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

WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

joeyh.name

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 226 posts

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#21

Post by kolinko »

ghusto wrote: post #14
jillesvangurp wrote: post #9

> So there are only 2 web browser engines, and it seems likely there will soon only be 1, and making a whole new web browser from the ground up is effectively impossible because the browsers vendors have weaponized web standards complexity against any newcomers. Maybe eventually someone will succeed and there will be 2 again. Best case. What a situation. The premise of this article seems completely wrong. Chromium, S…

> Chromium, Safari, Firefox. And a longtail of half implemented alternatives. But the point is that there are 3 independent browser engines that are fairly widely used. Come on, you can't say that with a straight face. Safari exists because Apple has a monopoly on iOS traffic, and therefore an financially significant portion of mobile traffic. As soon as their rigid fingers are pried loose of that (which we're seeing…

I switched to Safari from Chrome on MacOS and never looked back. Way faster and kinder to battery. Also, it doesn’t push Google or any other login onto me.

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#22

Post by neuroelectron »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #9

> So there are only 2 web browser engines, and it seems likely there will soon only be 1, and making a whole new web browser from the ground up is effectively impossible because the browsers vendors have weaponized web standards complexity against any newcomers. Maybe eventually someone will succeed and there will be 2 again. Best case. What a situation. The premise of this article seems completely wrong. Chromium, S…

The "weaponization of complexity" is real—modern web standards are an endless labyrinth of APIs, performance optimizations, and security requirements. Large players like Google have the resources to dictate how the web evolves, while any newcomer faces insurmountable hurdles in achieving compatibility, security, and speed. Even major tech companies have tried and failed (e.g., Microsoft ditching EdgeHTML for Chromium).

Can anyone do anything about it? Google’s control is inevitable. No one can meaningfully compete with Google in the long run. Keeping up with compatibility alone is a full-time job for massive teams—which is why even Microsoft gave up on EdgeHTML and switched to Chromium.

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#23

Post by torlok »

You can already do this. You don't need a special browser. This approach always sounds great until you consider how native input, text selection, copy-paste, etc. behave on mobile. Not to mention accessibility, screen readers, and so on.

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#24

Post by abdellah123 »

Browsers are dead anyway ... Most people visit Google, AI chat, fb, instagram and TikTok. For devs, it's same + HN & github. The point is that it's less than 15 websites (at least the top level ones), not counting where they take you to next!

What's coming is a malleable OS that runs natively + in the browser ! probably uses WASM and that breaks the barriers between apps. I need to build one to show my point.

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#25

Post by fresh_geezer »

spankalee wrote: post #5

This post is so wrong and right at the same time. On the set up: First, there are 3 major engines, and even if Gecko dies there will be two. Second, both users and developers want a more capable web. Don't blame browser vendors for giving it to them. The web is wildly successful because of its continued evolution, and if it stopped evolving, native mobile apps would have beaten the web back even more. WASM could inde…

> WASM could indeed make for a simple, yet powerful, web-like platform, and I hope to see this!

Careful what you wish for. WASM-rendered pages could spell the end of ad-blockers and other extensions that modify or read page content. You'll have only binary blobs being downloaded rendering something on a canvas surface.

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#26

Post by lillecarl »

onion2k wrote: post #18
Maledictus wrote: post #4

yeah, maybe, but I fear ad blocking would be much harder.

The most effective ad blocker is choosing not to use websites that display ads. That won't ever change.

Insightful, which search engine do you use? Where do you buy things online? How do you keep in touch with relatives?

If your answers are "Kagi, no online purchases (or reviews), phone calls" sure... But it's not the world we live in

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#27

Post by tonyedgecombe »

ghusto wrote: post #14
jillesvangurp wrote: post #9

> So there are only 2 web browser engines, and it seems likely there will soon only be 1, and making a whole new web browser from the ground up is effectively impossible because the browsers vendors have weaponized web standards complexity against any newcomers. Maybe eventually someone will succeed and there will be 2 again. Best case. What a situation. The premise of this article seems completely wrong. Chromium, S…

> Chromium, Safari, Firefox. And a longtail of half implemented alternatives. But the point is that there are 3 independent browser engines that are fairly widely used. Come on, you can't say that with a straight face. Safari exists because Apple has a monopoly on iOS traffic, and therefore an financially significant portion of mobile traffic. As soon as their rigid fingers are pried loose of that (which we're seeing…

>As soon as their rigid fingers are pried loose of that (which we're seeing the beginnings of), that's gone.

It would be rather ironic if that leads to less browser choice and us all being slightly worse off.

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#28

Post by ahmedfromtunis »

aredox wrote: post #12
skerit wrote: post #8

Funny to read this: > So there are only 2 web browser engines, and it seems likely there will soon only be 1, and making a whole new web browser from the ground up is effectively impossible because the browsers vendors have weaponized web standards complexity against any newcomers Ladybird seems to be thriving. Sure, they themselves only plan on releasing a beta version next year, but still. And it's even on the Hack…

What is ladybug's marketshare? Does it work flawlessly with "This webpage works better with Chrome" webpages? It is not even mentioned on https://caniuse.com/?search=web%20components

I spend a lot of time on the internet and try to avoid the socials, so I visit a healthy variety of websites of all kinds.

But I never encountered a single "works better with chrome" message. Am I missing something?

Re: WASM Wayland Web (WWW)

#29

Post by OvbiousError »

torlok wrote: post #23

You can already do this. You don't need a special browser. This approach always sounds great until you consider how native input, text selection, copy-paste, etc. behave on mobile. Not to mention accessibility, screen readers, and so on.

My first thoughts exactly. How do you prevent this from turning into what we had with flash if you don't provide the framework to build the UI components.
Post reply on HN