Kind of sad really what happened to Firefox.
Let's see here... recent issues I've run into.What problems there are with Firefox?
I've heard this argument repeated a few times. Sorry... but it's completely incorrect and inaccurate.Hopefully not. If there's only one engine out there, we have the same setting we had 10 years ago when MSIE had 90+% market share... I wouldn't like that.
I've heard this argument repeated a few times. Sorry... but it's completely incorrect and inaccurate.
IE is a single proprietary web browser, owned by one corporate entity. Webkit is an open-source project for a web rendering engine, overseen by a consortium, and also available for anyone to use or modify. It's effectively public property (and it's not a web browser)
Using webkit to power our browsers is absolutely no different to everyone using zlib as a standard compression library. A webkit-monoculture will only serve to evolve the web more rapidly, instead of pointless fragmentation across browsers and platforms.
Right now, having completely different engines with varying feature-sets and functionality is only holding us back and delaying progress.
Perhaps not the best analogy, but you can see where I'm coming from. I was more just trying to illustrate the difference between browser and engine, which I'm sure you've noticed some people have trouble with.There's alternatives to zlib, so that analogy doesn't quite hold up.
... If this trend continues, standards will become largely irrelevant (not a particularly great thing).
They'll be stuck hacking on Webkit if they want anyone to really use their product. The world doesn't need another Presto or Gecko. If their changes are worthwhile, it would become integrated within webkit or used for subsequent versions.If someone wants a better browser than the Webkit offerings, especially if developed in another language, that will only be possible if there are standards for web content; otherwise, they'll be chasing after Webkit specific bugs and features.
Webkit would effectively become the engine and standards body which everyone adhered to. IMO, this makes far more sense than the current mess we're stuck with. The standards bodies are ineffective and molasses slow at getting anything done. The distinct differences and vendor-specific features between modern rendering engines demonstrates how irrelevant these organisations really are.
There's room in our world for plenty of different browsers and interpretations for what the browsing experience should be, but using a different engine should not be optional for anyone expecting mass acceptance.
They'll be stuck hacking on Webkit if they want anyone to really use their product. The world doesn't need another Presto or Gecko. If their changes are worthwhile, it would become integrated within webkit or used for subsequent versions.
I'm still not seeing how a single, dominant rendering engine (run by an open-source consortium) could ever be a bad thing.