Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Feb 2013 13:21 UTC
Opera Software De kogel is door de kerk: as we already talked about earlier, Opera is going to switch to the WebKit engine, leaving its own Presto rendering engine behind. We didn't yet know if they would the switch only on mobile or on the desktop as well, and they cleared that up too: both mobile and desktop Opera Browsers will switch to the WebKit rendering engine.
Thread beginning with comment 552387
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by ssokolow
by cdude on Wed 13th Feb 2013 21:32 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ssokolow"
cdude
Member since:
2008-09-21

Only in a parallel universe. Microsoft themself spoke out loud just recently that please, please web-designers, not forget the IE.

Firefox and WebKit. That's the landscape. Both working together well on all platforms (including Windows) and usually if it works in one it does in the other too.

Its IE being far behind like still not supporting for example WebGL, still not working on THE major platforms Android and iOS.

Edited 2013-02-13 21:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by ssokolow
by lucas_maximus on Thu 14th Feb 2013 00:31 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ssokolow"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Only in a parallel universe. Microsoft themself spoke out loud just recently that please, please web-designers, not forget the IE.


Yeah well that what happened to the other companies with IE6 back in 2001 ... and that turned out soooo well didn't it?

We had no browser innovation for years. Everything was written for the one browser.

The same is happening with webkit but in the mobile space.

Firefox and WebKit. That's the landscape. Both working together well on all platforms (including Windows) and usually if it works in one it does in the other too.


I want a landscape where I can program against the spec and each browser behave the same, whatever the platform.

As other have said, there are hundreds of browsers that use some form of webkit. It is fragmented ... write once hack everywhere.

There are blog posts on pretty well respected web development sites that are saying that same as I do.

Its IE being far behind like still not supporting for example WebGL, still not working on THE major platforms Android and iOS.


Also WebGL is a crap spec.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/87696-webgl-is-fundamentally-f...

http://www.contextis.com/research/blog/webgl-more-webgl-security-fl...

BUT HEY LETS SUPPORT IT even though there are major security issues.

Also while IE10 isn't bleeding edge, it has all the important features that most web developers want to use today.

Lets not forget that jQuery team actually came out and said that there are less shims for modern IE than Chrome and Safari.

I really wish this drivel that is years out of date would not be repeated.

IE is released as a product for Windows, Microsoft really release IE for corporate customers, even their own evangelists say this.

I don't use IE as a browser, but IE9 and IE10 are as capable as Firefox and Chrome.

Edited 2013-02-14 00:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by ssokolow
by Tony Swash on Thu 14th Feb 2013 01:00 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ssokolow"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22


Yeah well that what happened to the other companies with IE6 back in 2001 ... and that turned out soooo well didn't it?

We had no browser innovation for years. Everything was written for the one browser.

The same is happening with webkit but in the mobile space.
other too.


I think the difference is in intent, which in turn is a function of business model. Right from the start Microsoft saw the web as a threat to it's business which was to ensure that everything that supported it's OS/Productivity monopoly flourished and everything that even remotely threatened it or even opened an alternative space did not flourish. Microsoft thought that a neutral browser that ran equally well on any platform undermined it's platform strategy. It's answer was a closed proprietary browser engine and the crushing of netscape by leveraging the Windows OS monopoly. Once netscape was finished and IE ruled Microsoft lost interest in browser development because they didn't want the web to be a rich and developing experience, they wanted it to be a tepid backwater compared to Windows apps.

Now compare that to Webkit, which is open and non-proprietary. Both the most important companies driving webkit development, Google and Apple, want an open standards based feature rich web, although both want that for different reasons. They don't want that because they are kind of heart, they want that because an open standards based feature rich web enhances and synegises with both their (different) core business models.

I think it is unlikely that webkit will go the way of IE.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Comment by ssokolow
by PresentIt on Thu 14th Feb 2013 07:32 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ssokolow"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

Also WebGL is a crap spec.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/87696-webgl-is-fundamentally-f...

http://www.contextis.com/research/blog/webgl-more-webgl-security-fl...

BUT HEY LETS SUPPORT IT even though there are major security issues.

So because something has a flaw, it is crap.

What amazing logic!

I love how the Microsoft fans are attacking WebGL despite Microsoft's alternative being even worse in the security department.

Wow, a single vulnerability in WebGL! If that means it's crap, then all browsers, ever, are crap.

Reply Parent Score: 2