A) "The web" is not some unified thing so having a certain web technology come and go is categorically different than a language deprecating features. B) I wou

A) "The web" is not some unified thing so having a certain web technology come and go is categorically different than a language deprecating features. B) I wouldn't exactly hold up "the web" and Windows as shining examples of things are going great. Even just using Windows you can see the complexity escaping control, for example there's 3 separate ways in which to change volume for sound devices on windows. Each one with a different UI and found in a different place. To say nothing of attempting to develop on it. As for the web, companies like Mighty[0], whose whole shtick is "the web and the browser you need are too bloated and slow in order to run on your actual machine. The obvious solution is to add another layer and run that browser in a virtual server and pipe the screen back to you", are getting backed and people see as a "solution". This is madness. C) > There's other ways to keep the working set of complexity in check without losing compatibility (eg linters, modernizers, or profiles) That's a "solution" only in so far as you don't consider all of those things are yet another layer of complexity that we're adding on. [0]: https://www.mightyapp.com https://www.mightyapp.com