10 ms·

I'm worried about Chrome's dominance, honestly. Google can basically dictate things the same way Microsoft did in the past. We are obviously not in quite the sa

by Ezhik 10y ago

I'm worried about Chrome's dominance, honestly. Google can basically dictate things the same way Microsoft did in the past. We are obviously not in quite the same situation - open source and all, but there have ready been several cases where Google just decided to do things, and other players in the field had no choice but to follow.

prohor 10y ago
Yes like this one - just dropping part of current SVG standard that was supported by all browsers. Without any notification and replacement it broke some sites. Why? Because it was too much code, low adoption and it is depreciated in SVG 2.0 draft. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=539385 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=539385
- tangue 10y ago
  Css regions was included in Canary and ousted because it was too much code too (and because basically the Chrome Team didn't like the spec.) And I'm not talking about the half baked html5 widgets like datepicker ...
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
  The comments in that thread are really saddening. I feel sorry for those developers that have suddenly had their applications broken for them on a whim by the Chromium team. I write JS code and deliver it to clients. What will I tell them when their website widgets break because Chrome removed SVG support entirely?
  - a3n 10y ago
    Give them a thumbnail explanation of what Chrome did, and suggest a more inclusive browser.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
      But they don't decide what browser their customers use.
      - a3n 10y ago
        Then suggest that they detect browsers, and put up a little non-distracting version of your thumbnail explanation to their customers. :) If this is truly distracting or breaking to your clients' customers, then someone is going to have to do or say something.
        Ezhik 10y ago
        The terrible truth is that consumers don't give a shit about standards, freedom, and the greater good. They just want the website to work with the least amount of effort possible.
        pawadu 10y ago
        Lets turn this around: The terrible truth is that some web devs don't give a shit about web standards. They just want the site to look good on their iMac with Safari. So now we have huge webkit emulation layers in all major browser...
        Ygg2 10y ago
        Or to turn it around: The terrible truth is that Chrome don't give a shit about standards, freedom, and the greater good. They just want to write their code with the least amount of effort possible, standards be damned.
      - pawadu 10y ago
        I don't understand your logic here. Are the costumers using Chrome? Then devs should test on Chrome too. Are the costumers NOT using Chrome? Then what is the problem??
        10y ago
  - codedokode 10y ago
    It is bad idea to rely on new features anyway. How will your website work in a 5-year-old browser?
    - themihai 10y ago
      Like on a 5 year old browser. Honestly, unless you develop for government I don't see any reason to consider 5 year old browsers. Do you develop apps for iPhone 1 or Android 1? The web is already behind anyway...
    - TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
      New features? Chrome was removing an old, standard web feature supported everywhere for years.
- chickenbane 10y ago
  Actually, Chrome dropping a feature that was removed from a spec, was a lot of code and had low adoption sounds like a good idea. Engineering is always about trade-offs, and choosing a good balance in Chrome is what made it so popular. The parent of this comment was worried about Chrome's "dominance", but remember Chrome was the last browser to the party. Safari's dominance appears to be the reason Firefox added -webkit prefixes. If you really think the SVG feature was important and Chrome should support it, then lobby for it to be part of the standard and for other web developers to use it. But it's not a great example of Chrome pushing its whim on others.
