2657
Firefox is the only way.
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2023
2657 points (97.7% liked)
Memes
45902 readers
1742 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Safari still uses the WebKit engine... right?
Google Chrome used to use WebKit before switching to their own weird engine that a whole bunch of other browsers now use.
When Google forked from WebKit to create Blink, they had genuine reasons for it.
Apple was stalling any progress of web by stalling new features in WebKit. They wanted to push their native apps and get big cut from developers' money.
Google had to fork and progress web dev further.
And unfortunately for us, Google folks are greedy assholes who stop at nothing to own everything web even if they have to bend everything.
WEI is a perfect example.
I never expected to fall down a rabbit hole.
I mean, whatever their reasons, for World Wide Web of hypertext pages the list of necessary features shouldn't be so long.
So a good thing.
Anyway, that battle is long lost, so I'm just slowly moving my "internet reading" needs into Gemini. Friends I can't move, though.
If most of what you want out of the web is browsing static web pages, halting development of standards is fine. But if you want to expose capabilities through the browser like location that are available on new platforms instead of relying on platform-specific apps, you're going to need new features.
I don't want that. WWW is not intended for that.
If you want that, there's been Flash and Java applets at least allowing whatever you'd like.
That was the correct way to put cross-platform applications into webpages.
Don't tell me about security problems in those, these are present in any piece of software and fixed with new versions, just like with the browser itself.
Okay, then links awaits you. I'd rather use something that enables powerful in-browser web applications while not relying on a host of proprietary bug ridden plugins.
It's a client for the same broken thing.
This is utter bullshit.
Obfuscated JS is not any less proprietary or bug-ridden than Java bytecode.
google uses blink which is forked from WebKit
@notenoughbutter @Resol, and WebKit is a fork from KHtml made by the German KDE.
Blink is the most used engine, because it's the most compatible with current web standarts, even somewhat more than Gecko. If Apple's Safari insist in it's WebKit, the most outdated engine, it's become the new IE in a near Future.
Named as such because, like Weeping Angels, if you blink you'll be sent back to a society without enforcement of antitrust laws
actually the name of Blink engine is quite interesting, it was named after the non-standard html
blinktag and ironically it never supported it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_(browser_engine)#NamingI don't understand this argument about antitrust laws. As far as i know Google hasn't done anything to block other companies from making their own search engines or browsers. Nor does Value and Steam, nor Microsoft and Windows.
Come on, this is ridiculous.
WEI checks if your browser and system is "genuine" and "unmodified" before letting you access any content "protected" by it, which inevitably leads to smaller and custom mods that don't fit their predetermined criteria for "genuineness" being locked out, which in turn forces you to use Google (and Microsoft and Apple, they’re in on it too) products in order to access certain content and eventually the entire internet, just as surely as it's almost completely impossible to avoid their Google Analytics malware.
And before you say "that's a ridiculous slippery slope fallacy! That'll never happen!", Logitech is already requiring you to go to a website that will only open in Chromium browsers in order to pair devices with the Logitech Unifying Receiver.
Thanks for reminding me of what the hell it was called