10 ms·
As a counter-point, I remember people making the same argument when Google announced Chrome. Browsers would always be a battle between two contenders and it wo
by rprospero 3y ago
As a counter-point, I remember people making the same argument when Google announced Chrome. Browsers would always be a battle between two contenders and it would be better for Google to focus on helping Firefox in its fight against Internet Explorer than creating a third browser that could never hope to scrape a meaningful market share from the existing behemoths.
It’s a long road for Ladybird to be a real competitor to Chromium. However, the road to overtaking Firefox is much shorter and I’m less hopeful that Mozilla has a road to overtake Chromium.
- bruce511 3y agoChrome had two benefits over IE that Ladybird doesn't have today. The first was budget, and the second was that IE development had basically stopped. By contrast Chrome today is perhaps Google's most active development team, and has more or less an unlimited budget. MS saw IE as a nice-to-have, Google sees Chrome as existential. Also, while IE was very closed source, Chromium (and Mozilla) are open. That means Ladybird is competing with Brave et al for mind share, and can't play the "we're better cause Open Source " card.