4 ms·

Browser compat issues arose precisely because a dominant browser maker gave zero shit about standards, and what you call "pax chromana" is a repetition of that,

by pyrale 6y ago

Browser compat issues arose precisely because a dominant browser maker gave zero shit about standards, and what you call "pax chromana" is a repetition of that, with many webapps targeting only chrome. I understand that having the main browser actually decent is an improvement from the IE days, but for those of us that don't use chrome, the increasing tendency to only target one browser feels like a step back.

edgyquant 6y ago
It’s also that Chrome is derived from an open source core which allows companies like Microsoft to use their engine to compete with them. So it is better than the IE days in that way.
- nikitaga 6y ago
  Much good that "open source" will do you if you can't get a Widevine license from Google. https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/google-widevine-blocked-my-browser/ https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/google-widevine-blocked... And this bullshit even before "Pax Chromana". Imagine the things to come. It's like we've learned nothing.
  - srtjstjsj 6y ago
    Widevine is DRM so there's no reason for a freedom activist to want it.
    - nikitaga 6y ago
      This has nothing to do with "freedom activists". Besides, "freedom activists" don't need to watch news clips or youtube? Or are they so short-sighted they think DRM will remain limited to entertainment services like Netflix and Hulu? Do "freedom activists" want to live in a world where you need Google's permission to compete with their browser? Is that the kind of freedom they're activisming about? Freedom from the tyranny of non-Google choices?
treis 6y ago
>for those of us that don't use chrome, Sure, but that's like being one of the tribes of Europe before the Romans. When the tribes got crushed and everyone became Roman peace and prosperity (mostly) reigned. Having to use chrome if you don't want to sucks, but it makes things way easier for developers to have one browser to target.
- pyrale 6y ago
  > When the tribes got crushed and everyone became Roman peace and prosperity (mostly) reigned. Well, it didn't really go well for the tribes. About half of the gallic population was killed or enslaved. As for the romans, that war was started to reinforce the personal power of Caesar, and the power imbalance it generated led to the fall of the republic. I'm not sure your historic analogy makes a great case for your point. > it makes things way easier for developers to have one browser to target. What makes things easier for developers is standards. As for targetting one product present in a walled garden, it may be pleasant in the short term, but we have many cautionary tales about it, and Google is responsible for more than their fair share of them.

by pyrale 6y ago

edgyquant 6y ago

It’s also that Chrome is derived from an open source core which allows companies like Microsoft to use their engine to compete with them. So it is better than the IE days in that way.

nikitaga 6y ago
Much good that "open source" will do you if you can't get a Widevine license from Google. https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/google-widevine-blocked-my-browser/ https://blog.samuelmaddock.com/posts/google-widevine-blocked... And this bullshit even before "Pax Chromana". Imagine the things to come. It's like we've learned nothing.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Widevine is DRM so there's no reason for a freedom activist to want it.
  - nikitaga 6y ago
    This has nothing to do with "freedom activists". Besides, "freedom activists" don't need to watch news clips or youtube? Or are they so short-sighted they think DRM will remain limited to entertainment services like Netflix and Hulu? Do "freedom activists" want to live in a world where you need Google's permission to compete with their browser? Is that the kind of freedom they're activisming about? Freedom from the tyranny of non-Google choices?

treis 6y ago

>for those of us that don't use chrome, Sure, but that's like being one of the tribes of Europe before the Romans. When the tribes got crushed and everyone became Roman peace and prosperity (mostly) reigned. Having to use chrome if you don't want to sucks, but it makes things way easier for developers to have one browser to target.

pyrale 6y ago
> When the tribes got crushed and everyone became Roman peace and prosperity (mostly) reigned. Well, it didn't really go well for the tribes. About half of the gallic population was killed or enslaved. As for the romans, that war was started to reinforce the personal power of Caesar, and the power imbalance it generated led to the fall of the republic. I'm not sure your historic analogy makes a great case for your point. > it makes things way easier for developers to have one browser to target. What makes things easier for developers is standards. As for targetting one product present in a walled garden, it may be pleasant in the short term, but we have many cautionary tales about it, and Google is responsible for more than their fair share of them.