Mozilla's CEO is not enthusiastic about Microsoft's switch to Chromium:
When Microsoft announced that its Edge browser would be revamped using Chromium, the internet's response was generally quite positive. Edge is far from the worst browser on the planet, but it's certainly not what we'd call a fan favorite. As such, even the slightest indication that it could be changed significantly would have been welcome news for many.
However, it would seem that "many" doesn't include one individual in particular: Mozilla CEO Chris Beard. In a blog post published today, titled "Goodbye, EdgeHTML," Beard expressed his frustrations with Microsoft's decision.
"By adopting Chromium, Microsoft hands over control of even more of online life to Google," Beard writes in the post. "This may sound melodramatic, but it's not. The "browser engines" — Chromium from Google and Gecko Quantum from Mozilla — are "inside baseball" pieces of software that actually determine a great deal of what each of us can do online."
Microsoft's switch to Chromium could be a big boon for Google's own implementation.
Related Stories
Microsoft is building a Chromium-powered web browser that will replace Edge on Windows 10
Microsoft's Edge web browser has seen little success since its debut on Windows 10 back in 2015. Built from the ground up with a new rendering engine known as EdgeHTML, Microsoft Edge was designed to be fast, lightweight, and secure, but launched with a plethora of issues which resulted in users rejecting it early on. Edge has since struggled to gain any traction, thanks to its continued instability and lack of mindshare, from users and web developers.
Because of this, I'm told that Microsoft is throwing in the towel with EdgeHTML and is instead building a new web browser powered by Chromium, a rendering engine first popularized by Google's Chrome browser. Codenamed Anaheim, this new web browser for Windows 10 will replace Edge as the default browser on the platform. It's unknown at this time if Anaheim will use the Edge brand or a new brand, or if the user interface between Edge and Anaheim is different. One thing is for sure, however; EdgeHTML in Windows 10's default browser is dead.
Report: Windows Lite is Microsoft's long-awaited answer to Chrome OS
The success of Google's Chromebook hardware and Chrome OS software wasn't an inevitability, but the ease of use they afford ended up allowing Google to carve out a niche in a very crowded PC marketplace. Ever since Chrome OS entered the scene, we've been waiting for Microsoft to come out with its own pared down version of Windows, but its half-hearted attempts (Windows 10 S, Windows RT) have all fallen flat.
Those failures haven't stopped Microsoft though, as Petri on Monday reported that the company is working on "a new version of Windows that may not actually be Windows." Based on the documentation he has seen, Petri's Brad Sams believes that Windows Lite — the new OS — is Microsoft's answer to Chrome OS.
According to Sams, Windows Lite will only run Progressive Web Apps (PWAs) and Universal Windows Platform (UWP) apps, while removing all other functionality. He says that this is the first "truly lightweight version of Windows" – one which won't run in enterprise or small business environments, and may not even be available for purchase on its own. Just like Chrome OS, Windows Lite will have to be pre-installed by an OEM.
Microsoft ChromeOS: It's Linux-Free!
Google isn't the company that we should have handed the Web over to
Back in 2009, Google introduced SPDY, a proprietary replacement for HTTP that addressed what Google saw as certain performance issues with existing HTTP/1.1. Google wasn't exactly wrong in its assessments, but SPDY was something of a unilateral act, with Google responsible for the design and functionality. SPDY was adopted by other browsers and Web servers over the next few years, and Google's protocol became widespread.
[...] The same story is repeating with HTTP/3. In 2012, Google announced a new experimental protocol, QUIC, intended again to address performance issues with existing HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2. Google deployed QUIC, and Chrome would use QUIC when communicating with Google properties. Again, QUIC became the basis for IETF's HTTP development, and HTTP/3 uses a derivative of QUIC that's modified from and incompatible with Google's initial work.
It's not just HTTP that Google has repeatedly worked to replace. Google AMP ("Accelerated Mobile Pages") is a cut-down HTML combined with Google-supplied JavaScript designed to make mobile Web content load faster. This year, Google said that it would try to build AMP with Web standards and introduced a new governance model that gave the project much wider industry oversight.
