4 ms·
Interesting bit of history. Thanks for this article. I'm curious, though, how the fact that Chromium is open-source will change this dynamic, because the ethos
by jeromebaek 8y ago
Interesting bit of history. Thanks for this article. I'm curious, though, how the fact that Chromium is open-source will change this dynamic, because the ethos of open source seems directly against the idea of Google abusing their control over Chromium.
- walterbell 8y agoHow about removing URLs in favor of legal names for website publishers (demo given by Google earlier this year)? Where can users go if they still want YouTube to work well?
- btilly 8y agoWhat is abuse? Do you mean rolling a new protocol in Chrome without warning that magically makes Google faster because they rolled it out on their end as well? This already happened with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPDY https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPDY. As long as what they do is technically good and not too heavy-handed, developers won't resist. In fact it is likely to be welcomed. But the effect will constantly leave Google a half-step ahead of everyone else on the upgrade train. After all it isn't hurting developers, it is just leaving Google with a slightly better competitive edge.
- myrryr 8y agoPretty much this, technically good and not too heavy-handed is a lot better than we are used to from anyone else.
- mulmen 8y agoFirefox is Open source. Does Mozilla control what standards get adopted on the most used platforms? Or which ones influence your search ranking and traffic? No, because Mozilla don't own them, Google does. The problem is not Google having a browser, open or closed. The problem is all the influence Google has elsewhere.