the program for
> the use of other people out there. If they're there, there's nothing
> saying that you have to use them. But it would be nice to give the
> option to people.
situations like this:
When my wife comes into the room and takes over the browser and wants
her own settings I have to lose my login sesion in the OS so she can
switch browser profiles, bit of an overkill dont you think?
Just let the browser handle profile access and give us a 'switch active
user' function and an inter-profile bookmark store so bookmarks can be
shared.
You can implement this through OS security by giving the browser a user
login/switch feature that spawns the browser as the newly logged in user
with users rights and environment.
For OS's with lesser security the login can be given the function of
switching to the appropriate profile.
As for not puting this in because it is not secure; if we wanted secure
we would use a secure OS.
and for those who want encrypted profiles I am sure you can put your
profile in a directory secured with some third party software.
