4 ms·

They also built an incredible browser full of amazing capabilities that I do love. And have an enormous commitment to standards and standards processes, that t

They also built an incredible browser full of amazing capabilities that I do love. And have an enormous commitment to standards and standards processes, that they have supported & helped tirelessly. https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/ https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/

spystath 3y ago
I think that's a relatively simplistic way of viewing this. Although I don't disagree with the core argument, Google will always implement and ship "standards" that fit their business model or their vision of the web. A Chrome API becomes a defacto standard regardless of the state of consensus between engine vendors. Chrome can bulldoze through the standards process because of the massive amount of Chrome installations (and derivatives). There are standards that have never been fully accepted by Mozilla [0] or WebKit (famously webusb for instance, because of security implications) but they are still in Chrome and now Firefox or Safari are effectively a "worse" browser because they don't support "standard" X that never reached consensus but Chrome implemented anyway. It always starts as an "experimental" feature under a config flag while the supposed discussion is taking place "just to see how it works, promise" before Google decides to remove the experimental flag and ship it. WEI started to play out exactly in the same way but given the massive outrage they decided it was too damaging to keep pursuing it (they still sneakily implemented it in Android WebViews). So although I don't disagree that, yes Google has certainly improved on some things when it comes to standard processes they have abused their powerful position and continue to do so to push forward whatever they think it benefits them. [0] https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/
- DougN7 3y ago
  Interesting. I hadn’t thought of it that way, but you’ve shown Chrome is the new IE of the web. How the world turns…
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  If there were peers out there beyond Mozilla, Apple, and Edge, I'd agree more. Safari has long been the web's boat anchor that keeps it from going anywhere. Mozilla has lots of good moments, but they also have been snotty meanspirited aggressive press hounds talking mad shit about sensor support, web USB, web midi, and other really amazing capabilities. Google has no peers who are pro web. So them not having full consensus on what they do try bothers me not the slightest.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
beej71 3y ago
They did, this is true. And so does Mozilla, for that matter. But what's also true is that the market leader is incentivized to break interoperability and lock out other vendors. That was Microsoft; now it's Google. Or, put another way, I don't hear the EFF complaining about Edge at the moment. I'm happy that Google is at least trying to standards-track these bad ideas and not just unilaterally putting them in Chrome. But I wouldn't bet a dime that they aren't going to do exactly that in the future. 70% of the market is a lot of weight.

spystath 3y ago

I think that's a relatively simplistic way of viewing this. Although I don't disagree with the core argument, Google will always implement and ship "standards" that fit their business model or their vision of the web. A Chrome API becomes a defacto standard regardless of the state of consensus between engine vendors. Chrome can bulldoze through the standards process because of the massive amount of Chrome installations (and derivatives). There are standards that have never been fully accepted by Mozilla [0] or WebKit (famously webusb for instance, because of security implications) but they are still in Chrome and now Firefox or Safari are effectively a "worse" browser because they don't support "standard" X that never reached consensus but Chrome implemented anyway. It always starts as an "experimental" feature under a config flag while the supposed discussion is taking place "just to see how it works, promise" before Google decides to remove the experimental flag and ship it. WEI started to play out exactly in the same way but given the massive outrage they decided it was too damaging to keep pursuing it (they still sneakily implemented it in Android WebViews). So although I don't disagree that, yes Google has certainly improved on some things when it comes to standard processes they have abused their powerful position and continue to do so to push forward whatever they think it benefits them. [0] https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/

DougN7 3y ago
Interesting. I hadn’t thought of it that way, but you’ve shown Chrome is the new IE of the web. How the world turns…
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
If there were peers out there beyond Mozilla, Apple, and Edge, I'd agree more. Safari has long been the web's boat anchor that keeps it from going anywhere. Mozilla has lots of good moments, but they also have been snotty meanspirited aggressive press hounds talking mad shit about sensor support, web USB, web midi, and other really amazing capabilities. Google has no peers who are pro web. So them not having full consensus on what they do try bothers me not the slightest.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

beej71 3y ago

They did, this is true. And so does Mozilla, for that matter. But what's also true is that the market leader is incentivized to break interoperability and lock out other vendors. That was Microsoft; now it's Google. Or, put another way, I don't hear the EFF complaining about Edge at the moment. I'm happy that Google is at least trying to standards-track these bad ideas and not just unilaterally putting them in Chrome. But I wouldn't bet a dime that they aren't going to do exactly that in the future. 70% of the market is a lot of weight.