A person claiming to be a former Microsoft Edge developer has written about a tactic Google supposedly used to harm the competing browser's performance:
A person claiming to be a former Edge developer has today described one such action. For no obvious reason, Google changed YouTube to add a hidden, empty HTML element that overlaid each video. This element disabled Edge's fastest, most efficient hardware accelerated video decoding. It hurt Edge's battery-life performance and took it below Chrome's. The change didn't improve Chrome's performance and didn't appear to serve any real purpose; it just hurt Edge, allowing Google to claim that Chrome's battery life was actually superior to Edge's. Microsoft asked Google if the company could remove the element, to no avail.
The latest version of Edge addresses the YouTube issue and reinstated Edge's performance. But when the company talks of having to do extra work to ensure EdgeHTML is compatible with the Web, this is the kind of thing that Microsoft has been forced to do.
See also: Ex Edge developer blames Google tricks in part for move to Chromium
Related: HTTP/2 on its Way In, SPDY on its Way Out
Google Touts QUIC Protocol
Google Attempting to Standardize Features of Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP)
Google AMP Can Go To Hell
The Next Version of HTTP Won't be Using TCP
HTTP/3 Explained: A Work in Progress
Microsoft Reportedly Building a Chromium-Based Web Browser to Replace Edge, and "Windows Lite" OS
Mozilla CEO Warns Microsoft's Switch to Chromium Will Give More Control of the Web to Google
Microsoft Engineer Causes Online Wrath After Saying Firefox Should Use Chromium
Mozilla should give up on its own browsing engine and switch Firefox to Chromium, a Microsoft engineer said in a series of tweets, as what the company does right now is "building a parallel universe that's used by less than 5 percent."
The message posted by Microsoft Product Manager Kenneth Auchenberg has triggered an almost instant reaction from the user community, with most of the replies pointing out that building alternative products that can compete against Chromium is vital for the health of the browsing ecosystem.
"It's time for @mozilla to get down from their philosophical ivory tower. The web is dominated by Chromium, if they really *cared* about the web they would be contributing instead of building a parallel universe that's used by less than 5%?" he tweeted.
"I couldn't disagree with you more. It precisely *because* Chromium has such a large marketshare that is vital for Mozilla (or anyone else) to battle for diversity. I'm shocked that you think they're not contributing. "Building a parallel universe"? That *is* the contribution," web developer Jeremy Keith responded.
[...] Auchenberg's message has obviously received more acid replies, including this one criticizing Microsoft's recent browser changes. "Just because your employer gave up on its own people and technology doesn't mean that others should follow," Asa Dotzler tweeted.
Also at ZDNet.
Previously: Microsoft Reportedly Building a Chromium-Based Web Browser to Replace Edge, and "Windows Lite" OS
Mozilla CEO Warns Microsoft's Switch to Chromium Will Give More Control of the Web to Google
Related: Is Google Using an "Embrace, Extend..." Strategy?
Google Denies Altering YouTube Code to Break Microsoft Edge
Mozilla "Got Outfoxed" by Google – Former VP Accuses Google for Sabotaging Firefox
Former Mozilla VP, Johnathan Nightingale, has called out on Google for what could only be termed as anti-competitive practices. In a Twitter thread on a somewhat unrelated subject, Nightingale said that during his 8 years at Mozilla, Google was the company's biggest partner. "Our revenue share deal on search drove 90% of Mozilla's income," he tweeted.
However, that doesn't mean Google wasn't involved in some underhand practices. "When I started at Mozilla in 2007 there was no Google Chrome and most folks we spoke with inside were Firefox fans," Nightingale wrote. "When chrome launched things got complicated, but not in the way you might expect. They had a competing product now, but they didn't cut ties, break our search deal – nothing like that. In fact, the story we kept hearing was, 'We're on the same side. We want the same things.'"
"I think our friends inside google genuinely believed that. At the individual level, their engineers cared about most of the same things we did. Their product and design folks made many decisions very similarly and we learned from watching each other. But Google as a whole is very different than individual googlers," Nightingale added.
Google Chrome ads started appearing next to Firefox search terms. gmail & gdocs started to experience selective performance issues and bugs on Firefox. Demo sites would falsely block Firefox as "incompatible."
