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 552431
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Comment by ssokolow
by cyrilleberger on Thu 14th Feb 2013 09:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ssokolow"
cyrilleberger
Member since:
2006-02-01

You miss the point, everything will be built for Webkit first and everything else second, just like it was for IE6 ...


And that is a problem ? IE6 was a problem for two reasons:

1) it was not developed anymore, meaning no progress
2) only available on a single platform

IE6 was all about locked-in, locking users on windows, and locking users on microsoft technologies. All of that is not possible with Webkit. Since it is LGPL, it cannot become proprietary, and, if Apple cannot prevent others to use Webkit on different platform, also Apple cannot stop progress, if Apple decides to stop development of Webkit, no problem, Google and Opera will carry on the work, and it will give them a competitive advantage over Apple. This is the major difference between IE6 and Webkit, one was blocking progress, the other one cannot.

because developers aren't following the spec they are developing for Webkit only.


Shame on developers for developing website that works in real life instead of developing website that would work in a theoretical world...

That said, there is still the need for a good specification to make sure that rendering does not get broken across version of webkit. And that is an area where Opera is a very welcomed addition to the webkit world, they have always been the best at respecting the specification.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[7]: Comment by ssokolow
by lucas_maximus on Thu 14th Feb 2013 09:17 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ssokolow"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

And that is a problem ? IE6 was a problem for two reasons:

1) it was not developed anymore, meaning no progress
2) only available on a single platform

IE6 was all about locked-in, locking users on windows, and locking users on microsoft technologies. All of that is not possible with Webkit. Since it is LGPL, it cannot become proprietary, and, if Apple cannot prevent others to use Webkit on different platform, also Apple cannot stop progress, if Apple decides to stop development of Webkit, no problem, Google and Opera will carry on the work, and it will give them a competitive advantage over Apple. This is the major difference between IE6 and Webkit, one was blocking progress, the other one cannot.


You are still missing the point. It is a mono-culture of Webkit and there are loads of incompatible forks.

Incompatible forks means lots of fragmentation. Fragmentation is a nightmare for developers.

Also if your browser isn't webkit based on mobile, well your browser won't work with a huge number of mobile sites.

Shame on developers for developing website that works in real life instead of developing website that would work in a theoretical world...

That said, there is still the need for a good specification to make sure that rendering does not get broken across version of webkit. And that is an area where Opera is a very welcomed addition to the webkit world, they have always been the best at respecting the specification.


The standard is moot if everyone treats webkit as the de-facto standard. The Standard becomes webkit ... the same complaints are made about Microsoft Office not supporting ODF.

Edited 2013-02-14 09:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Comment by ssokolow
by Tony Swash on Thu 14th Feb 2013 10:59 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by ssokolow"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22


The standard is moot if everyone treats webkit as the de-facto standard. The Standard becomes webkit ... the same complaints are made about Microsoft Office not supporting ODF.


I don't really understand what you are complaining about or indeed what you want to happen instead.

You seem to be saying that having a single open source non-proprietry standard engine for the web upon which anybody can build different types of browsers is in itself a bad idea.

Why?

Isn't that exactly the best way to do things. Don't you think it is worse for the web, for users, for developers and for web site authors to be faced with multiple render engines, some of which only exist so that a single company can claim a stake in the web.

Compared to all other models of how one might go about ensuring a standards based and open web I cannot see what is wrong with the Webkit model.

Personally I hope all the alternatives to webkit die and die soon.

Reply Parent Score: 3