5 ms·
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
by 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 agoBut 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 agoThe 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 agoDo you expect that browsers relying on closed standards would result in more competition under the same circumstances? You didn't demonstrate that.
- _heimdall 1y agoMy 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 agoWithout 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 agoWithout 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.
- _heimdall 1y agoBrowser engines are extremely difficult to start today because of the extensive, complicated, and ever growing list of specifications. We had a web before open standards. It wasn't the best user experience and each browser was somewhat of a walled garden, but there was heavy competition in the space.
- lwhi 1y agoIt was a literal hellscape before open standards. I imagine there's most likely a subset of the population who believe that open standards are aligned conceptually to regulation, and that any form of regulation in a free market is wrong. This subset of the population is misguided at best, and delusional at worst. Open standards are essential.