All of this is stuff you're allowed to do to compete, of course. But we were still a search partner, so we'd say "hey what gives?"
And every time, they'd say, "oops. That was accidental. We'll fix it in the next push in 2 weeks."
Previously: After 10 Years with Google, Firefox Switches to Yahoo
Netmarketshare Claims Mozilla Firefox Usage Drops Below Ten Percent
Mozilla CEO Warns Microsoft's Switch to Chromium Will Give More Control of the Web to Google
Is Google Using an "Embrace, Extend..." Strategy?
Google Denies Altering YouTube Code to Break Microsoft Edge
Microsoft Employee Sparks Outrage by Suggesting Firefox Switch Browser Engine to Chromium
Related: Firefox 29 is a Flop; UI Design Trends Only Getting Worse
Mozilla Teases Chromium-Based Firefox, Then Pulls Back
Can the New Firefox Quantum Regain its Web Browser Market Share?
Firefox 64 Will Remove Support for RSS and Atom Feeds
Microsoft Reportedly Building a Chromium-Based Web Browser to Replace Edge, and "Windows Lite" OS
Firefox Browser Use Drops As Mozilla's Worst Microsoft Edge Fears Come True
Back in April, we reported that the Edge browser is quickly gaining market share now that Microsoft has transitioned from the EdgeHTML engine to the more widely used Chromium engine (which also underpins Google's Chrome browser). At the time, Edge slipped into the second-place slot for desktop web browsers, with a 7.59 percent share of the market. This dropped Mozilla's Firefox – which has long been the second-place browser behind Chrome – into third place.
Now, at the start of August, we're getting some fresh numbers in for the desktop browser market, and things aren't looking good for Mozilla. Microsoft increased its share of the browser market from 8.07 percent in June to 8.46 percent in July. Likewise, Firefox fell from 7.58 percent to 7.27 percent according to NetMarketShare.
[...] As for Mozilla, the company wasn't too happy when Microsoft first announced that it was going to use Chromium for Edge way back in December 2018. Mozilla's Chris Beard at the time accused Microsoft of "giving up" by abandoning EdgeHTML in favor of Chromium. "Microsoft's decision gives Google more ability to single-handedly decide what possibilities are available to each one of us," said Beard at the time. "We compete with Google because the health of the internet and online life depend on competition and choice."
[...] Microsoft developer Kenneth Auchenberg fought back the following January, writing, "Thought: It's time for Mozilla to get down from their philosophical ivory tower. The web is dominated by Chromium, if they really *cared* about the web they would be contributing instead of building a parallel universe that's used by less than 5 percent."
Is the browser monoculture inevitable or will Firefox hang in there?
Previously:
Mozilla Teases Chromium-Based Firefox, Then Pulls Back
Firefox Tops Microsoft Browser Market Share for First Time
Netmarketshare Claims Mozilla Firefox Usage Drops Below Ten Percent
Microsoft Intercepting Firefox, Chrome Installation on Windows 10 Insider Build
Microsoft Reportedly Building a Chromium-Based Web Browser to Replace Edge, and "Windows Lite" OS
Mozilla CEO Warns Microsoft's Switch to Chromium Will Give More Control of the Web to Google
Microsoft Employee Sparks Outrage by Suggesting Firefox Switch Browser Engine to Chromium
Mozilla Was "Outfoxed" by Google
Microsoft Edge Shares Privacy-Busting Telemetry, Research Alleges
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:29PM (14 children)
...if Mozilla hadn't shat on their userbase at every turn they'd have some more relevance and leverage in these times.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @02:47PM
Unlike Google, which shits on its userbase, its customers, its employees, its investors, and the world at large.
Do Evil Unto Evil. Fuck Google To Death.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:23PM (7 children)
Does nobody remember Sun v. Microsoft over javascript? The idea that Microsoft is getting on the same page with anybody about anything is pretty funny. But not as funny as this from the blog post:
"From a social, civic and individual empowerment perspective"
Odd that a product that rarely goes a week without getting pwned should be regarded as being civic minded. If it was civic minded, it would stop supporting insecure and obnoxious systems architecture just because other vendors do it. Part of being civic minded, is drawing the line when behaviours are harmful to the public welfare. The reason why browser software is free, is precisely because they don't do this. The software vendors aren't willing to assume the litigious risk that comes along with commercial consideration.
