4 ms·

I remember writing websites at that time. Developers were worried about there being "yet another browser to support". It was a big deal because supporting all

I remember writing websites at that time. Developers were worried about there being "yet another browser to support". It was a big deal because supporting all the browsers was already a lot of work. Nothing rendered consistently. Javascript would run fine in one browser, but not in other. You got to deal with fun features like quirks mode and worrying about transparent pngs. You had to use Flash if you wanted to embed a video. The web is a completely different place today. Everything renders consistently across the different browsers - even Edge for the most part. Javascript is a modern language now. Video/audio embeds were finally standardized. Layout tools are significantly better with flexbox and soon, grid. The idea that we were at some web standards pinnacle in 2008-2012 is crazy to me. The pinnacle is now.

mstade 8y ago
> The idea that we were at some web standards pinnacle in 2008-2012 is crazy to me. The pinnacle is now. I don't think the point was that we were at a pinnacle in terms of standards quality, completeness, or user agent consistency. Rather I think the point – at least it for me – was that during those years it was more of a conversation, not Google choosing a direction and everyone else more or less forced to follow suit. We are certainly in a better spot today in terms of capability, I agree, but I'm not sure I'd agree that we're in a better spot in terms of collaboration.
- SquareWheel 8y ago
  At what time has there been better collaboration between browser vendors than right now? That is the reason that browsers are so well in sync with each other now.
  - mstade 8y ago
    Well that's the argument, isn't it? Collaboration doesn't mean necessarily mean being in sync or following suit. When there's a hegemony then a level of collaboration might still exist, but if the interests don't align with the dominant party they can just go ahead anyway and more or less force others to fall in line – e.g. EME. Even if everyone syncs up, it's not necessarily good collaboration. Conversely, the dominant party can choose to just ignore other's contributions and ideas if their interests don't align, effectively making those contributions largely pointless. Whether or not you agree is one thing, but I hope my point is clearer now anyways. :o)
    - SquareWheel 8y ago
      Thanks for being respectful and well-reasoned in your response. My opinion is that the collaboration is probably the best it's ever been right now. The example I gave lower down in this thread is that when WebAssembly was introduced, the Chrome team decided to deprecate their own solution, PNaCl. We're far from the days of ActiveX. https://blog.chromium.org/2017/05/goodbye-pnacl-hello-webassembly.html https://blog.chromium.org/2017/05/goodbye-pnacl-hello-webass...
      - mstade 8y ago
        > Thanks for being respectful and well-reasoned in your response. Likewise! WebAssembly is a very good counter example, but still my feeling – or fear, really – is that this is not in spite of Google's hegemony but because of it. Let's say they hadn't gotten on board with WebAssembly and instead doubled down on PNaCL or come up with a different competing proposal. Even if all other parties rallied around WebAssembly there's a very good chance the dominance of Google would make it stillborn. If it's not in Chrome, it's simply not worth bothering, purely due to its dominance. I recognize though that this is a bit of a straw man argument, and one based more in my opionins and feelings in the matter rather than anything resembling objective truths. I suppose that's also why we'll have to agree to disagree. :o) > We're far from the days of ActiveX. Thankfully!
        SquareWheel 8y ago
        Cheers! It's a difficult thing to quantify anyway, so agreeing to disagree sounds good to me. Do enjoy your weekend!

mstade 8y ago

> The idea that we were at some web standards pinnacle in 2008-2012 is crazy to me. The pinnacle is now. I don't think the point was that we were at a pinnacle in terms of standards quality, completeness, or user agent consistency. Rather I think the point – at least it for me – was that during those years it was more of a conversation, not Google choosing a direction and everyone else more or less forced to follow suit. We are certainly in a better spot today in terms of capability, I agree, but I'm not sure I'd agree that we're in a better spot in terms of collaboration.

SquareWheel 8y ago
At what time has there been better collaboration between browser vendors than right now? That is the reason that browsers are so well in sync with each other now.
- mstade 8y ago
  Well that's the argument, isn't it? Collaboration doesn't mean necessarily mean being in sync or following suit. When there's a hegemony then a level of collaboration might still exist, but if the interests don't align with the dominant party they can just go ahead anyway and more or less force others to fall in line – e.g. EME. Even if everyone syncs up, it's not necessarily good collaboration. Conversely, the dominant party can choose to just ignore other's contributions and ideas if their interests don't align, effectively making those contributions largely pointless. Whether or not you agree is one thing, but I hope my point is clearer now anyways. :o)
  - SquareWheel 8y ago
    Thanks for being respectful and well-reasoned in your response. My opinion is that the collaboration is probably the best it's ever been right now. The example I gave lower down in this thread is that when WebAssembly was introduced, the Chrome team decided to deprecate their own solution, PNaCl. We're far from the days of ActiveX. https://blog.chromium.org/2017/05/goodbye-pnacl-hello-webassembly.html https://blog.chromium.org/2017/05/goodbye-pnacl-hello-webass...
    - mstade 8y ago
      > Thanks for being respectful and well-reasoned in your response. Likewise! WebAssembly is a very good counter example, but still my feeling – or fear, really – is that this is not in spite of Google's hegemony but because of it. Let's say they hadn't gotten on board with WebAssembly and instead doubled down on PNaCL or come up with a different competing proposal. Even if all other parties rallied around WebAssembly there's a very good chance the dominance of Google would make it stillborn. If it's not in Chrome, it's simply not worth bothering, purely due to its dominance. I recognize though that this is a bit of a straw man argument, and one based more in my opionins and feelings in the matter rather than anything resembling objective truths. I suppose that's also why we'll have to agree to disagree. :o) > We're far from the days of ActiveX. Thankfully!
      - SquareWheel 8y ago
        Cheers! It's a difficult thing to quantify anyway, so agreeing to disagree sounds good to me. Do enjoy your weekend!