Twitter | Search | |
Kenneth Auchenberg
Thought: It's time for 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%?
Microsoft is officially giving up on an independent shared platform for the internet. By adopting Chromium, Microsoft hands over control of even more of online life to Google. This may ...
Mozilla Mozilla @mozilla
Reply Retweet Like More
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 24
Replying to @mozilla
... and this is my personal opinion.
Reply Retweet Like
💖Taudry Hepburn💖 Jan 24
Replying to @auchenberg @mozilla
(Chrome engineer here.) This isn't very helpful. :( Moz is doing some great, groundbreaking work, in ways that they realistically couldn't do in the Chromium project. I don't want to see them go.
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 24
Replying to @tabatkins @mozilla
I don't want them to go either, but they should re-org into a research institution instead trying to justify themselves with the "protectors of the web" narrative. It's tiring.
Reply Retweet Like
Michał Gołębiowski-Owczarek Jan 25
Replying to @auchenberg @mozilla
Standards need 2 independent implementations. Switch everyone to Chromium and standards will be dead. It will be impossible to even approve a new ECMAScript version...
Reply Retweet Like
Kris Siegel Jan 26
I think it’s a valid opinion to argue that Mozilla and WebKit (if you consider it different enough from blink), keeping their separate implementations, shows that they care deeply about the web whereas Opera and, unfortunately now Microsoft, less so But that’s just my opinion 🤷‍♀️
Reply Retweet Like
Discount Bamforth (50% off) Jan 26
Replying to @auchenberg @mozilla
We tried this before with IE6, and the downsides were arguably worse than the upsides. We can't allow a single company to be in charge of the tools we use to access information.
Reply Retweet Like
Jeremy Keith Jan 26
Replying to @auchenberg @mozilla
(and I know that plenty of people on the Chrome team feel the same way; they understand that diversity is vital for the health of the web and fully support Mozilla.)
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
I don't neglect the important work Mozilla has contributed, but here's a few observations shapes my perspective: 1) The modern web platform is incredible complex. Today it's an application runtime comparable to the Java or .net framework.
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
2) This complexity it's incredibly expensive to implement a web runtime. Even for Google/Microsoft it's hard to justify such investment that would take thousands of engineers in multiple years. The web has become too capable for multi engines, just like many frameworks.
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
3) Contribution can happen on many levels, and why is it given that each browser vendor has to land their contributions in *their own* engine? What isn't the question what drives most impact for the web as a holistic platform?
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
4) My problem with Mozilla's current approach is that they are *preaching* their own technology instead of asking themselves how they can contribute most and deliver most impact for the web? Deliver value to 65% of the market or less than 5%?
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
5) This leads to my bigger point: In a world where the web platform has evolved into a complex .application runtime, maybe it's time to revise the operation and contribution model. Does the web need a common project and an open governance model like fx Node Foundation?
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
6) What if browser vendors contributed to a "common webplat core" built together and each vendor did their platform specific optimizations instead of building their own reference implementations off a specification from a WG? That's what I mean by "parallel universes".
Reply Retweet Like
Nathan Fritz 🌯🤔 Jan 26
Replying to @auchenberg @mozilla
The benefits of open standards don't work without multi implementations from multiple parties. Otherwise it just turns into a dictated experience. Something that is unacceptable for a platform if open discourse and open publishing. Not to mention the benefits of competion.
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
7) I believe Mozilla can be much more impactful on the holistic web platform if they took a step back and revised their strategy instead of throwing rocks after Google/MS/etc.
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @adactio @mozilla
8) I want the web to win, but we need collaboration not parallel universes. Writing specs together is no longer enough. The real threat to the web platform is not another browser engine, but native platforms, as they don't give a damn about an open platform.
Reply Retweet Like
Jeremy Keith Jan 26
Replying to @auchenberg @mozilla
The collaboration you describe would be a monopoly. Competition is vital.
Reply Retweet Like
Kenneth Auchenberg Jan 26
Replying to @fritzy @mozilla
What are you basing this on? Comparing closed-source IE to open-source Gecko? Open source Chromium where multiple vendors already contribute together?
Reply Retweet Like
Jeremy Keith Jan 26
Replying to @auchenberg @mozilla
Presumably any independent e-commerce platforms should give up their “parallel universes” and throw their lot in with Amazon. The numbers work out about the same as with browser share. And CMSs? Very complex. They should probably all contribute to WordPress instead, right?
Reply Retweet Like