You can't be better than the next guy and committed to the status quo at the same time.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:45PM (5 children)
"Working Software, Mike speaking. How may I help you?"
"Working Watermarker 1.1.2 Sucks The Infinite Wang."
"In what way?"
"It won't let go of my cock!"
"I'll remove WWM's teeth in 1.1.3. Would you like to be one of our beta testers?"
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:22PM (4 children)
"I enjoy my job of coding device drivers for IoT sex toys. Lonely people who masturbate are losers who deserve to have their privacy violated by my employer's products otherwise they would get laid every day like me. But my true passion is my side business of running a job board. I know very well how companies use my job board to advertise jobs that they have no intention of ever filling, but I'm never happier than when I think about all those jobless bums who get fucked over by soggy.jobs [soggy.jobs]."
- Michael David Crawford, Don Slippery Dickhead, Grand Kakistocrat of Portlandia
(Score: 4, Funny) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:59PM (3 children)
Our customer service personnel will respond to your request in the order it was made.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:19PM (2 children)
Product: Working Watermarker
Version: 1.1.3
Issue: Teeth are missing
Customers who enjoy the feeling of a toothy blowjob will be disappointed by the product. Developers please include a configuration option to enable teeth.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @11:27PM (1 child)
THIS.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @05:24PM
I demand granularly detailed configuration options that also remember my preferences!
all this stuff about personalized advertising and yet whatever I care about gets spat right back at me as if the service provider doesn't really care what I think.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:46PM
It was java not JavaScript
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:25PM (3 children)
Even if users or developers wanted to use them.
Standardizing on WebExtensions gave Google more control of the web too.
So did taking Google's Money, then squandering it on Pocket, and social justice issues, instead of on a serious push to regression test and bugfix Gecko and later Quantum in an effort to cut down on memory block, keep the browser fast and small, and improve security against the incessant march of critical exploits they generate EVERY FUCKING NEW VERSION.
Seriously the executive staff of Mozillla all deserve to be poor. Any of the devs responsible for the current security issues, deserve to be poor.
Why do I say poor? Because my alternative is 'shot in the head'. Just like politicians, corporate cronies, and the people who keep voting them in or acting as apologists.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:34PM (2 children)
This 2 year old post on that other site is revealing:
https://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8836539&cid=51642315 [slashdot.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @11:39PM (1 child)
I once spent well over an hour trying to figure out what had become of my Status Bar as well as how to re-enable it. Eventually I somehow managed to clue in to that FF had auto-updated itself despite that every single time I install it, I specifically disable auto-updates.
I always update manually because I always archive every single binary I ever install. Mostly for bug regression but also so as to counteract such gems as completely _removing_ the Status Bar.
And Oh it's not actually _called_ the "Status Bar" which is why I wasn't getting any search hits for that well over an hour.
I needed that status bar back because it's where an Add-On that I depend on for my livelihood appeared.
Eventually I stumbled upon a discussion between a South Asian web developer and a Mozzila PropagandaBot. That South Asian developer as well depended on whatever the hell they called the status bar for his own livelihood. The PropagandaBot would always reply something to the effect that "You don't need to thank us for butt-fucking you, we enjoyed the experience too."
I mentioned that the victim was South Asian to remark upon his particular Gem of terminology: he was also griping about "The Pile Of Elephant Droppings Menu". Most know that as the menu with the icon consisting of three horizontal bars.
"Pile Of Elephant Droppings". What a lovely turn of phrase!
Good Times.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @07:14AM
I still haven't managed to get chrome to show http in the urlbar.
Is it REALLY that hard or bad to include an option to show the protocol?
A few times now I've been staring at a blank page in Chrome wondering wtf is wrong only to realize that it is a http page
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday December 11 2018, @07:29PM
Keep in mind that the original Chrome team was the original Firefox team (that is, the same developers that made the good Firefox).
