Do we know why Google grew dissatisfied with Apple and forked Webkit?
I believe Google felt that WebKit was too bloated for their taste. When they forked they ripped out quite a bit of code they did not need.
We Need Chrome No More
61–70 of 536 posts
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#62More like we need Google no more.
You always find the smartest bunch in these threads. Proof: not a single downvoted comment so far.
But with all your smarts why aren't you building search engines? Is it because you think that with superior tech we can't beat Google? I think it will come down to precisely that. Don't you see how easy it would be for someone who specializes in search to beat an opponent who specializes in ads?
Edit: I should clarify. What I meant was, start specializing in search, or we're all dead. Dead meat. By the hands of the Android.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#63I enjoyed this post, but I take issue with the idea that Chrome was initially adopted, or served, "to break the Web free from corporate greed." Chrome's appeal was primarily technical. Each tab got its own process and could crash without taking down the entire browser. No one else had this at the time, and it was a big deal because Flash was still widespread so sites were even less stable than they are today. Luckily…
It still is behind technically isn't it? Does Firefox support Site Isolation yet?
No, Firefox doesn't have Site Isolation. It's a planned feature addition.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#64I enjoyed this post, but I take issue with the idea that Chrome was initially adopted, or served, "to break the Web free from corporate greed." Chrome's appeal was primarily technical. Each tab got its own process and could crash without taking down the entire browser. No one else had this at the time, and it was a big deal because Flash was still widespread so sites were even less stable than they are today. Luckily…
> Chrome's appeal was primarily technical. Each tab got its own process and could crash without taking down the entire browser. Curious, I remember speed being the primary reason. Google invented V8 (the javascript engine), with some pretty decent optimizations and a well-working JIT on i386/amd64 platforms. At the time when chromium came out, it handled some JS-heavy applications very nicely that Firefox struggled w…
You would need to break web standards compatibility to fight the current bloat cycle on the web. But it might happen, a simpler, faster web.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#65I enjoyed this post, but I take issue with the idea that Chrome was initially adopted, or served, "to break the Web free from corporate greed." Chrome's appeal was primarily technical. Each tab got its own process and could crash without taking down the entire browser. No one else had this at the time, and it was a big deal because Flash was still widespread so sites were even less stable than they are today. Luckily…
> Each tab got its own process and could crash without taking down the entire browser. No one else had this at the time IE8 Beta 1 shipped March 5, 2008; Chrome's beta release wasn't till September. OK, admittedly, Chrome's stable release happened before IE8's, but MS was working on much the same thing.
[deleted]
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#66> Ten years ago, we needed Google Chrome to break the Web free from corporate greed
Firefox already did this. We needed Chrome because Firefox lagged behind in performance and was a memory hog.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#67Other than AMP, I can't really think of a case that I would characterize as "Google abusing its position" w.r.t. Open Web. It was Chrome that led the push for PWAs, which I think is both great for the Open Web and consumers... The author complains about other vendors being "called laggards", which - let's be honest - we're really talking about how long Apple/Safari dragged their feet on Service Workers... and they _should_ be called out for that because it was an incredibly cynical thing to do to protect their walled App garden from the Open Web.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#68I find posts like this kind of interesting. Chrome gained prominence because it had great performance improvements over the competition -- IE and Firefox. IE in particular was dog slow at all times, and Chrome ran everything at least as well and almost always better. Firefox didn't have process isolation when Chrome came onto the scene, and that kind of knocked it for security and stability. It's not as if people swi…
>It's not as if people switched just because it had Google branding. Everyone switched because it was quantifiably better. The knowledgeable minority, maybe. _Most_ people switched because Google pushed it like a piece of adware. Bundling it with other software installers, prompting you to use it whenever you use Google search or other products, and bundling it with an OS.
If that was the deciding factor we'd still be using IE.
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#69Do we know why Google grew dissatisfied with Apple and forked Webkit?
Do we know why Google grew dissatisfied with sites serving their own content and developed AMP?
Re: We Need Chrome No More
#70There is an important difference between Google and Microsoft. Google is using their market dominance to push their opinions on the open standards bodies; Microsoft used their market dominance to ignore standards bodies completely.
The standards are unimplementably complex. Open but inaccessible is not useful for fostering competitors.