2 ms·

Religion? We're talking practical reality here. The reality is that when alternative browsers finally slip into irrelevance the web will belong to Google. We

Religion? We're talking practical reality here. The reality is that when alternative browsers finally slip into irrelevance the web will belong to Google. We had a monoculture on the web once with IE. It went poorly. If you literally don't care about the health of the open web, fine -- but that is what I would call a near-religious dedication to ignorance

taylodl 3y ago
You act as though Safari doesn't have a significant market presence. Also, Microsoft developed new web technologies and then patented them - preventing their competitors from using them. All of Microsoft's development tools of course used those new technologies and therefore required the web site visitor to use IE. The situation today with Google is markedly different.
- JohnBooty 3y ago
  You act as though Safari doesn't have a significant market presence. Safari is not good enough as a bulwark of the free web. It's only available on Apple platforms and doesn't support ad-blockers as robust as FF. Microsoft developed new web technologies and then patented them What patented web technologies are you thinking of? ActiveX controls? The situation today with Google is markedly different. Sure. Microsoft wanted to lock you into IE and Windows. Google wants to lock you into Chrome and ensure that the web is utterly bent to serve their advertising platform. If you don't understand the massive commonality here -- which, again, is domination and ownership of the web -- because you're focused on implementation details, I don't know what to tell you.
  - taylodl 3y ago
    Life with Google is much better. Google isn't telling my employer which OS and which DB I have to use to build solutions. Oh sure, if I need a web UI then it needs to run correctly on Chrome, but that's an order of magnitude less than what Microsoft was mandating. Microsoft wanted EVERYTHING. Google is after web advertising. Also, I don't support the use of ad blockers. If you don't want ads, then don't visit the site. You and I may have different ideas as to what constitutes the free web. When I'm talking about "free", I'm talking about free as in freedom, not free as in beer.

taylodl 3y ago

You act as though Safari doesn't have a significant market presence. Also, Microsoft developed new web technologies and then patented them - preventing their competitors from using them. All of Microsoft's development tools of course used those new technologies and therefore required the web site visitor to use IE. The situation today with Google is markedly different.

JohnBooty 3y ago
You act as though Safari doesn't have a significant market presence. Safari is not good enough as a bulwark of the free web. It's only available on Apple platforms and doesn't support ad-blockers as robust as FF. Microsoft developed new web technologies and then patented them What patented web technologies are you thinking of? ActiveX controls? The situation today with Google is markedly different. Sure. Microsoft wanted to lock you into IE and Windows. Google wants to lock you into Chrome and ensure that the web is utterly bent to serve their advertising platform. If you don't understand the massive commonality here -- which, again, is domination and ownership of the web -- because you're focused on implementation details, I don't know what to tell you.
- taylodl 3y ago
  Life with Google is much better. Google isn't telling my employer which OS and which DB I have to use to build solutions. Oh sure, if I need a web UI then it needs to run correctly on Chrome, but that's an order of magnitude less than what Microsoft was mandating. Microsoft wanted EVERYTHING. Google is after web advertising. Also, I don't support the use of ad blockers. If you don't want ads, then don't visit the site. You and I may have different ideas as to what constitutes the free web. When I'm talking about "free", I'm talking about free as in freedom, not free as in beer.