5 ms·

There are some similarities, but it's not an identical situation. When IE6 was parked and browsers were considered 'done', it was a closed source monolith tigh

There are some similarities, but it's not an identical situation. When IE6 was parked and browsers were considered 'done', it was a closed source monolith tightly coupled to the dominant OS. Today Chromium is open source, even if Chrome isn't, and browsers are used on a greater variety of operating systems. Just as it's common for an owner of a new Mac or PC to install Chrome as a first task, there are no technical reasons why something else couldn't be the dominant choice - just familiarity and inertia. Those things change. The other reason things are slightly different is because of better compliance with Web standards. For a web developer in the late 90's, it was easy to get drawn in to using Microsoft's proprietary tinkering with the DOM (only now are they able to resist the temptation to EEE, probably not through choice or natural instinct). Browsers now put much more emphasis on standards compliance, making web site and app portability common and expected.

bad_user 8y ago
The fact that Chromium is open source is completely irrelevant. Fact of the matter is that Google controls its development, which means that whatever they push in Chrome becomes a de facto standard. DRM for HTML to prevent ads from being blocked? Sure. Want to bet it will happen due to Google and Chrome? We've got the same situation with Android too. That AOSP is open source is completely irrelevant, it's still a Google controlled monopoly, nobody can fork it due to the massive resources required and Google can effectively coerce phone makers into doing whatever they want via the threat of blocking access to Google Play. The blind spot and double standard people have for Chrome and Android is huge. --- Also, do you know what's most hilarious? People switching to Chromium-derived browsers to get away from Google. I can almost hear the evil laugh from Mountain View.
- timrichard 8y ago
  Run Firefox on Cyanogenmod. Sites will still work. > Fact of the matter is that Google controls its development, which means that whatever they push in Chrome becomes a de facto standard. Which is why webp, webm, Amp has dominated over other standards? > Want to bet it will happen Weak speculation. The context under discussion was "fully taken over yet", and "dominant".
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    AMP, certainly. It’s a horrible solution that really on has any traction because Google is the backs it heavily.
- m45t3r 8y ago
  > The fact that Chromium is open source is completely irrelevant. Of course it is relevant. The fact that I can run Chrome in Linux/macOS/Windows means I am not forced to run some OS just to get compatibility with sites that I use. This is completely different from IE6/7 era, where in some cases it was impossible to use Linux/macOS simply because you had a site compatible with only IE. BTW, I use Firefox, and I don't remember the last time that a site doesn't work in Firefox. > DRM for HTML to prevent ads from being blocked? Sure. Want to bet it will happen due to Google and Chrome? This is simply FUD. Does Google have the power to do it? Sure. Does it mean it will do it? Don't know, this is why it is FUD. > We've got the same situation with Android too. That AOSP is open source is completely irrelevant, it's still a Google controlled monopoly, nobody can fork it due to the massive resources required and Google can effectively coerce phone makers into doing whatever they want via the threat of blocking access to Google Play. Another FUD. Yeah, people can fork it and we even have a big example that is FireOS from Amazon. Sure, Amazon is even bigger than Google so they have the massive resources required, however it can happen.\ > People switching to Chromium-derived browsers to get away from Google. I can almost hear the evil laugh from Mountain View. This is completely irrelevant. People who use alternative browser are not simply using it "because it is not code from Google", but generally wants some features that Chrome does not offer (at least by default). The three major Chromium-forks (Brave, Opera and Vivaldi) are not focusing in "we're not Google", they're focusing in having new features.

bad_user 8y ago

The fact that Chromium is open source is completely irrelevant. Fact of the matter is that Google controls its development, which means that whatever they push in Chrome becomes a de facto standard. DRM for HTML to prevent ads from being blocked? Sure. Want to bet it will happen due to Google and Chrome? We've got the same situation with Android too. That AOSP is open source is completely irrelevant, it's still a Google controlled monopoly, nobody can fork it due to the massive resources required and Google can effectively coerce phone makers into doing whatever they want via the threat of blocking access to Google Play. The blind spot and double standard people have for Chrome and Android is huge. --- Also, do you know what's most hilarious? People switching to Chromium-derived browsers to get away from Google. I can almost hear the evil laugh from Mountain View.

timrichard 8y ago
Run Firefox on Cyanogenmod. Sites will still work. > Fact of the matter is that Google controls its development, which means that whatever they push in Chrome becomes a de facto standard. Which is why webp, webm, Amp has dominated over other standards? > Want to bet it will happen Weak speculation. The context under discussion was "fully taken over yet", and "dominant".
- saagarjha 8y ago
  AMP, certainly. It’s a horrible solution that really on has any traction because Google is the backs it heavily.
m45t3r 8y ago
> The fact that Chromium is open source is completely irrelevant. Of course it is relevant. The fact that I can run Chrome in Linux/macOS/Windows means I am not forced to run some OS just to get compatibility with sites that I use. This is completely different from IE6/7 era, where in some cases it was impossible to use Linux/macOS simply because you had a site compatible with only IE. BTW, I use Firefox, and I don't remember the last time that a site doesn't work in Firefox. > DRM for HTML to prevent ads from being blocked? Sure. Want to bet it will happen due to Google and Chrome? This is simply FUD. Does Google have the power to do it? Sure. Does it mean it will do it? Don't know, this is why it is FUD. > We've got the same situation with Android too. That AOSP is open source is completely irrelevant, it's still a Google controlled monopoly, nobody can fork it due to the massive resources required and Google can effectively coerce phone makers into doing whatever they want via the threat of blocking access to Google Play. Another FUD. Yeah, people can fork it and we even have a big example that is FireOS from Amazon. Sure, Amazon is even bigger than Google so they have the massive resources required, however it can happen.\ > People switching to Chromium-derived browsers to get away from Google. I can almost hear the evil laugh from Mountain View. This is completely irrelevant. People who use alternative browser are not simply using it "because it is not code from Google", but generally wants some features that Chrome does not offer (at least by default). The three major Chromium-forks (Brave, Opera and Vivaldi) are not focusing in "we're not Google", they're focusing in having new features.