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:02PM (13 children)
Why are people having such a hard time understanding that there are more than two browsers out there? I have 6 browsers installed and I use them all. Don't like Google tracking you? Use Flashpeak Slimjet, based on the open-source code, but with the phone-home code removed. Don't like Mozilla Firefox? Try Pale Moon (similar alteration) or Qupzilla or Vivaldi. And then there's TorBrowser. Open your mind to the possibilities. Don't follow others.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:05PM (4 children)
Yes, no. There are basically only two browsers out there. The rest are rebranded, recompiled versions of the first two. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine what the exceptions might be.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:20PM
The exceptions are stuff like dillo, which works, but doesn't support javascript or a lot of other things that are necessary for many pages to work. lynx/links/elinks/w3m/netsurf are all cool, but have the same limitations as dillo. QtWebEngine and WebkitGTK are more or less just stripped down chrome. Gecko is really the only thing preventing web-rendering from being a complete monoculture.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by crafoo on Sunday December 09 2018, @10:22PM
It's true. Mostly due to browsers trying to do far more than they should. It's interesting watching the cross-platform promise of the web crumble as the browser takes over more and more of the OS and desktop GUI.. while quickly fragmenting everything. I laugh when someone tells me, "just try it in a different browser until it works". Oh great. So your answer is I have to have ALL "operating systems" installed to do anything with my day.
Javascript was a mistake.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @09:36AM (1 child)
Brave?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 10 2018, @10:13AM
That "built on top of" indicates that it is just another re-compiled and rebranded Chrome browser. So, we are still looking at two browsers, basically.
But, don't let that discourage you from using Brave in preference to Chrome. That re-compiling of source code removes tons of crap that Google puts into it for the express purpose of tracking you.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:12PM (3 children)
This isn't about browsers but rendering engines. E.g. Mozilla Firefox == Pale Moon == Tor Browser in this regard.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:18PM (2 children)
And Vivaldi = Opera = Chrome = Microsoft ChromeEdgeWhatever
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:23PM (1 child)
And Safari = ?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:37PM
WebKit, so kinda like Chromium (Blink).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:54PM
"We're sorry, your browser is suspicious. Access denied by cloud flare."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:59PM
spotted the windows user...
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:40PM (1 child)
Step one: please realize that there is a difference between a rendering engine and a browser, just like there is a difference between a combustion engine, drivetrain and car's chassis (look ma, a car analogy!).
Step two: please re-read the article with your newfound knowledge.
Step three: try commenting again.
(Score: 1) by DeVilla on Tuesday December 11 2018, @06:23PM
This seems more the difference between a Dodge Omni and Plymouth Horizon.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:03PM (5 children)
Chrome/Chromium is open source. We already see multiple groups compiling the browser to remove Google's tracking, and advertising. It will be a simple task for Microsoft to compile the source code more to their liking, and distribute Chrome with their own "telemetry" and other bullshit.
The only thing that I see that won't be to Microsoft's liking, is the way IE was embedded into the OS. They'll have to reconsider the manner in which they exfiltrate data, and trigger functions within the OS.
If Microsoft is so incompetent that they give Google control of their OS by using a Chrome browser, then they deserve whatever happens.
(Score: 5, Informative) by tekk on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:17PM (4 children)
It's not the telemetry so much as control over the standards process. We're already at the point where step #1 of troubleshooting web apps seems to be "run it in a Blink browser" (I prefer Vivaldi for this purpose.) At this point a single rendering engine (blink) is going to be about 80% of the web. Every browser except Safari, Firefox (& forks), and some chinese browser called UC (apparently its rendering engine is based on classic Webkit, fork or not I can't say,) that can be used by a normal person will be blink.
In other words Google now controls the web standards process, because any extra feature they add will cover 80% or so of users. 80%'s more than enough for the PHB's to justify leaving everyone else behind.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bobthecimmerian on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:22PM
Exactly. Chromium and Blink the code are open source. But any chance the world had to adjust internet standards away from data collection and advertising just got even smaller. Because any standard that isn't implemented in core Chromium will effectively be killed, since Google will protect its cash cow.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:56PM (2 children)
This according to Wikipedia.
Perhaps we would do well to submit to our future Communist overlords.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @09:32AM
Just because chinese is the most spoken language by population today does not mean we will all be speaking it in two generations time.
