Live data from Hacker News

What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

mnot.net

241–250 of 356 posts

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#241
post #4

We don't have to speculate, we've been through this already during the IE4 to IE6 era. Microsoft just did whatever they wanted with the web "platform", and so will Google. In Microsoft's case what they wanted was nothing . They weren't a web business, saw it as a threat to their platform leverage, and so just left it abandoned and stagnant for years. Google is simultaneously better and worse: they won't leave it stag…

I'm sure this is an unpopular opinion, but, IMO, the web was better for users and devs back then.

For users, IE6 was an era of unrivaled simplicity where the essential hypertext purpose was already fulfilled. Trident (its layout engine) wasn't great but it got the job done. And that same era spawned alternative browsers around that engine, the same way we have Chromium derivatives today, where the real innovation happened. Tabs, ad/popup blocking, easy per-site searching, auto-cookie cleaning, etc. were all present in browsers like NetCaptor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetCaptor) or Maxthon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxthon), which all used IE. Nobody had to worry about "will this page work in my browser".

For devs, IE6 was the closest thing to a real standard the Web ever saw... more than at any time before or since. Its monopoly created a much stronger de facto web standard than anything the W3C has tried to coerce or the WHATWG has tried to suggest. It allowed innovation around a common web layout, in terms of browser features, instead of overloading the DOM with flashy interactives that nobody asked for.

Then ActiveX came and went, competed with Java applets, Flash took over, Firefox and Webkit started taking off, Javascript got more powerful... and Microsoft's beautiful walled garden collapsed. What do we have to show for it, two decades later? Slower pages with unnecessary complexity, written in transpiled languages ten layers deep, with a UX more focused on dark patterns than getting to the point. What's your typical complex web app... Gmail? It's good, sure, but in replacing Eudora, we ended up with the messiest, jankiest, hackiest ecosystem in the history of consumer computing.

It was really too bad Microsoft was the one who got away with IE6's monopoly. If it had been a proper browser vendor who took (and maintained) control from the early days, the web would be a much cleaner ecosystem, like the walled garden app stores we have today.

Even today, we're back in the same situation with on iOS, where every browser is just WebKit underneath. iOS web browsing is thus a lot cleaner than than crapfest on Android, where every browser ships their own renderer and no two cheap Android phones ever render the same website the same way.

Frankly, I'm just not sure it's worth it? Twenty years of web dev later, and honestly I think it's just gotten worse. Most people still just want to look up restaurant hours or send a message to their friends or whatever. The rest is crust.

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#242

I think it's very unlikely that the web will end up Chromium-only. macOS-specific browser share numbers are hard to come by, but on our own moderately sized website we see about 60% of macOS users choosing Safari. Even if iOS allows other browser engines, presumably a similarly large number of iOS users would also choose Safari, either because it's the default or because they like it. So regardless of what happens wi…

If anything, I'd expect Safari share to grow since competition might kick Apple to improve their browser to be a true equivalent or better competitior to Chrome.

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#243
post #242

I think it's very unlikely that the web will end up Chromium-only. macOS-specific browser share numbers are hard to come by, but on our own moderately sized website we see about 60% of macOS users choosing Safari. Even if iOS allows other browser engines, presumably a similarly large number of iOS users would also choose Safari, either because it's the default or because they like it. So regardless of what happens wi…

If anything, I'd expect Safari share to grow since competition might kick Apple to improve their browser to be a true equivalent or better competitior to Chrome.

The opposite seems true right now, with Apple deciding to improve its proprietary ecosystems (app store, swift, etc.) and letting WebKit stagnate. There's a lot that Gecko and Blink can handle but Safari struggles with, seemingly by design. Apple doesn't want a strong web-based ecosystem because that means their competitors can use it too, vs the iOS/macOS only stuff.

If they wanted to, they could switch Safari to Blink just like everyone else did, but still keep adding features on top of it (privacy, iCloud integration, whatever), the same way Microsoft does.

No user asks for a different layout engine, that's corporations fighting with different values and priorities. The differentiating features for users are layers above that and arguably held back by renderer differentiation.

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should convert browsers in to just a basic wasm window responsible for rendering html and running wasm. Then JavaScript and all it’s apis can become a shared library as a wasm package or something.

I'm not convinced that JavaScript is the difficult part. HTML/CSS rendering seems far more challenging.

It's the interaction of JS with HTML and CSS, combined with the expectation that all browsers will implement everything in ways that are functionally identical. Current "web platform" specs are in the form of algorithms/pseudocode rather than descriptions of desired behavior.

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#245

I'm not a webdev so I mostly don't care as long as it's FOSS, but I will say that firefox loads a lot faster than chromium on my machine. Looking at top it appears that somehow firefox is actually using more memory than chromium is (i only tested a three tabs open in each browser so maybe they don't scale the same under heavier load) but at the same time I can report anecdotally that in addition to being slower, chro…

> but I will say that firefox loads a lot faster than chromium on my machine. which machine??? genuinely curious

intel i9-9900 3.60GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, and a 6TB 7200RPM SATA HDD running manjaro

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like confusing "open-source" Android, AOSP and Play Services: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on... >While Android is open, it's more of a "look but don't touch" kind of open. You're allowed to contribute to Android and allowed to use it for little hobbies, but in nearly every area, the deck is stacked against anyone trying to use Android without Google's blessing. The second you try to…

The difference is, AOSP on its own is unusable, but Chromium Is.

AOSP on its own was perfectly usable, in the early days. That frog has been thoroughly boiled.

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#247
post #4

We don't have to speculate, we've been through this already during the IE4 to IE6 era. Microsoft just did whatever they wanted with the web "platform", and so will Google. In Microsoft's case what they wanted was nothing . They weren't a web business, saw it as a threat to their platform leverage, and so just left it abandoned and stagnant for years. Google is simultaneously better and worse: they won't leave it stag…

You fail to mention that IE was closed source while Chromium is open source. That's a completely different situation. We already have a number of Chromium based browsers that go against some of Google's most fundamental interests (e.g Brave).

Is someone maintaining a significantly different version of the chromium engine that I'm not aware of? Google can always change the license on Chromium as well which would require a hard fork and basically you end up with diverging versions. No we need multiple (or at least two browser engines) browsers.

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open source without the option for an alternate development organisation to drive or steer development direction means vey little. Costs matter, and Web development costs are high. Google benefits from coordination, funding, and one migh presume, cost advantages, which would be exceedingly difficult for any comparable US or EU effort to match. Development in lower-cost-of-living regions, perhaps most viably China, mi…

>Open source without the option for an alternate development organisation to drive or steer development direction means vey little. Open source is that option. The economics of starting from scratch vs starting from Chromium's latest commit are fundamentally different. I'm not saying that it's easy, only that it is not remotely comparable to the IE situation.

You are ignoring the fact that Google can start making changes to make it incompatible on a scale that a small team of open source maintainers couldn't hope to keep up with.

Re: What will a Chromium-only Web look like?

#250
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only reason they disallow Chromium and Mozilla is they want their users locked into their environment and they want to leverage that substantial locked-in user base to dictate terms That's one reason, but not the only reason. Security is another big one in that the WebKit process is running with privileges that Apple does not want to award to any other app process on the platform, much less a third-party one. T…

Having a smartphone battery that lasts more than an hour is also a pretty good reason. It’s like the skepticism over the Steve Jobs “Flash” memo… why do nerds have such a hard time accepting that Apple might actually be sincere about wanting to make a decent product?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN