3 ms·

Isn't the future of applications on the browser only possible because the current browser leader (Google) isn't actively fighting cross OS support? Because what

Isn't the future of applications on the browser only possible because the current browser leader (Google) isn't actively fighting cross OS support? Because what's a browser if not a universal front end for widgets. We could have had cross platform widgets but that would have made it too hard to monopolize one platform. Google have simply abstracted the previous platform leader (Microsoft) advantage away from them. It's interesting, but depressing that we keep letting these greedy humans lock us into things. We keep wasting time fighting them and each other.

chme 6y ago
I think vendor-lock-in is something that should probably be made illegal by consumer protection laws.
lukasbuenger 6y ago
While technically somewhat a valid concern, vendor lock in on an OS level has never been Googles MO. Quite the opposite actually: The more the merrier. Every Google service (Maps, Docs, Mail, Drive, Calendar, Analytics Admin etc ppt) works in all major browsers. You might get the best out-of-the-box UX with their offerings in Chrome because authentication/authorisation is handled on an app level, but other than that there's really nothing stopping you from using, say, their spreadsheets in Safari. The fact that they kind of own TC39 while also actually owning the browser with the largest market share is not optimal on many, many levels, but, frankly, the risk of them pushing a hard lock in on any level, to me, is negligible. They're monetising telemetry and ultimately don't care where that's coming from. Edit: Typo and Grammar
- fartcannon 6y ago
  Yeah, they're not going to prevent browsers running on multiple OSes, but they do abuse their position to prevent competing browsers. The OS doesn't matter now, the browser does. They can leverage their position to move the goal posts faster than the competition can run. So, it's still bad, it's just a different abstraction.

chme 6y ago

I think vendor-lock-in is something that should probably be made illegal by consumer protection laws.

lukasbuenger 6y ago

While technically somewhat a valid concern, vendor lock in on an OS level has never been Googles MO. Quite the opposite actually: The more the merrier. Every Google service (Maps, Docs, Mail, Drive, Calendar, Analytics Admin etc ppt) works in all major browsers. You might get the best out-of-the-box UX with their offerings in Chrome because authentication/authorisation is handled on an app level, but other than that there's really nothing stopping you from using, say, their spreadsheets in Safari. The fact that they kind of own TC39 while also actually owning the browser with the largest market share is not optimal on many, many levels, but, frankly, the risk of them pushing a hard lock in on any level, to me, is negligible. They're monetising telemetry and ultimately don't care where that's coming from. Edit: Typo and Grammar

fartcannon 6y ago
Yeah, they're not going to prevent browsers running on multiple OSes, but they do abuse their position to prevent competing browsers. The OS doesn't matter now, the browser does. They can leverage their position to move the goal posts faster than the competition can run. So, it's still bad, it's just a different abstraction.