Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Microsoft Is Going Ahead And Rebuilding Edge Browser Atop Chromium

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    This is very bad for Firefox. Already some websites only work 100% on Chrome, and this will very likely make it much worse.

    Comment


    • #42
      "Microsoft has meaningfully increased participation in the open source software (OSS) community, becoming one of the world’s largest supporters of OSS projects. Today we’re announcing that we intend to adopt the Chromium open source project in the development of Microsoft Edge on the desktop to create better web compatibility for our customers and less fragmentation of the web for all web developers,"
      "...becoming one of the world's largest supporters of OSS projects" !!!

      Be aware of the trojan horse! Here you have it black on white, microsoft is only into OSS as long as they are able to use it for their own purposes.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by microcode View Post
        Honestly, Mozilla has neglected Gecko for about a decade. It is riddled with bugs, especially around SVG, and is a pain in the ass to develop for. I really hope they hire some more actual technical staff who are willing to do the tough but necessary work of making Gecko not a steaming heap of shit; because it will soon be the only alternative browser engine left in the game.
        What is what Quantum based on Servo is doing by gradually dropping nearly two decades years old codes.

        Comment


        • #44
          I'm surprised MS didn't open source Edge however it's probably so tied to Windows it would be of no use elsewhere, wake me up when they open source Windows.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by zanny View Post

            If Chromium was a legitimate open project or standard it would be fine. But it isn't - its holistically Google controlled, with contributors signing over copyright to Google via CLA and changes requiring a signoff by Google employees.

            We are absolutely living in a time where Google determines what the Internet is, not any standards organization or consortium of disparate interests. We already lived through Microsoft determining what the Internet was and it was a dark age. The only difference that for Microsoft the Internet was competition to their software products in the early 00s - so crippling it via IE was practical. For Google their products are all online, so it isn't their prerogative to cripple the Internet but cripple the non-Google Internet. Which, because its much less apparent its harm, can be much more heinous with greater long term ramifications from its damage.
            The problem has nothing to do with who controls Chromium. It's important to the continued health of the web that standards not accidentally enshrine a specific implementation's internal implementation details. (That's why Firefox didn't implement Pepper/PPAPI as a successor to NPAPI, by the way. Google designed around certain Chrome internals that Firefox didn't match and, when they proposed it to Mozilla and Mozilla pointed that out, they decided to just go with it anyway.)

            You need at least two independently developed browser engines to have a solid means to shake out problems which tie a prospective standard to a specific engine's design.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post

              Not really. A Chromium monopoly does not mean the "end" of W3C standards, it just means that Chromium standards will be the new W3C standards... That's not necessarily a bad thing...

              Either way, if it is open source on a proper licence and you can use it anywhere, why does it matter?
              Free software means freedom to choose. If websites only work with Chromium, you **have to** use chromium to access the web. You can't choose, so you're no longer free, even if it's free software. And you can rename "the web" by "the google network". As in my opinion google is the worst tech company, this is one of the worst news ever.

              Comment


              • #47
                Well that's a bit concerning then seeing how we're now closer than anyone in their right mind would like to be to the situation back in the late 90s and very early 2000s where a very large share of websites were written for IE and not really even tested on anything else.

                Then again considering how different Microsoft's management is now that Ballmer and the rest of the Microsoft old guard is gone this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone in the know. Long gone is the "Amazing Ape Man" ranting about that "that fucking Norwegian guy*" and his "literally communism" OS. Replaced by pragmatists who will increasingly use open source software where practical and even offer it as an alternative to their own software, as evidenced by how over half of Azure instances run Linux and it's only going up.

                *At Microsoft's internal Windows 2000 launch party he really did go on stage and rant about Torvalds as "that fucking Norwegian guy"

                Originally posted by Slartifartblast View Post
                I'm surprised MS didn't open source Edge however it's probably so tied to Windows it would be of no use elsewhere, wake me up when they open source Windows.
                Considering how this is clearly about saving costs that wouldn't have had the desired effect as we already have two very well established open source browsers.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by Flaburgan View Post
                  Free software means freedom to choose.
                  Free software (FOSS) only means that you are free to take and modify the source.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by L_A_G View Post
                    Well that's a bit concerning then seeing how we're now closer than anyone in their right mind would like to be to the situation back in the late 90s and very early 2000s where a very large share of websites were written for IE and not really even tested on anything else.

                    Then again considering how different Microsoft's management is now that Ballmer and the rest of the Microsoft old guard is gone this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone in the know. Long gone is the "Amazing Ape Man" ranting about that "that fucking Norwegian guy*" and his "literally communism" OS. Replaced by pragmatists who will increasingly use open source software where practical and even offer it as an alternative to their own software, as evidenced by how over half of Azure instances run Linux and it's only going up.

                    *At Microsoft's internal Windows 2000 launch party he really did go on stage and rant about Torvalds as "that fucking Norwegian guy"
                    Lol, it's not "pragmatism", they just don't have much choice left.

                    They can't keep chest-thumping like back in the day.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by Slartifartblast View Post
                      I'm surprised MS didn't open source Edge however it's probably so tied to Windows it would be of no use elsewhere, wake me up when they open source Windows.
                      That would be even less useful to anybody except maybe wine.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X