4 ms·

Quite the opposite, see http://www.chromium.org/blink#vendor-prefixes http://www.chromium.org/blink#vendor-prefixes

• deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
• deadc0de 14y ago
  I mean use the monopoly to take the tech, clone, tweak, and then don't contribute back. Thankfully google will keep it open source since they're making money from it quite indirectly. But still.. A "fork you" to apple that would make the web suffer. Douchy.
  • basch 14y ago
    Isnt "take the tech, clone, tweak, and then don't contribute back" exactly the model Apple used to create webkit from khtml. If memory serves, the khtml team was incredibly unhappy with apple trying to submit giant monolithic and undocumented commits.
    • deadc0de 14y ago
      It was not ok then, and it's even more not ok now, considering Chrome's market share.
      • fpgeek 14y ago
        What Google's doing now is far kinder than what Apple did then. As noted above, Apple "contributed back" big monolithic patches. By contrast, Google is providing access to a version-controlled repository. The latter is far easier to work with, of course.
  • dragonwriter 14y ago
    > I mean use the monopoly In what market relevant to this issue does Google have a monopoly? > to take the tech, clone, tweak, and then don't contribute back. Its all open source, so it is contributed back. Google just isn't constrained to not change things that WebKit users rely on in future Blink work. > A "fork you" to apple that would make the web suffer. WebKit and Chromium both being more free to try different solutions isn't going to make the web suffer, its going to make the web better.