4 ms·

The web is open and is famously very competitive. We have three whole browser engines and only two of them are implemented by for-profit corporations whose valu

The web is open and is famously very competitive. We have three whole browser engines and only two of them are implemented by for-profit corporations whose valuations have 13 digits. I mean other ones exist, but the average modern developer claims it's your fault when something doesn't work because you use firefox or safari and also demands the browser rewrap all the capabilities the operating system already provides for you because they can't be assed to do the work of meeting users where they are.

lwhi 1y ago
In a world with over 3 billion people we have 'three whole browser engines'. I don't want to be mean, but this isn't a great counterpoint.
- king_geedorah 1y ago
  I'm not sure what the number of people in the world has to do with whether an open standard does or doesn't promote innovation. The user asked for a case where an open standard didn't do that and I provided one. Whether you think it's a great counterpoint is entirely irrelevant to me.
  - lwhi 1y ago
    But browser engines are entirely functional based on open standards!!!!! This is the core proposition! The benefit of open standards here, is to the consumers of these standards .. not the engines. Open standards allow the consumers (websites / apps) to be able to benefit.
    - _heimdall 1y ago
      The presumption that started this thread is that open standards are always good for competition. I think browsers are a good counter example where open standards led to three browser vendors, we have less competition rather than more.
      - fsflover 1y ago
        Do you expect that browsers relying on closed standards would result in more competition under the same circumstances? You didn't demonstrate that.
        _heimdall 1y ago
        My original demonstration wasn't actually the browser question. Auto manufacturers did show much higher levels of competition before standards and shared components. Though it is worth noting that there was heavy competition in the browser space prior to the specs we have today. Part of the reason we ended up with a heavily spec-driven web is precisely because the high level of competition was leading to claims of corporate espionage, and it was expected that end user experience would be better with standards. I absolutely agree the end user experience is better. I disagree that has anything to do with competition.
        lwhi 1y ago
        Without open standards, we would likely choose _one browser_, due to the economic cost of development. One manufacturer would call all the shots for the _one browser_. There would be zero competition until something calamitous happened to the manufacturer and the pendulum swung to a new monopolist. We even have an example of how this plays out to fall back on; Macromedia Flash.
      - lwhi 1y ago
        Without open standards, we would need to pick a browser and provide for it. If we needed to support another browser we'd need to provide a new solution built to its specification. Open standards have allowed the possibility of multiple browser vendors, without making the life of browser consumers (i.e. developers and organisations providing apps and sites) a living hell. Without this, we'd be providing apps and sites for a proprietary system (e.g. Macromedia Flash back in ancient history). Furthermore, when Flash had cornered a market, it had absolutely no competition at all. A complete monopoly on that segment of the market. It took Steve Jobs and Apple to destroy it, but that's a different story. -- The reasoning for only three engines, isn't the fault of open standards. There are many elements of our economic system that prevent competition. Open standards is not one of them.

lwhi 1y ago

In a world with over 3 billion people we have 'three whole browser engines'. I don't want to be mean, but this isn't a great counterpoint.

king_geedorah 1y ago
I'm not sure what the number of people in the world has to do with whether an open standard does or doesn't promote innovation. The user asked for a case where an open standard didn't do that and I provided one. Whether you think it's a great counterpoint is entirely irrelevant to me.
- lwhi 1y ago
  But browser engines are entirely functional based on open standards!!!!! This is the core proposition! The benefit of open standards here, is to the consumers of these standards .. not the engines. Open standards allow the consumers (websites / apps) to be able to benefit.
  - _heimdall 1y ago
    The presumption that started this thread is that open standards are always good for competition. I think browsers are a good counter example where open standards led to three browser vendors, we have less competition rather than more.
    - fsflover 1y ago
      Do you expect that browsers relying on closed standards would result in more competition under the same circumstances? You didn't demonstrate that.
      - _heimdall 1y ago
        My original demonstration wasn't actually the browser question. Auto manufacturers did show much higher levels of competition before standards and shared components. Though it is worth noting that there was heavy competition in the browser space prior to the specs we have today. Part of the reason we ended up with a heavily spec-driven web is precisely because the high level of competition was leading to claims of corporate espionage, and it was expected that end user experience would be better with standards. I absolutely agree the end user experience is better. I disagree that has anything to do with competition.
        lwhi 1y ago
        Without open standards, we would likely choose _one browser_, due to the economic cost of development. One manufacturer would call all the shots for the _one browser_. There would be zero competition until something calamitous happened to the manufacturer and the pendulum swung to a new monopolist. We even have an example of how this plays out to fall back on; Macromedia Flash.
    - lwhi 1y ago
      Without open standards, we would need to pick a browser and provide for it. If we needed to support another browser we'd need to provide a new solution built to its specification. Open standards have allowed the possibility of multiple browser vendors, without making the life of browser consumers (i.e. developers and organisations providing apps and sites) a living hell. Without this, we'd be providing apps and sites for a proprietary system (e.g. Macromedia Flash back in ancient history). Furthermore, when Flash had cornered a market, it had absolutely no competition at all. A complete monopoly on that segment of the market. It took Steve Jobs and Apple to destroy it, but that's a different story. -- The reasoning for only three engines, isn't the fault of open standards. There are many elements of our economic system that prevent competition. Open standards is not one of them.