6 ms·

Exactly how many browser engines do we need? There's currently Blink(Chrome|Edge|Brave), Gecko(Firefox), and WebKit(Safari and various OSS browsers). With web

Exactly how many browser engines do we need? There's currently Blink(Chrome|Edge|Brave), Gecko(Firefox), and WebKit(Safari and various OSS browsers). With web technology standards, it doesn't really make sense that there would be that much competition, so having 3 competing engines seems sufficient to me.

the1pato 8y ago
WebKit* Webpack is a bundler.
- ravenstine 8y ago
  LOL Thanks for the correction.
mbell 8y ago
I'm sure some won't like this comment, but there are only two that matter: Chrome and Safari. Firefox's share is about the same as IE 11 (2.0 -> 2.5%).
- Insanity 8y ago
  Where do you get those numbers? This indicates FF to be around 10% still: https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?options=%7B%22filter%22%3A%7B%22%24and%22%3A%5B%7B%22deviceType%22%3A%7B%22%24in%22%3A%5B%22Desktop%2Flaptop%22%5D%7D%7D%5D%7D%2C%22dateLabel%22%3A%22Trend%22%2C%22attributes%22%3A%22share%22%2C%22group%22%3A%22browser%22%2C%22sort%22%3A%7B%22share%22%3A-1%7D%2C%22id%22%3A%22browsersDesktop%22%2C%22dateInterval%22%3A%22Monthly%22%2C%22dateStart%22%3A%222018-05%22%2C%22dateEnd%22%3A%222019-04%22%2C%22segments%22%3A%22-1000%22%7D https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?opt... EDIT: This is on laptop/desktop. Without the device filter it's about 5%. But then again, I don't think it comes by default on any Mobile OS, so they have a disadvantage there. Plus non power users of their smartphone (like me) might not change the browser there.
- ravenstine 8y ago
  That's may be true, but that doesn't mean Firefox/Gecko isn't a viable alternative just because fewer people are choosing to use it. In fact, I think it demonstrates my point that people don't need competing browser engines that badly because they aren't radically different. There was a time where IE was hemorrhaging users to Firefox, but that was because Firefox legitimately did things better than IE/Trident. At this point, however, our expectations of what a web browser should do are fairly solidified, so people are likely going to choose whatever is being marketed to them the most and comes installed on many Android phones by default.
- IceWreck 8y ago
  > Firefox's share is about the same as IE 11 (2.0 -> 2.5%). No? Most browser share analysis put FF at #2 (9-10%), for desktop/laptops and at #3 (5-6%) for mobile.
  - HunOL 8y ago
    In minds of developers/managers/testers. I find too often sites that do not work correctly in Firefox.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
shados 8y ago
We need enough as to be reasonable competing point of views when it comes to setting standards. Things like web components, service workers, built-in javascript modules and more were pretty meh features pushed really hard by a specific browser vendor that tried to ignore feedback/pushback. The only way the standards won't get to be more of a mess is if we have multiple implementations and multiple, distinct organizations having opinions on the specs and implementation. A world where Blink has 80%+ marketshare (which is pretty much what we have or where we're headed) is one where a single group can dictate the standard for everyone else.
- gridlockd 8y ago
  Do we even need more standards though? The standardization process takes a lot of time and just because something is a standard doesn't mean major players will implement it. Implementations always trump. Browsers are basically an operating system now. For comparison, nobody cares that the Linux kernel isn't a standard. Nobody wants a "competing" Linux kernel implementation. The implementation itself is the standard and reference and that's totally fine. The problem with looming IE dominance in the old days was that it was closed-source and proprietary, but that's not the case with modern day engines. In the FOSS world, competition isn't really a big driver. It just causes redundant work. > A world where Blink has 80%+ marketshare (which is pretty much what we have or where we're headed) is one where a single group can dictate the standard for everyone else. That's just not true. Any piece of software can be transformed into another piece of software. If <Upstream> really wants some feature I don't want, I can patch it out. If I publish some feature that <Upstream> thinks is good, they can just merge it. Of course it would be good if <Upstream> was more like the LLVM-Foundation and not "literally Google", but the point is that having just one engine isn't the same as one party controlling the implementation. Microsoft obviously understands this, or they wouldn't choose Chromium as the new basis for Edge.
  - shados 8y ago
    > That's just not true Its true enough: it keeps happening. Patch it out or resist all you want, it doesn't matter if you have to acknowledge and deal with its existence, if only because of the amount of energy it takes to push back against it. If it doesn't have a feature you want because they disagree, you can add it to your browser of choice, but it doesn't matter because you still won't be able to use it. It's exactly what we're seeing with firefox. They could implement feature XYZ, but it would be irrelevant because no one (web developers) could use it.
meruru 8y ago
Blink and WebKit are basically the same though. I'm not sure if they should be counted separately. How much WebKit existing helps prevent Google from taking control of the web?

the1pato 8y ago

WebKit* Webpack is a bundler.

ravenstine 8y ago
LOL Thanks for the correction.

mbell 8y ago

I'm sure some won't like this comment, but there are only two that matter: Chrome and Safari. Firefox's share is about the same as IE 11 (2.0 -> 2.5%).

