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

I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

adayinthelifeof.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 501 posts

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#241

Post by zdunn »

grishka wrote: post #181
ilaksh wrote: post #24

"Writing a browser" (from scratch) at this point basically means you are implementing a type of portable operating-system-in-a-box (the web platform) and that it will be compatible with whatever Google decides to add to theirs. The browser is so comprehensive in functionality and APIs, and such a challenge to keep up with Google's constant churn of new features and total dominance, that not even Microsoft could do it…

> The browser is so comprehensive in functionality and APIs Not really. If you limit your scope by saying that you're building a hypertext document viewer , it suddenly becomes approachable. A lot of the functionality is all that PWA stuff no one asked for and no one is using for anything good anyway. WebSQL? IndexedDB? Service workers? WebGL? WebGPU? WebBluetooth? WebRTC? Just act like it all doesn't exist. 99% of a…

I asked for it, and a lot of other ppl did too. These are great features and removing them would cause more than 1% of websites to lose some functionality.

But, importantly, they shouldn't lose their core functionality (if they're written well) because that's the "Progressive" part of PWA. If you don't use the feature or your browser doesn't support it, the website should still have basic functionality. One of the big ideas behind PWAs is "progressive enhancement", where you layer on features that may not be supported everywhere but add value when they are supported.

And a progressively built browser that doesn't implement every spec goes hand-in-hand with that. I think having more under-featured browsers like that would push webdevs into caring more about progressive enhancement.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#242

Post by JohnFen »

ynniv wrote: post #172
phkahler wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> As you do, I find the discourse around tech to be a pit of dismissiveness, avoidance, denial, resignation, and learned-helplessness. Do you think this is why people are abandoning the GPL license in favor of MIT/BSD? Something about the fight the GPL aims to win being a hopeless fantasy? In the face of the sentiment you and OP express, I'd think GPL usage would be widespread.

As a developer my problem with the GPL is that it's less free than other licenses. It's an interesting legal hack, but it can only succeed in its goals by boiling the ocean. I just want to write things, and sometimes making money involves not publishing all of your source code. Having to choose between options and idealism limits the popularity of GPL projects.

> I just want to write things, and sometimes making money involves not publishing all of your source code.

This is why I do both. I copyleft some projects. Others, I don't. It all depends on the balance of needs.

Although, for me, the issue isn't releasing source code at all. That's orthogonal to the issue of whether or not to use an open source license. I have yet to release software, open source or otherwise, where I haven't made the source available. For my non-OSS projects, that source is only available to people who have purchased the software, though.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#243

Post by zdunn »

grishka wrote: post #223
nfw2 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"PWA stuff no one asked for" You don't speak for everybody.

I've yet to see someone take a PWA seriously.

Aren't you the developer of Smithereen (a fediverse server)? Nearly every other fediverse software has a web interface that can act as a PWA. I launch lemmy.ml and kbin.social as standalone PWAs from my homescreen. My pleroma instance also has some PWA features (though not standalone display mode). I don't use Mastodon, but @nolan@toot.cafe did some amazing work years ago to make it a really fast and responsive PWA (which has since been undone ).

It's ok if you don't like to use PWAs but that doesn't mean nobody does or that they're worthless.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#244

Post by JohnFen »

Good for you!

I've been considering doing something similar. I can't find a browser that really makes me comfortable or happy, so my thought is that the only solution is to write my own.

It would certainly not be full-featured or be able to deal with the full HTML spec -- but for me, that's a positive, not a negative.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#245

Post by nicoburns »

atlasduo wrote: post #94
jaytaph wrote: post #59

OP here. Thanks for the pos/neg/neutral comments everybody. Some remarks: Yes, there are a lot of browsers out there where I can contribute to which would be more efficient. But that would result in just a few browsers instead of a lot of browsers. I'm all for the last one, as this would give people options. This IS a pet project. I never told anyone otherwise. I would start writing it even when I wasn't fed up with…