  - fphhotchips 10y ago
    Isn't that the point though? This is part of the standard, and was being used by developers. Not many developers, but then I'm pretty sure that there are parts of lots of standards that are barely used - doesn't mean we just go around taking them out because we feel like it. The best part of Firefox/Netscape/Chrome/Safari/Opera eating IE's lunch was that they all converged (roughly) on standards compliance, so we didn't have to have "Built for IE 6.0" stickers all over everything. Chrome ditching parts of the standard just because they don't like it is the fast track back to there.
  - prohor 10y ago
    Yes, but the problem it is part of current standard, 2.0 is still work in progress. Also alternative API from SVG 2.0 is not yet delivered by Chrome either as far as I know.
    - gsnedders 10y ago
      The Chrome team removed something that there was agreement across all browsers to deprecate, and which was made optional in a near-finished spec. Also, it's perfectly typical for drafts to be what implementers are targeting, as plenty of published specs receive almost no errata and any issues in them only get addressed in new revisions.
TheCowboy 10y ago
This is the right general idea to be concerned about. Chrome was, in my opinion, an attempt to undermine Microsoft's dominance. It was also a business strategy, since a browser monopoly by MS could be the death to www.google.com. (I think that there is enough desktop browser competition to keep things in check for now, but it could become a problem.) I think a bigger potential threat is the dominance of Apple and their control over iOS with the requirement that "Apps that browse the web must use the iOS WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript" and other platform restrictions.
- vbezhenar 10y ago
  What iOS dominance are you talking about? Android has larger market share, last time I checked. Even if that's not true in some regions, it's not dominance at all. If people don't like iOS restrictions, they can use Android, it's very competitive platform. Don't forget that Windows is really the only universal desktop operating system. OS X hard wired to Macs and Linux has really tiny share on desktop market. So those laws about monopolists can be applied to Windows, but with iOS it's a very different situation.
  - oneplane 10y ago
    It doesn't matter how big the OS is if the users don't use the browser. I'm not sure what the numbers are this year, but it's been iOS's browser and iOS's AppStore that has the most activity and/or money.
    - SomeCallMeTim 10y ago
      >iOS's AppStore that has the most activity and/or money. iOS AppStore has higher total sales so far, but the difference isn't that great, and Android is due to pass the AppStore in about 2018 [1]. I've seen a phone vs tablet breakdown that implied Android phone app sales actually surpassed iOS a few years ago, but I can't find it now. The huge difference was in iPad app sales which were much higher than Android, and it would be easy to believe that the difference in overall app revenues per store was made up by the difference in tablet revenues. [1] http://www.androidauthority.com/play-store-revenue-growth-2018-406474/ http://www.androidauthority.com/play-store-revenue-growth-20...
skrowl 10y ago
This exactly. Too many people make Chrome sites and Chrome apps instead of WEB apps.
btgeekboy 10y ago
Open source only matters to an extent. If Google's the primary source of committers, they can reject patches. And if a patch is rejected, sure you can fork, but your new browser will have 0 marketshare.

