Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

blogs.windows.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 304 posts

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#161

Post by paulie_a »

taf2 wrote: post #138
tombert wrote: post #22

I'm assuming I'm not the only one who's afraid of Blink becoming the new Internet Explorer; instead of people following a web standard, they'll follow what's Chrome-compatible. It's still better because Chromium is open-source, but I do worry that we're going to have a problem in the future with a lot of broken sites (YTMND-style).

This is not even close to comparable. I’ve said in other threads the issue with IE and really IE6 - was for multiple years Microsoft did zero development. The browser didn’t patch zero day exploits for months or even a whole year. Fundamentally IE6 was an extension of Windows via ActiveX controls. The layout bugs were permanent. Remember zoom:1, hack to fix a layout issue or just float:right etc... Blink is open sour…

I can't find any current stats in ie6 but the delay to upgrading was a pain point. While I wanted to just blacklist the browser from websites I was responsible for with a gigantic banner. I unfortunately didn't get that latitude. I just stopped caring if it worked or not for them. If a user complained I directed them their tech department. At a certain point I'm not supporting your internal outdated website because it requires an outdated browser.

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#163

Post by Yoric »

simonsarris wrote: post #36
tombert wrote: post #22

I'm assuming I'm not the only one who's afraid of Blink becoming the new Internet Explorer; instead of people following a web standard, they'll follow what's Chrome-compatible. It's still better because Chromium is open-source, but I do worry that we're going to have a problem in the future with a lot of broken sites (YTMND-style).

> instead of people following a web standard, they'll follow what's Chrome-compatible The browser vendors taking the lead over standards committees is how we got this far into HTML5, especially including Apple's/Safari's decision to ditch flash, and the WHATWG actually moving us forward vs the W3C. Unless Blink has a history or an expectation of deprecating serious functionality in the future, is it really so bad if…

This is a good question. Let me give you an example.

Let's imagine for instance that Google develops something called "Google Pay". Let's now imagine that WHATWG works on something called "WebPay".

In a multiple-engines world, there would be pressure for Blink to support (and keep supporting) most major credit cards & payment mechanisms to let users pay using WebPay.

In a single-engine world, one single manager at Google will have sufficient power to decide that WebPay supports only Google Pay.

Feel free replace Google Pay and WebPay by any other technology strategic to Google.

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#164

Post by jbob2000 »

no_wizard wrote: post #118

I'm still shocked that they went the Chromium route here. This would have been their chance to really, well, for lack of a better way of putting it: stick it to Google [0] I think it would have been far, far more impressive to use Quantum ( https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum ) or WebKit ( https://webkit.org ), with the added benefit that nw.js is already up and going for the Webkit engine (and likely would have suffice…

With a strong Microsoft voice on the Chromium project, it will probably act as a counter to the Google voice. And Quantum and WebKit are nowhere close to Chromium, they're picky to a fault about HTML and CSS, it's just annoying to develop for them.

Nobody is competing on browser market share any more, that's a lost cause. With so much traffic going to mobile and apps now, it just doesn't make sense to be re-inventing the wheel when they could be investing in features that actually matter.

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#165

Post by partiallypro »

I'm wondering why they decided to keep the Edge brand. It seems dropping it and the "e" logo all together would be ideal. The logo beit IE or Edge has negative emotions for many users. I am excited for this though, because I will probably make the Microsoft browser my default once it launches since it will finally have access to the vast Chrome extension library. But, I still think they will struggle with adoption just from a branding standpoint.

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#166

Post by holtalanm »

bad_user wrote: post #135
holtalanm wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but if Microsoft is moving to Blink, wouldn't they, as well, have (as you say) influence on the project? What, really, is a downside to having an open-source web engine that all browsers use? I'm failing to see one. The web would become less fragmented; the web standard would be (only slightly) irrelevant, and we would move forward without having to deal with browsers interpreting the spec/standard differently, which…

> but if Microsoft is moving to Blink, wouldn't they, as well, have (as you say) influence on the project? No. 1. Chrome will remain the dominant web browser 2. the Chromium repository itself is owned by Google The only leverage Microsoft is in forking Chromium, but that does nothing to Chrome's market. Google themselves forked WebKit when they couldn't get along with Apple. And that was back when Chrome wasn't as pe…

well, if you look at it now, webkit is BY FAR not the dominant engine.

So, by your own logic, if Microsoft ends up in a disagreement with Google about the direction of chromium, whats to stop them from just forking it and becoming the new dominant engine?

Chrome will only remain the dominant web browser as long as its users view it as worth the hassle. If Edge is built upon chromium in the future, I'm not going to sit here and say that Chrome will remain the dominant browser following that.

We can sit here and talk about 'what ifs' all day.

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#167

Post by Yoric »

pcwalton wrote: post #123
munificent wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bad state to be in is: * There is a number of implementations of the same platform. * Those implementations are competing and the market encourages them to be in -compatible with each other. You can avoid that bad state by having an explicit standard and applying pressure on all implementations to meet that standard. It usually comes at the expense of slower innovation. But another viable way to avoid tha…

So whether the Web can run on Rust-based parallel engine components should be beholden to the reporting structure at Google? Let's be clear: that is the future you are advocating.

...or whether the web can/should support any technology that could possibly threaten Google's dominance.

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#168

Post by Yoric »

pcwalton wrote: post #123
munificent wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bad state to be in is: * There is a number of implementations of the same platform. * Those implementations are competing and the market encourages them to be in -compatible with each other. You can avoid that bad state by having an explicit standard and applying pressure on all implementations to meet that standard. It usually comes at the expense of slower innovation. But another viable way to avoid tha…

So whether the Web can run on Rust-based parallel engine components should be beholden to the reporting structure at Google? Let's be clear: that is the future you are advocating.

Also, congrats for Rust 2018 :)

Re: Microsoft Edge and open source collaboration

#169

Post by kodablah »

Klathmon wrote: post #79
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #5

Man, this sucks. I really wish they had open sourced their new engine and stuck with it. I would have volunteered time porting it to Linux/POSIX as well.

This is probably going to get a bit "rant-ey", it's not directed at you, but at the ecosystem at large (and kind of at myself). Everyone keeps saying this, but nobody is actually doing anything about it. People (myself included) talk about how a monoculture is bad, but we still don't use Edge. We talk about how more competition in the browser space is a good thing, but we still complain when the latest features or se…

> But I can't blame anyone but myself, because I don't use Edge

The problem is not with you or other users, the problem is with using adoption as a metric to determine success/failure of a browser. Sure FF needs adoption for funds, but for companies funded outside of that model a browser needs a BDFL not subject to the whims of adoption levels during different internet periods for us to have a vibrant ecosystem. But it won't happen because renderer implementation count is the least important and most costly metric.

IMO, what's happening here is not based (mostly) on adoption, rather it's about upkeep. The level of effort for browser maintenance outweighs its value for most regardless of user count. Hence the want to leverage existing codebases, share code, and add little flexibility that would exponentially expand the maintenance surface area. This will remain the general trend until a new form of hypertext (or a reduced form of existing) is in widespread use with the goal of implementation ease instead of just targeting ease. I don't suspect that'll happen anytime soon either if ever.

Post reply on HN