3 ms·
Sounds like the author isn't a normal web user. Nobody is going to pour millions into a browser that the typical user doesn't want.
by oneplane 5y ago
Sounds like the author isn't a normal web user. Nobody is going to pour millions into a browser that the typical user doesn't want.
- folkhack 5y ago100% they are not a normal web user, I am stating this as a fact. > WebRTC: "real-time communication capabilities", in a web browser. Pepperidge farm remembers when chat apps weren't running in browsers. It seems to me that they want media/experience/communications-rich features removed from the browser, in-lieu of your local OS/software suite. To me, the core feature of "the browser", and the web for that matter, is open standards communication + cross platform dissemination of information... rich-media included (video, audio, RTC). This list would take us back 10-20 years to when the browser was still a fledgling platform for development by ripping out a TON of features that people use on a daily basis. --- Overall the article feels like a daily Gentoo user trying to call shots on what their ideal version of Windows would look like: 1. Your ideals vs. the product the world uses are two very different things. 2. Sure it's a valid thought experiment, but I personally wouldn't spend the time writing/marking-up/citing a 152-item bulleted list expressing an ideal that will never happen.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- cuddlybacon 5y ago> It seems to me that they want media/experience/communications-rich features removed from the browser, in-lieu of your local OS/software suite. I got this impression too. I dislike that their solution seems to be nerfing web-browsers in hopes that developers begrudgingly go back to desktop apps instead of buffing the tools used for building desktop apps so that they're what people want to develop.