Opera? Plus with their switch to Blink on the horizon, even the old complaints about rendering compatibility are soon to be moot.
> Duh! Chrome, Youtube, Maps, Android and virtually everything serve Google's $$$$ making efforts. Following the above logic wouldn't Opera not fit the bill either, considering it serves only to make money for Opera?
If Opera was non-free or pushed Opera owned services, then I would agree. But they don't.
This is just a personal opinion, but for a browser I'd always support and use a not-for-profit one. No matter how fast, or perceptibly fast, an offering from a business entity is. Here is why: 1. Tomorrow you, the billion dollar enterprise, will force real identity even more vehemently. 2. I certainly don't want to see a constant hum of ads. 3. I don't want to turn my computer into a wide-mouth bucket for chrome apps…
Current popular browsers are: * Firefox * Chrome / Chromium * Internet Explorer * Safari * Opera All of them are produced with the aim of benefiting their parent corporations in some way -- for example, Mozilla Corp rents the default search engine setting to Google for hundreds of millions per year. I currently use Firefox and Chromium as my primary browsers, because they are the only popular browsers that are open-s…
Let's all take a deep breath and contemplate the times when we have been as self-assuredly wrong as the author of the above comment. Here's to civil discussion that shores up the spots in life where we're ignorant.
“Currently, the majority of WebKit reviewers are from Google (95), with Apple coming in second (59)... Google is also currently responsible for the vast majority of commits to the WebKit repository...” Doubtful.
Numbers are doubtful? I mean, sure, one could fabricate them, but why, especially if he can easily be caught doing it? Those are things anybody can verify by looking at the repository stats. Here's what I found with a cursory look: Google has overtook Apple in commits 2-3 years already: http://blog.bitergia.com/2013/02/06/report-on-the-activity-o... Older stats (already Google on top): http://neugierig.org/software/c…
Sorry, I meant that the suggestion in the comment I was replying to (that Google was forking because they couldn't get their changes in) was doubtful, not that the figures I quoted from the article were doubtful (I was using them as justification for my comment).
> Duh! Chrome, Youtube, Maps, Android and virtually everything serve Google's $$$$ making efforts. Following the above logic wouldn't Opera not fit the bill either, considering it serves only to make money for Opera?
If Opera was non-free or pushed Opera owned services, then I would agree. But they don't. In fact, how does Opera generate income?
“Currently, the majority of WebKit reviewers are from Google (95), with Apple coming in second (59)... Google is also currently responsible for the vast majority of commits to the WebKit repository...” Doubtful.
Do you have any proof that the statement is false?
No, I was using the statement to cast doubt on the parent comment's suggestion.
And then I got a good night's sleep, waking up to find that I'd communicated the opposite of what I meant and that it's too late to edit my comment.
Well, talk about taking your ball and going home. News like this is something I would have assumed from Apple rather than Google (based on the amount of code they've contributed).
Maybe it's political, maybe it's technical but this is a bit of news I expected yet didn't see coming.
Yes, and I suspect that Firefox is, at least, not going to work against the way it makes its money (ads) but the alternative browsers have bigger conflicts of interest.
It's interesting to see open-source foundations get corporate patrons. Like Ubuntu's relation with Amazon.
That's always been the case. (Linux For any project to succeed, it's going to need some kind of funding. And often that means turning to big businesses, who have deeper pockets than all of us little people combined.
Please, when you make a new project, please, please don't use a pre-existing English word. Perl? Great name. Searchable. You won't be contaminated and neither will you contaminate others. Tumblr? Same thing. Python? Well, has a lot of groundswell so now tech 'owns' the name, but you contaminate other people's search. Rust? (or a million other projects without python's heft) The reverse issue. Blink also has the probl…
'Chrome' used to refer to the GUI elements that surround a webpage - scrollbars, back button etc. Google changed that.
Google will effectively Google-bomb the web development word 'blink' too. It is no big loss.