Unless china wins the next world war which frankly is looking likely.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 11 2018, @11:26AM
China might have been communist in the 1950s but today it's certainly more capitalistic than even Russia and USA.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by acid andy on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:16PM (9 children)
I never thought I'd see this day. Embracing open source, Windows on ARM, dumping Windows Phone for an Android Launcher and now effectively the end of IE's legacy, this is not the Micro$oft we used to know. They're obviously fighting hard to stay relevant with what's popular in modern tech but I wonder how much they will lose what set them apart if they continue down this path. Either way, I won't touch their products as I'll never forgive them for all the telemetry and forced "upgrades" and now I have Steam Play, I have no further need of them.
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:19PM (3 children)
They're obviously fighting hard to stay relevant with what's popular in modern tech but I wonder how much they will lose what set them apart if they continue down this path
Embrace, extend and ....
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:26PM (2 children)
I thought of that but I'd be seriously amazed if they managed to extinguish anything of value to Google. I could maybe see them poisoning Chromium somehow but Google have the resources to just make a new browser whenever they want (or continue with their own branch of the source and maybe rebrand it if the name is tainted).
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:23PM (1 child)
My first thought was that it's a huge, loser move to concede that they can't make a decent browser on their own and have to use somebody else's code. M$ is a charter member of the corporate software club who feels not the slightest shame in using others' code, for all they scream about piracy and try to deeply embed DRM in software.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday December 09 2018, @08:27PM
It's too bad Google couldn't charge MS a patent fee for using it.
Payback would be such a nice bitch.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:26PM (3 children)
You say that like...
But seriously: just the other day MS surpassed Apple as the world's most valueable company.
The last time I personally visited their homepage it was actually difficult to find their links to windows and office.
MS is now far far more like IBM and Oracle: their product offering are no more than ways to facilitate their consulting services.
I expect google and amazons clouds are more popular among those who roll their own solutions, whereas I expect Microsofts Cloud is more popular among those that retain Microsoft's consultants to roll them on their behalf
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 5, Funny) by Nerdfest on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:38PM (2 children)
Their business these days seems to be bribing government and purchasing agents to throw money at Azure to give them a chance at continuing the lock-in. Azure has poor performance and reliability compared to their competition. Without lock-in or continuing bribes, they're done.
The backing off on the browser front is unusual though, as Edge might have helped them, but I guess it's just too broken. They've gone from "Explorer", to "Edge", and I'm guessing the finalized name of this new browser will be "Just the Tip".
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:59PM (1 child)
A couple months ago I listed many of Oracle's locations at Soggy Jobs.
A great many of its shops are located in national capitals.
Surely We Are Doomed.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Sunday December 09 2018, @10:18PM
Yeah, thinking about it, you're very right about the similarities to IBM as well. Luckily, as with both of the other companies, their relevance continues to drop.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday December 09 2018, @08:16PM
Welcome to the dark side, where you don't have to accept cookies!
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:26PM (4 children)
Browser that never supported SVG animation.
- signed
every web developer
(Score: 5, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:06PM (3 children)
Dear web developer, please choke to death on your own golden brown dick.
- signed
every user that hates pointless animations.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:10PM (2 children)
As expected, browsers have a toggle to disable Flash or JavaScript, but not animated SVG, and maybe not canvas or HTML5 video.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:42PM
-s.
I can block notifications only from a specific website, and even then, only when it first asks permission to so-crudely annoy the crap out of me.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @09:38AM
Plugins can block canvas.
And browser audio recording.
And browser fingerprinting.
And seriously wtf how did we get here :(
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @03:59PM
Mozilla was Google's bitch as long as they paid the off the foundation.
Seems like it's time MSFT tries the same trick to get the dog to dance.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by SomeGuy on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:01PM (13 children)
I suspect many people have forgotten what a browser monoculture looks like, so let me throw out a few reminders from the time IE was king.