by Ezhik 10y ago

prohor 10y ago

Yes like this one - just dropping part of current SVG standard that was supported by all browsers. Without any notification and replacement it broke some sites. Why? Because it was too much code, low adoption and it is depreciated in SVG 2.0 draft. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=539385 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=539385

tangue 10y ago
Css regions was included in Canary and ousted because it was too much code too (and because basically the Chrome Team didn't like the spec.) And I'm not talking about the half baked html5 widgets like datepicker ...
TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
The comments in that thread are really saddening. I feel sorry for those developers that have suddenly had their applications broken for them on a whim by the Chromium team. I write JS code and deliver it to clients. What will I tell them when their website widgets break because Chrome removed SVG support entirely?
- a3n 10y ago
  Give them a thumbnail explanation of what Chrome did, and suggest a more inclusive browser.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
    But they don't decide what browser their customers use.
    - a3n 10y ago
      Then suggest that they detect browsers, and put up a little non-distracting version of your thumbnail explanation to their customers. :) If this is truly distracting or breaking to your clients' customers, then someone is going to have to do or say something.
      - Ezhik 10y ago
        The terrible truth is that consumers don't give a shit about standards, freedom, and the greater good. They just want the website to work with the least amount of effort possible.
        pawadu 10y ago
        Lets turn this around: The terrible truth is that some web devs don't give a shit about web standards. They just want the site to look good on their iMac with Safari. So now we have huge webkit emulation layers in all major browser...
        Ygg2 10y ago
        Or to turn it around: The terrible truth is that Chrome don't give a shit about standards, freedom, and the greater good. They just want to write their code with the least amount of effort possible, standards be damned.
    - pawadu 10y ago
      I don't understand your logic here. Are the costumers using Chrome? Then devs should test on Chrome too. Are the costumers NOT using Chrome? Then what is the problem??
      - 10y ago
- codedokode 10y ago
  It is bad idea to rely on new features anyway. How will your website work in a 5-year-old browser?
  - themihai 10y ago
    Like on a 5 year old browser. Honestly, unless you develop for government I don't see any reason to consider 5 year old browsers. Do you develop apps for iPhone 1 or Android 1? The web is already behind anyway...
  - TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
    New features? Chrome was removing an old, standard web feature supported everywhere for years.
chickenbane 10y ago
Actually, Chrome dropping a feature that was removed from a spec, was a lot of code and had low adoption sounds like a good idea. Engineering is always about trade-offs, and choosing a good balance in Chrome is what made it so popular. The parent of this comment was worried about Chrome's "dominance", but remember Chrome was the last browser to the party. Safari's dominance appears to be the reason Firefox added -webkit prefixes. If you really think the SVG feature was important and Chrome should support it, then lobby for it to be part of the standard and for other web developers to use it. But it's not a great example of Chrome pushing its whim on others.
- fphhotchips 10y ago
  Isn't that the point though? This is part of the standard, and was being used by developers. Not many developers, but then I'm pretty sure that there are parts of lots of standards that are barely used - doesn't mean we just go around taking them out because we feel like it. The best part of Firefox/Netscape/Chrome/Safari/Opera eating IE's lunch was that they all converged (roughly) on standards compliance, so we didn't have to have "Built for IE 6.0" stickers all over everything. Chrome ditching parts of the standard just because they don't like it is the fast track back to there.
- prohor 10y ago
  Yes, but the problem it is part of current standard, 2.0 is still work in progress. Also alternative API from SVG 2.0 is not yet delivered by Chrome either as far as I know.
  - gsnedders 10y ago
    The Chrome team removed something that there was agreement across all browsers to deprecate, and which was made optional in a near-finished spec. Also, it's perfectly typical for drafts to be what implementers are targeting, as plenty of published specs receive almost no errata and any issues in them only get addressed in new revisions.

TheCowboy 10y ago

This is the right general idea to be concerned about. Chrome was, in my opinion, an attempt to undermine Microsoft's dominance. It was also a business strategy, since a browser monopoly by MS could be the death to www.google.com. (I think that there is enough desktop browser competition to keep things in check for now, but it could become a problem.) I think a bigger potential threat is the dominance of Apple and their control over iOS with the requirement that "Apps that browse the web must use the iOS WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript" and other platform restrictions.

vbezhenar 10y ago
What iOS dominance are you talking about? Android has larger market share, last time I checked. Even if that's not true in some regions, it's not dominance at all. If people don't like iOS restrictions, they can use Android, it's very competitive platform. Don't forget that Windows is really the only universal desktop operating system. OS X hard wired to Macs and Linux has really tiny share on desktop market. So those laws about monopolists can be applied to Windows, but with iOS it's a very different situation.
- oneplane 10y ago
  It doesn't matter how big the OS is if the users don't use the browser. I'm not sure what the numbers are this year, but it's been iOS's browser and iOS's AppStore that has the most activity and/or money.
  - SomeCallMeTim 10y ago
    >iOS's AppStore that has the most activity and/or money. iOS AppStore has higher total sales so far, but the difference isn't that great, and Android is due to pass the AppStore in about 2018 [1]. I've seen a phone vs tablet breakdown that implied Android phone app sales actually surpassed iOS a few years ago, but I can't find it now. The huge difference was in iPad app sales which were much higher than Android, and it would be easy to believe that the difference in overall app revenues per store was made up by the difference in tablet revenues. [1] http://www.androidauthority.com/play-store-revenue-growth-2018-406474/ http://www.androidauthority.com/play-store-revenue-growth-20...

skrowl 10y ago

This exactly. Too many people make Chrome sites and Chrome apps instead of WEB apps.

btgeekboy 10y ago

Open source only matters to an extent. If Google's the primary source of committers, they can reject patches. And if a patch is rejected, sure you can fork, but your new browser will have 0 marketshare.