> spends so little time actually refuting the statement "if WebKit weren't mandated, Chromium would take over" Does it have to? It's a rather strange claim to

> spends so little time actually refuting the statement "if WebKit weren't mandated, Chromium would take over" Does it have to? It's a rather strange claim to advance. I cannot read it as anything other than the recognition that in an open competition, even given the headstart of being the default browser, Safari/webkit would lose to Chrome/blink, which, again, I cannot read as anything other than the admission that Safari is an inferior browser. And if that is the case, if users are not free to choose the browser they prefer, then what good is the argument against the browser monoculture anyway?