You're a $500M/year org, not a tiny org. (that doesn't make Axel right either).
-
-
It takes a huge team to implement today's increasingly complex web standards compared to back then. Real browsers have engines :P
-
UC is absolutely its own engine (it's a fork of webkit, but so is Blink, and I think you count Blink as a "real engine"). As a framework author, I wish it weren't so, but it is.
-
I don't consider all webkit forks the way I consider Google and Blink. Do you?
-
It's a very old fork with extremely significant divergences, including a huge reliance on server processing. They're not just leeching off of Apple; not at all.
-
For what it’s worth, I think UC Browser is pretty different, because they would not be competitive at all if they weren’t targeting the Chinese market specifically (market share data confirms this).
-
I think something much more interesting is the success of Samsung Internet, which speaks volumes about what drives adoption in the mobile space.
-
What do you think it teaches us?
-
That browsers right now are interchangeable commodities in the mobile space, so integration plays (hardware, Chinese government support, etc.) are pretty much the only thing that drive adoption.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
(how big of a budget do you think UC browser has?)
-
Does UC have an engine or are they a wrapper that many much smaller companies seem to be able to manage?
End of conversation
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.