4 ms·

B: I want a de-googled browser! I don't want my browser phoning home to Google! G: Ok, here's Chromium, with proprietary bits removed. B: You've removed access

B: I want a de-googled browser! I don't want my browser phoning home to Google! G: Ok, here's Chromium, with proprietary bits removed. B: You've removed access to proprietary Google APIs that allow the browser to send and store stuff on Google. G: Yeah, isn't that what you asked for? It's not very hard for someone to spec out an open protocol for an end-to-end browser profile sync service. Those who want complete control of privacy can then run their own servers/containers and sync their browser to them. Those who want Google integration can user Chrome, and later, write an extension that allows Chrome to also utilize whatever open sync protocol exists. There's too much whining, and too little coding. I think for the amount of time used to write articles like this, people could have already spec'ed out and MVP'ed such a service. This reminds me of the cypherpunks mailing list in the 90s. Like 95% of all the messages were political whining that X didn't exist, or Y doesn't do what they want, or bitching about the government. Eventually the hackers forked the 'coderpunks' mailing list, to work on actual solutions. Chromium is a giant gift horse of a codebase that doesn't need Google integration, because implementing a browser from scratch is almost like implementing Unix from scratch, it's an enormous undertaking. It works amazingly well in my Oculus Quest 2 with WebXR integration (and :( Facebook integration). Chromium is being used in wearables, smart home devices, automative dashboards, the same way linux is endlessly reused, even if the forks aren't all useful as desktop replacements. Thousands and thousands of products are being released thanks to OSS forks of AOSP, Chromium, or Linux, which if they didn't exist, would make life very hard for hackers and startup entrepreneurs who would have to pay enormous license fees, or do enormous amounts of work to bring up simple devices. I guess what I'm saying is, developers these days face a cornucopia of riches in the ecosystem, but instead, HN is filled full of threads of people virtue signaling like they're an oppressed minority population. There's a lot of things which are non-ideal about every major platform developers face, but the successful entrepreneurs shut out the noise, and find opportunities in filling in the gaps.

benjaminjosephw 6y ago
There's definitely room to be proactive here and build rather than complain but I think there's an issue to address beyond that. This is really anti-competitive behavior on a par with Microsoft's Embrace Extend Extinguish model[0]. Chromium filled a gap in the OSS market but, because it has non-free services baked in and provided without charge, it was able to outperform real FOSS alternatives. Removing access to those propriety features/services after the market has matured is like this leaves a much bigger gap that's much harder to fill than it would have been back when the market wasn't as mature. I think we do need to roll-up our sleeves and focus on building/supporting better alternatives but it's also important to be able to call out where the playing-fields aren't level so we can better cheer on those Davids willing to take on Goliath. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
- cromwellian 6y ago
  What’s the evidence that Chrome’s market share is due to sync and not due to a) arriving at a time when IE was terrible with speed and security and b) a huge marketing campaign behind it You’re chalking up people switching to Chrome as being attracted to proprietary backend featured, without any evidence.

benjaminjosephw 6y ago

There's definitely room to be proactive here and build rather than complain but I think there's an issue to address beyond that. This is really anti-competitive behavior on a par with Microsoft's Embrace Extend Extinguish model[0]. Chromium filled a gap in the OSS market but, because it has non-free services baked in and provided without charge, it was able to outperform real FOSS alternatives. Removing access to those propriety features/services after the market has matured is like this leaves a much bigger gap that's much harder to fill than it would have been back when the market wasn't as mature. I think we do need to roll-up our sleeves and focus on building/supporting better alternatives but it's also important to be able to call out where the playing-fields aren't level so we can better cheer on those Davids willing to take on Goliath. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

cromwellian 6y ago
What’s the evidence that Chrome’s market share is due to sync and not due to a) arriving at a time when IE was terrible with speed and security and b) a huge marketing campaign behind it You’re chalking up people switching to Chrome as being attracted to proprietary backend featured, without any evidence.