OSNews

I am not sure I understand your argument here. You think that the more devs who back a technology equates to more users who use it?

(Please remember- when toolkit devs talk about users, they usually mean those devs who use the API's which they have written, not users who simply install applications on their desktops which are built with these libraries.)

Well hate to burst your bubble but users(of which only 1% are devs) rarely choose tech based on the kind of criteria which actually count for devs. If this was not the case why are there so many millions of users using software which devs decry each and every day for myriads of technical reasons. Indirectly of course there is a connection-if devs are not paid to work on code, or are not driven to scratch an itch by working with code, users never see applications based on that code. But do I need to point out the myriad of truly horrible applications written by paid developers ?

Moreover don't forget the money involved here: most of the Mozilla hackers are not being paid by corporations who are directly investing in Mozilla-but there are significant financial interests behind Webkit-Nokia developed the GTK-Webkit port and purchased the company, Trolltech, which integrated Webkit into QT, not to mention what Apple has invested it, and now Google is investing in it.

These are major corporations with tremendous capital-they are paying dozens if not hundreds of developers to work on and around Webkit code. In a lot of circles the number of "professional" devs equates directly to product quality. I adamantly refute this position- I see NO positive correlation whatsoever between the number of paid developers and the quality of the software produced. I am not going to cite examples because there are so many that I cannot even begin to count them. I am not saying that there is no good software being written by devs being paid to write it- yet quality is not a function of financial investement.

I cannot help but feel that a lot of the fanboyism I see here is inspired by capitalist fetishism brought on by very expensive product marketing. This same old mantra crops up over and over again leading to people worshiping Apple or Sun or Microsoft because of their financial success in the market- as if that was *the* measure of quality which really counts. These people go into orgasm when Apple farts, Sun hickups or Microsoft takes a dump.

Sun has after many, many years seen the light and embraced the culture of Free Software. Apple has made liberal use of Open Source software but remains at odds with the Free Software community. Google is built almost in it's entirety on Free Software and is a contributer to the Free Software community-But both Apple and Google still hedge their market success on propietary software, although Google positions itself as active members of the community and Apple positions itself as reluctant particpators.

The initial code dump by Netscape which gave birth to the Mozilla project was the single largest and most important gift to the Free Software world until Sun released Open Office and later Java. The birth of the Mozilla project was absolutely pivotal to the success we see today of Free Software-at a time when virtually no one was taking Free Software seriously, a choice few had the wisdom and insight to take such a bold step-without which we likely not have much of the Free Software we have today.

Apple did not simply give Webkit to the Free Software community- Apple based Webkit on work produced by the Free Software community and was obligated by it's Free Software license to share it with rest of the community. Netscape made the choice to freely offer their own work as did Sun-this distinction, the distinction between being obligated to share by the license and wanting to share, in order to create communites, is extremely significant to some of us.

So much of the hype around Webkit is coming from people who are being paid to promote it(most of the blogs I read which are so unconditionally, and uncritically support Webkit and demonize Mozilla are employees of Nokia(either via maemo in the GTK camp or Trolltech in the Qt camp). Whereas most of those who strongly support Mozilla have little to no financial interest in the Mozilla project.

I am glad to see that Webkit has spawned a large Free Software community-one that has proven a fertile ground for a large number of commerical startups springing up around Nokia and the larger mobile computing industry. I want to see Free Software developers also being financially successful, I do not begrudge them their commercial self-interest. But I do not swallow hook line and sinker much of what they boast in technical blogs which, when the double-speak is removed, is little more that corporate advertising.

I also believe that there is far more to Webkit than merely the financial interests behind it- I think there are sound technological design factors which contributed greatly to it's success. So a lot of the praise is genuine praise based on it's technical merits. But the genuine praise is often washed out by the tides of knee-jerk market identification and thinly veiled corporate advertising.

Google who has perhaps the largest financial interest in Mozilla has chosen Webkit for their browser work in Chrome and Android-but only after having renewed a multi-year contract with Mozilla. Google will support Mozilla as long as Mozilla has millions of user. It is simply not in their interest to weaken Mozilla. The opposite is the case. The more successful the Mozilla project is, the more the market opens up for Google web apps to compete with Microsofts dominance with IE and their Office software.

It is obvious to anyone who has payed attention to Googles offerings over the years: Google has no interest in creating desktop applications which absolutely dominate any particular market. They do however have an interest in dominating certain domains in the web service/application realm(search, maps, gmail, google docs, and of course their ongoing digitalization of documents).

And it may come to pass that there are more users using mobile web browsers than people running browsers on their desktop pc's. But that day has not come and we are talking about very, very different markets. Webkit based browsers on PC's have only a fraction of the user base which Mozilla enjoys.