That is, if you value engine diversity, isn't what Apple has done on iOS the worst possible long-term outcome, undermining all the vectors along which competition and diversity can improve things?
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate @hashseed and
I'm struggling to reconcile it too. The Safari-only situation on iOS has never felt good, but I suspect an issue many of us have is that the 1 engine that stands to dominate is run by a company w/ powerful business interests. It'd be different if we had say, 1 w3c-managed engine
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @scottjehl @slightlylate and
It's open source tho?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fardarter @scottjehl and
For all intents and purposes, it's Google's browser. React is open source. It's still a FB thing.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ChrisFerdinandi @scottjehl and
I'm not sure I agree with this take. MS can contribute or fork if they dislike Google's direction (certainly they have resources). Other people can fork it. Look at what Preact does. Open source makes a relevant difference here, I think.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fardarter @scottjehl and
When 70% of the market uses a tool owned by a corporation who's interest in browser making is "track users for ad purposes," this argument falls apart. Google IS chromium, and controls its direction. Edge is more-or-less a Google Chrome fork with some shitty MS features on top.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChrisFerdinandi @scottjehl and
"owned by a corporation" I don't buy this premise and that's why I don't agree. If I did, I might by the argument. I don't think open source can be considered owned in the relevant way. Think MS is going to be all-in on this.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fardarter @scottjehl and
When MS starts contributing back into the project with the same level of vigor as Google, AND when they're interest in doing so isn't tied to their own ad-revenue or business interests, come back and let's chat. Until then, these browsers are literally business lines for orgs.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChrisFerdinandi @scottjehl and
I'm all for overthrowing capitalism, but it seems a heavy ask for discussing the merits of browsers.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fardarter @scottjehl and
Chrome is a wonderful, very capable browser whose primary purpose is to spy on your browsing habits for profit, and whose rendering engine Google has primary control over. This should not be controversial, and it should be fairly obvious why a monoculture around it would be bad.
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
The inability to separate Chrome-the-browser and Chromium-the-project is deeply problematic in this coversation. Until/unless folks here learn to make a distinction, no light will come from this heat (whatever your view).
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate @ChrisFerdinandi and
I appreciate that they're different but would love to know more. Is there a good reference on how chromium's direction is steered independently of Google's priorities?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @scottjehl @ChrisFerdinandi and
See our process for launching features in Blink: https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.