3 ms·

Those are mere technical arguments. Apple and MS, for example, have active interest in preventing Google's vision from happening.

pcwalton 13y ago
The fact that Google is willing to steamroll over consensus with its market power even in the face of technical arguments is precisely the problem here.
- KirinDave 13y ago
  Why should Google's product roadmap be subject to a consensus of their competitors?
  - masklinn 13y ago
    Microsoft apologists asked the same thing in the late 90s and early 00s. That did not end well for anybody. So here are your answers: 1. because it's a douche move, and 2. because it's bad for the platform and bad for just about everybody. Other than the one who ends up with a monopolistic lock-in over the whole system for half a decade, maybe.
    - jrockway 13y ago
      I feel like the Microsoft comparison is a little unfair. I doubt anyone would have complained much if IE and ActiveX were open source projects distributed under the Apache 2.0 license.
      - jkrems 13y ago
        Given that ActiveX was something that by design wouldn't have worked on non-Windows machines (since it was, if I remember correctly, pretty tightly tied into COM/services stuff) - I'm pretty sure it being open source wouldn't have changed anything.
  - msbarnett 13y ago
    > Why should Google's product roadmap be subject to a consensus of their competitors? ...because they're attempting to shape standards around their product roadmap, in committees in which their competitors also participate? You can tell your competitors to go fuck themselves and do whatever you want with your roadmap, or you can make standards promulgation and compliance a part of your roadmap, but you don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
    - youngtaff 13y ago
      Apple have done it with webstandards too - there are no innocent parties
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
      - gress 13y ago
        Then presumably you agree that Google should be called out for this and no longer treated as a trustworthy custodian of the open web.
        KirinDave 13y ago
        They never were nor did they claim to be. These working groups are working groups second, and political battlegrounds first. I think the pace of the WHATWG has proven the futility of such working groups. We see this time and time again, with various technologies. It's never worked well. And if Apple were doing this, 3/4 of this website would be cheering them on even though Apple's been pretty bad about this sort of thing historically.
        gress 13y ago
        > They never were nor did they claim to be. Then how do you explain this: https://www.google.com/takeaction/ https://www.google.com/takeaction/ ?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]

pcwalton 13y ago

The fact that Google is willing to steamroll over consensus with its market power even in the face of technical arguments is precisely the problem here.

KirinDave 13y ago
Why should Google's product roadmap be subject to a consensus of their competitors?
- masklinn 13y ago
  Microsoft apologists asked the same thing in the late 90s and early 00s. That did not end well for anybody. So here are your answers: 1. because it's a douche move, and 2. because it's bad for the platform and bad for just about everybody. Other than the one who ends up with a monopolistic lock-in over the whole system for half a decade, maybe.
  - jrockway 13y ago
    I feel like the Microsoft comparison is a little unfair. I doubt anyone would have complained much if IE and ActiveX were open source projects distributed under the Apache 2.0 license.
    - jkrems 13y ago
      Given that ActiveX was something that by design wouldn't have worked on non-Windows machines (since it was, if I remember correctly, pretty tightly tied into COM/services stuff) - I'm pretty sure it being open source wouldn't have changed anything.
- msbarnett 13y ago
  > Why should Google's product roadmap be subject to a consensus of their competitors? ...because they're attempting to shape standards around their product roadmap, in committees in which their competitors also participate? You can tell your competitors to go fuck themselves and do whatever you want with your roadmap, or you can make standards promulgation and compliance a part of your roadmap, but you don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
  - youngtaff 13y ago
    Apple have done it with webstandards too - there are no innocent parties
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - gress 13y ago
      Then presumably you agree that Google should be called out for this and no longer treated as a trustworthy custodian of the open web.
      - KirinDave 13y ago
        They never were nor did they claim to be. These working groups are working groups second, and political battlegrounds first. I think the pace of the WHATWG has proven the futility of such working groups. We see this time and time again, with various technologies. It's never worked well. And if Apple were doing this, 3/4 of this website would be cheering them on even though Apple's been pretty bad about this sort of thing historically.
        gress 13y ago
        > They never were nor did they claim to be. Then how do you explain this: https://www.google.com/takeaction/ https://www.google.com/takeaction/ ?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]