Insanity 8y ago
Where do you get those numbers? This indicates FF to be around 10% still: https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?options=%7B%22filter%22%3A%7B%22%24and%22%3A%5B%7B%22deviceType%22%3A%7B%22%24in%22%3A%5B%22Desktop%2Flaptop%22%5D%7D%7D%5D%7D%2C%22dateLabel%22%3A%22Trend%22%2C%22attributes%22%3A%22share%22%2C%22group%22%3A%22browser%22%2C%22sort%22%3A%7B%22share%22%3A-1%7D%2C%22id%22%3A%22browsersDesktop%22%2C%22dateInterval%22%3A%22Monthly%22%2C%22dateStart%22%3A%222018-05%22%2C%22dateEnd%22%3A%222019-04%22%2C%22segments%22%3A%22-1000%22%7D https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?opt... EDIT: This is on laptop/desktop. Without the device filter it's about 5%. But then again, I don't think it comes by default on any Mobile OS, so they have a disadvantage there. Plus non power users of their smartphone (like me) might not change the browser there.
ravenstine 8y ago
That's may be true, but that doesn't mean Firefox/Gecko isn't a viable alternative just because fewer people are choosing to use it. In fact, I think it demonstrates my point that people don't need competing browser engines that badly because they aren't radically different. There was a time where IE was hemorrhaging users to Firefox, but that was because Firefox legitimately did things better than IE/Trident. At this point, however, our expectations of what a web browser should do are fairly solidified, so people are likely going to choose whatever is being marketed to them the most and comes installed on many Android phones by default.
IceWreck 8y ago
> Firefox's share is about the same as IE 11 (2.0 -> 2.5%). No? Most browser share analysis put FF at #2 (9-10%), for desktop/laptops and at #3 (5-6%) for mobile.
- HunOL 8y ago
  In minds of developers/managers/testers. I find too often sites that do not work correctly in Firefox.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

shados 8y ago

We need enough as to be reasonable competing point of views when it comes to setting standards. Things like web components, service workers, built-in javascript modules and more were pretty meh features pushed really hard by a specific browser vendor that tried to ignore feedback/pushback. The only way the standards won't get to be more of a mess is if we have multiple implementations and multiple, distinct organizations having opinions on the specs and implementation. A world where Blink has 80%+ marketshare (which is pretty much what we have or where we're headed) is one where a single group can dictate the standard for everyone else.

gridlockd 8y ago
Do we even need more standards though? The standardization process takes a lot of time and just because something is a standard doesn't mean major players will implement it. Implementations always trump. Browsers are basically an operating system now. For comparison, nobody cares that the Linux kernel isn't a standard. Nobody wants a "competing" Linux kernel implementation. The implementation itself is the standard and reference and that's totally fine. The problem with looming IE dominance in the old days was that it was closed-source and proprietary, but that's not the case with modern day engines. In the FOSS world, competition isn't really a big driver. It just causes redundant work. > A world where Blink has 80%+ marketshare (which is pretty much what we have or where we're headed) is one where a single group can dictate the standard for everyone else. That's just not true. Any piece of software can be transformed into another piece of software. If <Upstream> really wants some feature I don't want, I can patch it out. If I publish some feature that <Upstream> thinks is good, they can just merge it. Of course it would be good if <Upstream> was more like the LLVM-Foundation and not "literally Google", but the point is that having just one engine isn't the same as one party controlling the implementation. Microsoft obviously understands this, or they wouldn't choose Chromium as the new basis for Edge.
- shados 8y ago
  > That's just not true Its true enough: it keeps happening. Patch it out or resist all you want, it doesn't matter if you have to acknowledge and deal with its existence, if only because of the amount of energy it takes to push back against it. If it doesn't have a feature you want because they disagree, you can add it to your browser of choice, but it doesn't matter because you still won't be able to use it. It's exactly what we're seeing with firefox. They could implement feature XYZ, but it would be irrelevant because no one (web developers) could use it.

meruru 8y ago

Blink and WebKit are basically the same though. I'm not sure if they should be counted separately. How much WebKit existing helps prevent Google from taking control of the web?