4 ms·
This isn't new, though. I think people forgive Google for more because they like them. IE did exactly the same thing before Chrome and was roundly (and rightly
by headmelted 9y ago
This isn't new, though.
I think people forgive Google for more because they like them. IE did exactly the same thing before Chrome and was roundly (and rightly) admonished for it.
In fairness, Chrome's proposals do seem to be designed with the open web in mind - at least insofar as being items that other projects could reasonably be expected to implement in their engines if they chose to do so.
There's nothing so egregious as IE's DirectX-filters-embedded-in-CSS nonsense - or shudder ActiveX - but it's still not great for the open web as a whole.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dao- 9y agoNaCl was as bad as ActiveX but less successful, thank God.
- headmelted 9y agoWas it though? I wasn't a fan of NaCl, and WebAssembly (for example) is a much better fit for an open web, but it was at least platform agnostic (if support was provided by the vendor) and ran in a reasonably strict sandbox. ActiveX was neither of these things. All that said, having any one browser be the standard is as terrible for the open web now as it was in IE's heyday. Just because Chrome is less awful doesn't solve the single-vendor problem.
- dao- 9y ago"If support was provided by the vendor" is a big if... Google was well aware of this inherent flaw but pushed NaCl regardless while at the same time promising for years that PNaCl would eventually solve all problems. PNaCl never really materialized, I think, and it feels like Google was throwing a smokescreen there to boost support and mindshare for NaCl.