I wish more people gave a shot at browser implementations. You see a lot of comments that this in a herculean task, and maybe it is, but it's not _that_ bad. You don't have to implement all of the functionality of modern web browsers. You don't need battery APIs, game controller APIs, USB, etc. Focus on what is important - HTML, CSS, JS. Worst case scenario - you will learn something new. Best of luck on this project…

I think it probably is that bad if you the approach it as this person is currently doing: not using any libraries at all. If you use existing libraries for HTML parsing, CSS parsing, layout algorithms, graphics rendering, etc, then I think I think it's doable.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#246

Post by nicce »

rendall wrote: post #180
nicce wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there have been already notifications in Google's services that this will fully work only in Chrome.

I use Firefox with Gmail every day and have never seen such a message.

Not in Gmail, but for example, in Google Cloud webui.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#247

Post by thecleaner »

jaytaph wrote: post #59

OP here. Thanks for the pos/neg/neutral comments everybody. Some remarks: Yes, there are a lot of browsers out there where I can contribute to which would be more efficient. But that would result in just a few browsers instead of a lot of browsers. I'm all for the last one, as this would give people options. This IS a pet project. I never told anyone otherwise. I would start writing it even when I wasn't fed up with…

OP you go write that code and profile and make sure you get some real world feedback on it. I hope it DOES result in a real functional browser.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#249

Post by zdunn »

ilaksh wrote: post #97
davedx wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Writing a browser" (from scratch) at this point basically means you are implementing a type of portable operating-system-in-a-box (the web platform) and that it will be compatible with whatever Google decides to add to theirs. I'll bite... why? Most websites follow HTML and ECMAScript. Why do you need to do anything Google does? Isn't the whole point of this project to decouple from what big tech companies do? The…

Study the Microsoft and Firefox projects to see why it turns out that way. The basic thing I am saying is that if you call it a web browser and use the same core protocols etc., you have a practically infinite (for an individual) set of requirements to implement and will never be truly compatible. What ideas like Tersenet and systems like Gemini propose is similar to what you say, except even simpler. HTML and ECMASc…

> The basic thing I am saying is that if you call it a web browser and use the same core protocols etc., you have a practically infinite (for an individual) set of requirements to implement and will never be truly compatible

But what the parent is saying is you don't have to be compatible with 100% of websites. If you build a browser with good HTML/CSS/Javascript handling, you'll be compatible with the large majority of the web. Yes, there are other specs that are in use by a tiny portion of the web. But your browser can still exist if it doesn't support them. Users of that website will know or find out that they can't use your browser for that, but for every other user that browser could be exactly what they need.

> without having to worry about a fuzzy and ever-expanding definition of what you have to support.

It's only ever-expanding if you're trying to keep up with the Jones's. You can define a subset of the web you want to support and build a clean, small browser that supports that.

Re: I'm fed up with it, so I'm writing a browser

#250

Post by 93po »

nonrandomstring wrote: post #72
jaytaph wrote: post #59

OP here. Thanks for the pos/neg/neutral comments everybody. Some remarks: Yes, there are a lot of browsers out there where I can contribute to which would be more efficient. But that would result in just a few browsers instead of a lot of browsers. I'm all for the last one, as this would give people options. This IS a pet project. I never told anyone otherwise. I would start writing it even when I wasn't fed up with…

> I get angry about not being able to do anything about anything. And this is my way of trying to do something about it. It's the best I can do. This attitude is gold, and it's what changes the whole world. What you said about the misery of "news" resonates with me. In psyops we call it "sapping". Propaganda designed to demoralise, dispirit and corrode resistance used to come from our enemies . The classic example wa…

It’s unfortunate that the message discussing enemies was flagged. Maybe it needed to be said in a better way?

The US government is undeniably often working against the best interests of its citizens.

Corporations, corporate news, and advertisers are also working against our best interests. Im not sure any mindful and reasonable person would refute this.

However I will be charitable in saying that I don’t think they’re making us hopelessly anxious to subjugate us. They’re doing it because it’s profitable

Post reply on HN