State of web browsers in 2018 • Hacker News Board

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#111

Post by Trufa » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 5:31 PM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #54

From TFA: >> " For developers, it’s one less browser engine to worry about " >> " For the open web: it’s complicated. If I were to put on the hat of a pragmatic developer, I fail to see the big gain in having competing browser engines. " The author does not understand web standards and probably doesn't remember IExplorer's monopoly and the era of " works best in IExplorer " websites. And what fewer and fewer people r…

This is not a rant, it's a long well thought and insightful blog post, you might disagree, or he might be completely wrong but it's no rant.

Besides, the main point is that the UGLY reality is that the only relevant browser/engine is Chrome.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#112

Post by scblock » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 5:35 PM UTC

Web developers "building for Chromium" is a travesty. It's every mistake made when IE was dominant, repeated. Just do a find and replace from Microsoft to Google. If you are a web developer, please don't do it, and don't try to convince yourselves that it's OK. It's not OK. It wasn't OK before, it's not OK now, and it won't be OK down the road. I don't care that it's expedient; like your reliance on third party tracking scripts it shows you don't respect me.

Microsoft has done us no favors today.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#113

Post by Spivak » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 5:37 PM UTC

GonzaloQuero wrote: post #68

mike22223333 wrote: post #65

As a publisher, most of us do not care about Firefox either. They have done us no good. So we don't even bother to test on it. Their so called "Tracking Protection" is nothing more then a gimmick. It can be bypassed easily using methods other then cookies. All it did was reduce the revenue from ads because of no cookies (the legitimate way to track id's). It did an insignificant harm to Google. But it reduced the rev…

So Firefox's Do Not Track is harming the way you track people through advertising? I'd say it's working perfectly, then. Maybe it is your business that is broken.

Businesses that make their money on ads have no reason to ensure their product works on a segment of the browser market that almost entirely blocks ads.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#114

Post by pxtail » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 5:41 PM UTC

tokyodude wrote: post #102

superkuh wrote: post #4

We're getting to the point where browsers are worthy of the decades old criticism Emacs has received. They have eventually become an OS with many fine features - simply lacking a good web browser. It's a large, sprawling project to make a good OS. Especially when the language of choice to run on it changes with such haste. Hopefully this nth re-imagining of dumb terminals dies off over the next few years and applicat…

Browsers to me are amazing. I can run untrusted code in my computer from all over the world and at least with Chrome the odds of my machine getting pwned are pretty low. The Chromium team fixes security issues quickly. For that I get this amazing environment where I can see things as incredible as Google Maps 3D, games, music apps, etc all sandboxed incredibly well. The whole thing is far far more secure than running…

It always amazes me how - even on HN - some people like to depreciate and underestimate browsers in their current state. It's like they are stuck with mindset in 90s and forgot to notice that browser are pretty advanced OS nowadays.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#115

Post by mercer » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 5:49 PM UTC

sstangl wrote: post #11

As a Mozilla employee, speaking from my own limited perspective, it seems the company as a whole broadly agrees with this analysis even if it isn't vocalized quite this succinctly. Chrome started out being force-installed alongside Flash, and there is no solution to the bundling problem -- the problem is even larger in scale than the article suggests because of Chromebooks affecting desktop. People who use Firefox in…

> Eventually, Google will do something that is an abuse of their monopoly power. Either there will eventually be a privacy/creepiness fiasco, or Google will attempt to use Chrome as leverage to squeeze a competitor out of a market.

> When that happens, Mozilla will be well-positioned as an alternative.