Does anyone else remember having to load extensions in to Mozilla/Netscape/Early Firefox that embedded the IE rendering engine just to get pages to load because they only rendered/ran properly in Microsoft Internet Explorer(TM)? That is basically what Firefox will be up against if everyone else switches to chrome. Developers will ignore Firefox and design only for Chrome or give Firefox users a lesser experience. Heck, there are already some sites like that out there. In time Firefox will find themselves forced to go the same way as Opera and just become a Chrome shell.
Unfortunately, the "web standards" as such are a Mt Everest sized steaming pile of hodge-podge shit. The entire idea of manually "coding" documents should have been left back in the 1970s. Even the smallest implementation changes can break pages, and fixes/patches/workarounds for any less common rendering engines will not come fast enough, especially in this day when people expect updates every five minutes.
When the leading browser vendor decides to assimilate some completely new (usually pointless) technology, less common rendering engines will again either take too long to re-implement/port the new technology or they attempt to do without.
If the leading browser vendor decides to pull support for an OS, then that OS instantly shrivels up and dies. Open source only protects against this so much. Usually new "technologies" won't be available in backports, and eventually the codebase will mutate too much to work with different tools.
In a monoculture, the leading browser vendor won't give a flying rats ass about any form of compatibility. Bugs will develop, and if smaller rendering engines are not bug-for-bug compatible then they may be considered unusable.
Or to put it another way....
[To read the rest of this comment, you must click this javascript link that only works in Google Crumb v98798769876]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 09 2018, @04:53PM
Modded up, despite that I don't entirely agree with your vision of the future.
Yes, I well remember when everything on the web was "engineered" to work with IE5, and then IE6. After 6, things seemed to start relaxing. But, there are too many players involved today. Unlike IE, Microsoft isn't the end-all, be-all authority on Chrome. I don't even think Google can make that claim today.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:37PM (2 children)
I remain dumbstruck that HTML 5 permits unclosed elements.
That surely makes rendering engines significantly more difficult to write.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Nerdfest on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:15PM
I think some don't even act properly when you do close the ones that are "optional".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:49PM
blame netscape for the madness. they should have been strict in what html they accepted. instead they dumbed it down for the masses, accepted brokeness, and we got the shit show we have today.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @05:40PM
That no one has ever hacked the root nameservers is due in part to each of them running significantly different code from all the others.
There was a time that while everybody readily agreed that there could be such a thing as a virus, they were never really a problem because there were so many different kinds of microcomputers - Altairs, Commodore 64s, Apple IIs and a whole bunch more.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by stormreaver on Sunday December 09 2018, @08:21PM (6 children)
You're overlooking one HUGE, HUMONGOUS, GIGANTIC, GINORMOUS difference between I.E. and Chromium: Chromium is Open Source. Anyone with the skills to make a browser can use Chromium's rendering engine, therefore preventing the horrors that were thrust upon us in the medieval dark ages of Internet Explorer. Standardizing on Chromium is the single best thing that has EVER happened to Web browsers. It can become an inclusive standard: one rendering engine to develop for and test against, but one that, by its very nature, precludes the formation of abusive monopolies.
Having multiple Web browsers that ALL RENDER IDENTICALLY is exactly what we need. Browsers can then differentiate themselves on non-rendering behavior, while having a single standard renderer. It's what we've all been wanting for over 25 years now.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @09:08PM
"Chromium is Open Source"
whoop-de fsckin' do
The development money comes from Google
A spy organization that is not operating in your best interest
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday December 09 2018, @11:47PM
Because there are far too many Open Source projects, and far too _few_ eyeballs.
For every browser to have the very same rendering engine will ultimately result in the Sicilian Mafia, the Russian Mob, the Chinese Tong, the Japanese Yakuza or the Occasional Nigerian Sole Proprietor 0wnz0r1ng every last box that Walks The Earth.
The only real defense against a world-wide malware attack is a diverse software ecosystem.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday December 10 2018, @12:20PM (1 child)
> Having multiple Web browsers that ALL RENDER IDENTICALLY is exactly what we need.
