• JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Everything else I said, sorry if that wasn’t clear!

    Essentially there are organizations like W3C and IEEE that define standards for how the internet works and how websites behave. All browsers follow these so everything works properly. Let’s say you have some idea you want to add to your browser you develop. You do it and tell everyone about it. You don’t have many users. Maybe a few sites do it but it isn’t really a problem that it doesn’t work on other browsers because so few people do it.

    Chromium has a massive market share because so many browsers use it as their base. Even Opera and Microsoft Edge which historically have been alternatives to Google Chrome now use Chromium as their base. The danger is that Chromium has such a large user base that they are essentially what the standard is.

    As a quick aside, Chromium is the name for the open source base of Google Chrome. Chrome itself is technically not open source. This jus thust in case you or other readers haven’t seen that word.

    Imagine a world where everyone uses Chromium. Why would you (if you were in charge of Chromium) need to listen to what standards organizations say about how the web should work? You’re literally in charge of every browser! You can just add some new features or take some out and every website would have to comply because you (in this hypothetical) truly do control every single web browser on the planet. Their websites would not work otherwise.

    Sure, out of the goodness of your heart you might behave and be a good steward but there will always be reasons for you to act against the standards that you don’t view as “bad” that other people might think are bad. I’m not saying all standards organizations are perfect and good or anything like that, but I believe I trust them more than Google.

    Even if Google never does anything “bad” (naive thinking lol) avoiding the situation where they have that kind of power is a good thing.

    To me that’s the most important reason to use a non-Chromium based browser. To avoid Chromium becoming the one true browser.

    And just for some context, Google has done bad things before with regards to web standards and then having the de facto standard with Chrome. The recent changes to the extension API to neuter ad blocking being a prime example. And we don’t even have to speculate and sound like nutjobs. They’re a public company. They’ve said before that ad-blocking is one of the biggest threats to their ad revenue. Not that it feels tin foil hatty to suggest even if they hadn’t said it, but they actually have said it in reports.

    • jarfil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      organizations like W3C and IEEE that define standards for how the internet works and how websites behave

      Too bad those organizations kept dragging their feet, writing standards by committee and making them unimplementable, pushing stuff like XHTML that nobody in their sane mind wanted… until the WHATWG called quits on them and focused on a working living standard: a reference free open source browser that anyone could just copy+paste to meet the standard.

      Nowadays we call that “Chromium”.

      • Rakn@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        No actually we don’t. Chromium isn’t a reference implementation. And while XHTML was handled poorly the idea behind it was actually very interesting. Didn’t pan out and was buried years ago. So what.

        • jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Chromium isn’t a reference implementation

          Could fool me, since it implements all WHATWG standards… or is it the other way around?

          XHTML didn’t just “not pan out”; the W3C kept beating its dead horse carcass, like it did with many others. The W3C didn’t pan out and was handled poorly, even though the idea behind it was actually very interesting.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why do you believe Google would not be able to ignore the WHATWG the same way they could ignore other standards organizations if they controlled the entire browser market?

        • jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, for starters the WHATWG listens to Google, not the other way around. And yeah, they do “control” the entire “browser market”, or more precisely, the part they care about: how to show ads.

            • jarfil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              That’s one way of seeing it.

              I don’t agree with the W3C or IEEE defining the standards anymore, or with Chromium becoming a “de facto” standard; the whole point of creating the WHATWG was to explicitly ditch the W3C, make Chromium into the basis for a living standard… and everyone clapped (except for some die hards who didn’t get the memo).

              • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Yeah, I see, I was just trying to list some examples of such standardization bodies I’m talking about. Don’t view it as some implicit approval over others I didn’t mention.