I hope you're right, but my main concern is that this could be a war of attrition: Google has such deep pockets that they can simply play nice, all the while testing the limits of what users will accept, until Mozilla taps out. And once that happens, all bets are off.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#116

Post by machiaweliczny » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 5:56 PM UTC

CWuestefeld wrote: post #47

SamWhited wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know why people aren't using it. Like the article said: no one cares (more or less) about how good the browser is. If you have to go install a new browser, that's more work than just using the builtin one, and Google can force every Android phone to install Chrome out of the box. Also, though I use Firefox mobile out of a desire to not be a part of the Chrome problem (even though I know it's useless and I'm…

Until Mozilla gets the performance problems under control Performance is 1/2 of the reason that I prefer Mozilla. As one of those people that typically has 50-100 tabs open, the Firefox model for memory management is vastly superior. The other half of the reason is TreeStyleTab, again because I'm one of those zillion-tab users. Vertically-stacked tabs in a sidebar is the only way to manage that mountain of tabs - hor…

Not true in my experience.

I liked firefox on mobile for ability to use addons. But with some update it started being totally unresponsive and crashing my phone, so I switched back to chrome which happily displays ":)" with 100+ tabs open.

On mac firefox is eating battery faster than chrome.

I would like some alternative for phone - so I will maybe try vivaldi or brave or test firefox once again.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#117

Post by dmitriid » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 6:01 PM UTC

Yizahi wrote: post #46

sstangl wrote: post #11

As a Mozilla employee, speaking from my own limited perspective, it seems the company as a whole broadly agrees with this analysis even if it isn't vocalized quite this succinctly. Chrome started out being force-installed alongside Flash, and there is no solution to the bundling problem -- the problem is even larger in scale than the article suggests because of Chromebooks affecting desktop. People who use Firefox in…

Arguably Google is already abusing their monopoly power but in the way that people like. I'm talking about AMP. In the future AMP/regular page boundary will blur and Chrome/GSearch/AMPpages will merge in the ubiquitous googlenet hosted on google servers (because it will work better than regular internet pages). Almost everybody will be happy after this and Mozilla will fall into obscurity. Basically you can't create…

A recent example is how Chrome broke audio on a lot of websites https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/15/17358752/google-chrome-66...

I won't even link to the discussion in Chrome's bugtracker, Chrome team didn't even test the change, apparently.

They also actively build "Chrome-only" websites.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#118

Post by bryanlarsen » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 6:06 PM UTC

wvenable wrote: post #89

bad_user wrote: post #54

From TFA: >> " For developers, it’s one less browser engine to worry about " >> " For the open web: it’s complicated. If I were to put on the hat of a pragmatic developer, I fail to see the big gain in having competing browser engines. " The author does not understand web standards and probably doesn't remember IExplorer's monopoly and the era of " works best in IExplorer " websites. And what fewer and fewer people r…

The author says "Microsoft had a browser that sucked (IE6)." This is not true. Microsoft had the best browser -- fastest, most stable, and friendliest for development. They created many of the standards we now take for granted. IE was literally the Chrome of the day -- the best browser installed by default on the biggest operating system.

You're both right. At the beginning of it's reign in 2001 IE6 was way better than alternatives. In 2011 IE6 still had a 5% market share and was the bane of every developer's existence.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#119

Post by whizzkid » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 6:06 PM UTC

miles_matthias wrote: post #88

Great article. Discussion question - what incentives need to change to make Apple invest more in Safari? They've always been invested in native apps first and foremost, because that's where they make their money - the app stores. The other place they make their money is hardware. And it's hard to say you buy a MacBook or iPhone because of safari. You don't. So I just don't know what it will take for Apple to make sig…

Priorities change unfortunately. Read this article if you have time. It highlights the importance and passion that was given to safari at a time. I am sure most engineers working on safari are still having great ideas for the product but management will not be on the same page as them.

https://donmelton.com/2014/04/10/memories-of-steve/

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#120

Post by jhpriestley » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 6:06 PM UTC

Cynox wrote: post #5

If it had been introduced today, would PNaCl have been rejected which ultimately lead to a better solution (WASM), or would it have been broadly accepted since it had sufficient market reach though Chrome?

Five years on, asm.js/wasm has been completely rewritten, has almost no adoption from developers, and lacks many of the features from PNaCl ... it may turn out well eventually but I don't think it's a great success story for web standards.