Google just realizes it cannot pretend to be a nice guy when the world no longer spins around it. So much for "do no evil"...
Your comment should've been downvoted into oblivion by now. I guess HN has changed a bit. You brought no argument to support your idea, just throwing mud.
Sometimes forking is necessary, even in open source projects, some party feels the majority or the leaders of that open source project take it into a wrong direction. That's what happened to LibreOffice, too.
To me it sounds like a good thing. We end up with 3 major rendering engines on the desktop; Gecko (Firefox), Trident (IE) and Blink (Opera and Chrome) and 2 major on mobile Blink (Opera and Chrome) and Webkit (Safari). This I think will help shake up some of monoculture. Chrome definitely doesn't have any level of domination over the enterprise market like IE6 on Windows did. That was the problem with IE6 not the bro…
What does Dolphin use? I don't even bother opening Firefix Chrome on Android, they just aren't up to Dolphins level.
Funny how when Opera deprecates its engine in favor of WebKit we all make a big deal about how it's bad for everyone. But when Google spins off their own version, we vilify them too... For real?
I don't think it has much to do with anything. Opera used Webkit because they had no choice. It was that or dying. Google forks webkit because even thus they have a massive control over it, they don't have _enough_ control. There are still things other contributors refuse loud enough. Well, like Dart. Or the implementation of Webkit2. Or what not. Since Google has the major browser marketshare, they're like "wait a m…
With Google, Opera (and probably others) leaving, is WebKit going to be able to sustain itself as an entity separated from Apple?
To me it sounds like a good thing. We end up with 3 major rendering engines on the desktop; Gecko (Firefox), Trident (IE) and Blink (Opera and Chrome) and 2 major on mobile Blink (Opera and Chrome) and Webkit (Safari). This I think will help shake up some of monoculture. Chrome definitely doesn't have any level of domination over the enterprise market like IE6 on Windows did. That was the problem with IE6 not the bro…
What does Dolphin use? I don't even bother opening Firefix Chrome on Android, they just aren't up to Dolphins level.
Extensively modified WebKit, I believe (at least compared to the system WebKit on Android). That being said, given that their customized engine targets Android, I suspect it is more likely than not that they'll switch to Blink.
Does that actually matter? All these are as well: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd208104.aspx Would you consider building on top of them? No because they are not 100% vendor neutral. They serve the vendor, not the consumers of the technology.
Microsoft has a history of being hostile to the open-source and free-software communities. They release "shared source" code under licenses with onerous terms or encumbered with patents. In the event that an open-source project built on their technology becomes popular, Microsoft attempts to smother it (for example, see their treatment of Mono). I trust Google about as much as I trust Red Hat, Canonical, or any other…
I trust Google about as much as I trust Red Hat, Canonical, or any other company with a history of friendly interaction with the community
Sorry but I have say, WTF is this? You are employed by Google https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=jmillikin . Can you imagine a current employee saying "I don"t trust my [current employer]" and still expect to show up to work again at 8.30am? How much weight should we give to your "trust"?
To me it sounds like a good thing. We end up with 3 major rendering engines on the desktop; Gecko (Firefox), Trident (IE) and Blink (Opera and Chrome) and 2 major on mobile Blink (Opera and Chrome) and Webkit (Safari). This I think will help shake up some of monoculture. Chrome definitely doesn't have any level of domination over the enterprise market like IE6 on Windows did. That was the problem with IE6 not the bro…
Which means getting Apple to allow other rendering engines on iOS should be an even bigger issue with Apple users in the future. Otherwise Safari will become the IE6 of iOS.
and firefox is the IE6 of firefox os ... what you are saying doesnt make sense. A mobile doesnt have to accept multiple browsers. Can you run chrome on WP8 ? no.
To me it sounds like a good thing. We end up with 3 major rendering engines on the desktop; Gecko (Firefox), Trident (IE) and Blink (Opera and Chrome) and 2 major on mobile Blink (Opera and Chrome) and Webkit (Safari). This I think will help shake up some of monoculture. Chrome definitely doesn't have any level of domination over the enterprise market like IE6 on Windows did. That was the problem with IE6 not the bro…
Which means getting Apple to allow other rendering engines on iOS should be an even bigger issue with Apple users in the future. Otherwise Safari will become the IE6 of iOS.
Actually, the issue is not "no choice in rendering engine", the issue (with IE6) was "a shitty rendering engine" - I for one don't care if Safari / Webkit remains the only rendering engine on iOS for eternity, as long as webpages work and look well. Because that's all that matters to me, as a consumer.
Which means getting Apple to allow other rendering engines on iOS should be an even bigger issue with Apple users in the future. Otherwise Safari will become the IE6 of iOS.
and firefox is the IE6 of firefox os ... what you are saying doesnt make sense. A mobile doesnt have to accept multiple browsers. Can you run chrome on WP8 ? no.
That's my point. You should be able to run other browsers on WP8 and Windows RT, too.
What if iOS or WP8 had Android's market share? Do you really think that would be good for the web? We just happen to be lucky to have Android, an OS that does allow other browser engines on it, to dominate right now.