There's a long, LONG way to go between some EU draft text and actual browser choice for everyone on iOS, but at least this is a hopeful start?

@tojiro Wouldn't that just make Chrome dominate even more?

@narF Safari still has a lot working in it's favor. It's the platform default, and they push the privacy angle hard. Lock-in shouldn't be necessary to keep a browser viable.

@tojiro @narF my biggest fear is this will allow vendors to say “yes, our website appears broken because you need to download browse X” like they already do on desktop.

@kkostov @narF That is indeed terrible behavior, and I hate when sites do it! It's not a reasonable excuse for allowing a major platform to handicap the web, though.

@tojiro @narF I agree. WebKit is also a cool open engine used in different browsers so it's a bit frustrating how iOS's choice has been put in the spotlight. When users are offered a list of default browsers to choose from - they can't tell what engine is underneath and on say Windows or Android they'd choose between the 1 Gecko (maybe) and 10 chromiums. All while Google is pumping strange features into chromium under the monicker of "progress".


@kkostov That "progress" is already coming to fruition with webapps that were impossible just couple years ago and now you can use (and develop) them without any gatekeepers.
But I agree in that people have no idea why they are not available/working on iOS. Browser choice would show that it is just Apple's decision not to support them.
@tojiro @narF

@ondra @tojiro @narF My point was more about the fact that chromium is doing whatever they want and their market share makes it a standard (the very problem Chrome was created to solve). Some devs like that of course because it's easier to target 1 browser instead of several. I would love to see for example a W3C, ECMA or IETF with more authority to keep browser vendors accountable.

@kkostov Yeah, dominant force is never healthy for any ecosystem. We should keep reminding everybody trying to target just one browser where that leads to. Unfortunately, Firefox practically gave up and Safari has conflicts of interest. But for example Microsoft is again starting to keep Google in check.
@tojiro @narF

@ondra @tojiro @narF Every browser has some kind of downsides e.g. Chrome of today is built so its users are the product driving ad sales for Alphabet.... In a "healthy" free, open web, we don't have to rely on one corp (with spotty history) like Microsoft to keep another in check.

@kkostov Oh I think Microsoft is the same old evil corporation as 20 years ago and I hate it with a passion. It's again preinstalling Edge for everybody on Windows, not respecting default browser setting etc. So it's definitely not a good situation. But the doesn't help it.
Apart from the "browser wars" there's also closed app stores vs the open web and I'm glad for the fight Chromium is putting up there.
@tojiro @narF

@ondra @kkostov @tojiro Can we still call this a browser war when Chromium is dominating in 99,9% of the world? Google won. This is a terrible outcome for the free web.

@narF Globally, Chrome is roughly below 2/3rds of the market share. IE was even more dominant in the past and it will be officially killed in a couple weeks (literally).
I'm just saying that it shouldn't be competed with using anti-consumer means. Especially when Apple is profiting from them.
@kkostov @tojiro

@ondra I feel like you are missing the bigger picture. The root cause of Google/Microsoft/Brave etc being able to do whatever they want is because of weak web governance - no incentive for browser vendors to do what's right for the user vs. their bottom line. You are glorifying the role of Chromium as the good party while it facilitates exactly the same problem - you are forced to use to the same engine (chromium) for all web browsers. Sound familiar? #ChromeBrowserBan?

@narF @tojiro

@kkostov C'mon, this is simply a false equivalence. Google isn't banning other browser engines.
I'm not an expert on the web governance but tightening it would probably be hard to enforce? It's an open standard nobody owns and anybody can implement. I'd prefer to involve more non-corporate stakeholders, encourage donations (as incentives) and educate users about their choices. Where they are allowed to have any, that is.
@narF @tojiro

@kkostov And don't get me wrong, I have many reservations against Chrome, but Chromium browsers are unfortunately the only ones that allow me to use wide range of powerful webapps without being tied to one platform.
I'd prefer to use e.g. Firefox for this purpose but it decided for a different path.

Chromium embedders can and do extend or disable parts of the underlying browser engine to meet their needs, whereas only Apple can modify WebKit on iOS.

I'm all for greater browser diversity, but unfortunately it's more of an economic issue than anything else. Browsers are HUGE and expensive to maintain. Not many orgs can afford to go it alone. Using Chromium means that you're benefitting from multiple companies engineering talents + your own.
@kkostov @ondra @narF

@tojiro @kkostov @ondra But why Chromium, controlled by Google, instead of something more free/libre/ethical?

@tojiro @kkostov @ondra For example, why is Electron based on Chromium instead of Firefox? (or whatever engine is behind FF)

@narF @kkostov @ondra Because that's what the developers chose to base it on? Maybe the integration patterns suited their needs better? I'm not sure what you're implying here.

And there was an Electron-like product based on Gecko called "positron". Seems like Mozilla isn't maintaining it, though.

Deno is another interesting project to watch in this space, built with Rust.

@tojiro @kkostov @ondra Not implying anything. I'm just a random internet citizen asking questions. I am worried about the future of the internet in a world where 1 company control all browsers and all apps that are made for Electron... 😕

@tojiro @ondra @narF then lets ditch all engines and focus on the one, Google-powered engine? We'd leave it to the likes of Microsoft to choose to disable the "bad" stuff and trust them them to implement the "good" ones like "buy now pay later"...

Significant community effort was expended to "liberate iOS" even though it already had open browser choice and mandating WebKit actually added to the overall experience. Instead, that effort could have gone towards solutions for the web in general...

@kkostov Are you arguing for more browser diversity (1st paragraph) just not on iOS (2nd paragraph)?

The effort to make the web better is quite hindered by the significant user base that can't benefit from it (unless that effort is put into WebKit).
@tojiro @narF

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!