While Google's new Chrome web browser has been met with a lot of praise and positive responses (well, mostly, at least), there has been one nagging issue that arose quite quickly after people got their hands on Chrome: the End User License Agreement accompanying the browser. It more or less granted Google the rights to everything seen or transmitted through the browser. Google now changed the EULA, saying it was a big case of woopsiedoopsie.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-06
I'd say the "main contributor"s were the KHTML dev team members, since probably that's still the largest part of the code base (I'm not sure, I didn't take a look, but I presume). Anyway, credit was given, so whatever, important is that it's based on a good rendering engine which hopefully will only get better.
Member since:2006-03-10
Heh... witty, but I wonder if you tried Konqueror in the years before Apple got their finger out and started contributing code back to KHTML? Granted, I never used it full-time, but when I did use it I found no cause for complaint with the rendering abilities. I'd say it was faster and less prone to leakage over time than Firefox, without a doubt, and my layouts never needed tweaking for any bugs. If the surrounding interface hadn't been left for dead by Firefox's I'd probably be using it now.
Apple have helped it along a lot, no argument, but to suggest that they are responsible for the bulk of its current quality seems like the effects of a Reality Distortion Field(TM)...
Member since:2008-05-26
I agree - KHTML worked really well before Apple got its hands on it, and even with Apple's influence it still just works really well. Did Apple actually do anything except introduce security flaws and get it working with their Safari code?
Look in the credits for Konqueror. Most names there are from KDE. The "Apple Safari Developers" are credited as just that, not "Webkit Developers".
As for the license, a lot of EULAs are copied and pasted. My mother's iPod came with the Mac OS X EULA prohibiting her from using iTunes with our Windows computer. It's no excuse for copying, especially since one inappropriate clause in a EULA can leave your company open to litigation.
Member since:
2005-06-29
which is why I said "main contributor" ...