Let's say that amazon, netflix and google collude to require *in the browser* in order to watch their streams. If you want to support users who want to watch netflix or amazon, your browser must support . If there are many browser rendering engines out there, then this is not possible because M$ or whoever don't want to give a bunk up. If there is only one, controlled by , then this becomes inevitable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 11 2018, @11:31AM
They already did that year ago https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/07/amid-unprecedented-controversy-w3c-greenlights-drm-web [eff.org]
And Mozilla too said Yes.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mobydisk on Monday December 10 2018, @05:38PM (1 child)
Here's why that doesn't work: Not enough people will install your fork. Web designers will continue to develop for "real" Chrome and your voice will be lost to the wind under the weight of the simple fact that every machine out there will have "real" Chrome preinstalled on it.
The problem when IE was king was not that we didn't have open-source browsers that were better, the problem was that one company had such a large market share that it didn't matter if it was complete garbage.
(Score: 2) by stormreaver on Monday December 10 2018, @10:42PM
It seems that EVERYONE who responded to me is missing the forest for the trees, and missing the trees for the forest. You're all missing the big picture. This has nothing to do with Linus's Law. This has nothing to do with creating a better product through many eyes (although, humorously enough, Blink is the result of forking Webkit, which was the result of forking KHTML [KDE's Web renderer], which resulted in a phenomenal renderer).
This is about a common RENDERER, and has absolute nothing to do with a Web browser (except that a Web browser needs a renderer). This has nothing to do with amassing a user base large enough to overthrow Chrome (although you have to remember that the thought of Chrome overthrowing Internet Explorer was once considered laughable).
Everyone (Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, and browsers that don't yet exist) starts with the same RENDERER (I'm using caps to emphasize the difference between a renderer and a Web browser), then differentiates their WEB BROWSER based upon everything that is not a RENDERER: user interface, plugins and extensions, etc. Firefox, for example, would get the necessary speed boost and additional stability that Quantum didn't achieve (and it's significant when playing Web games).
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday December 11 2018, @07:19PM
Your hypothesis is unconvincing given that the current state of the art is pulling in dozens of polyfill dependencies specifically to support compatibility with dozens of different browser implementations.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 09 2018, @06:47PM
Of course it would give an artificial inflation to chromiums share of the market but.. quite honestly who cares? Mozilla is not producing a high quality product, and they are not the champions of users rights they once were (if anything they may have limited that). Their voice just doesn't convince me to listen, nor should it to anyone else. Their opinion should be listened to no more than googles or microsofts. Worse maybe since people are still convinced they champion the users cause (hello DRM, bye bye alsa support?). I hope to see chromium benefit from this move despite my dislike for both google and microsoft, and my dependence on firefox forks.
(Score: 1, Troll) by gringer on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:00PM
Maybe Mozilla would sound a little bit more sincere if they distanced themselves from Microsoft and DRM:
https://twitter.com/BartSchuller/status/1070367150349709313 [twitter.com]
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2014/05/reconciling-mozillas-mission-and-w3c-eme/ [mozilla.org]
Ask me about Sequencing DNA in front of Linus Torvalds [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by Username on Sunday December 09 2018, @11:36PM
When all websites aren't written to spec, just trial and errored to work with the most popular browser, this is bound to happen. This might solve browser sniffing issue, but I have a feeling this will continue down that road anyway. Don't have chromium version .11 just .10? Oh you're just gonna get a splash page about updating your browser. 90% is about some website pushing some form of latest encryption to prove how ahead of the curve their website is, or some bullshit like that. Do I really care if china finds out I like cat pictures? Not really.
See I have this truck, an old piece of shit truck. The tailgate rusted off. Tires don't hold air. No exhaust pipe. It doesn't even have keys, you just turn the ignition switch and go. I do not secure this truck at all; do no place it in a garage or lock the wheel. Know how many times it was stolen? Zero. Because some things aren't worth stealing, and if people see what it for what it is, they wont go though the effort.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday December 10 2018, @02:45PM
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/10/18134073/chromium-microsoft-browser-chrome-extensions-xbox-one [theverge.com]
Microsoft's browser will support Google Chrome extensions.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 10 2018, @03:27PM
While monoculture *is* bad, MS was never capable of actually writing the damn browser well. Things took forever to land and always had weird issues and limitations. They had their moments, but overall IE and its rebranded “fork”'s death is welcomed.
Not that it makes Chrome-likes any better, but MS didn't help here. It was just a dead weight.