4 ms·
This is terrible advice. It would mean that Google, by controlling Chromium, has complete and unchallenged ownership of the Web. You are suggesting one of Googl
by ocdtrekkie 6y ago
This is terrible advice. It would mean that Google, by controlling Chromium, has complete and unchallenged ownership of the Web. You are suggesting one of Google's last remaining competitors in the space just fold and go home. At that point, we might as well literally just unplug everything and call the Internet experiment over.
Do. Not. Use. Chromium.
- stingraycharles 6y agoWell there’s still Safari, but I agree, it’s looking terrible for the open internet right now.
- moogly 6y agoSafari is macOS/iOS only.
- se32point1 6y agoWebKit, the enginge for Safari, is not. Epiphany uses the same engine and is available for Linux. I'm sure there's a Windows WebKit browser as well.
- marmaduke 6y agoQt has a WebKit thingy so you can build a WebKit browser across platforms even in Python: https://pywebview.flowrl.com/ https://pywebview.flowrl.com/
- CameronNemo 6y agoThey are pushing the Blink engine now instead, though...
- filleduchaos 6y agoFunnily enough, the PlayStation line uses WebKit as the engine for its web browser
- hvis 6y agoSafari is still more or less the same engine as Chrome. Even after the fork.
- esprehn 6y agoThe internals of Chrome and Safari have diverged dramatically since the fork (which was 7 years ago). Chrome has done multiple huge projects that changed how things work at a fundamental level like Oilpan (using a C++ garbage collector), LayoutNG (a full rewrite of the layout part of the engine from the ground up), Slimming Paint (a full rewrite of the compositing and painting system), and Site Isolation. Blink and WebKit are pretty different engines with very different behavior, bugs, and performance characteristics.
- Scarbutt 6y agoIf Mozilla could maintain and develop Firefox then they can also maintain/develop a complex Chromium fork.