[writepub]

I don't faintly see the logic in this!

The proof is in the pudding on Chrome's tangible open source impact:

1. V8 is used in a multitude of projects, node being the most impact-ful. And node has changed desktop (with electron and CLI apps), server and developer workflow

2. Brave, Edge, Opera are just some of the WideVine licensed Chromium based browsers

On the contrary, iOS has banned almost every tenet of common sense general purpose computing:

1. Safari for iOS is purposefully crippled to drive devs and users to it's app store

2. App store has fluid, whimsical, retroactively applied approval laws, ahem whims.

3. It's a general purpose computer that you can own the hardware of, but need the manufacturer's consent to run software on. You know, like needing your fridge maker's approval for the groceries you stock in it.

4. They purposefully stymie competition:

- Spotify, Google-Maps, etc. are denied APIs that give competing Apple offerings an edge.

- 30% tax on external apps again gives Apple's competing offerings unfair edge

- Complete ban on Just-In-Time compiled code and alternate browser engines is intentional - to stymie features and quality to a default of "below Apple's competing offerings"

How one rationalizes Chrome to be more "anti-trust-y" is contrary to logic

[MaxBarraclough]

> Brave, Edge, Opera are just some of the WideVine licensed Chromium based browsers

Today I learned: the new Edge has both WideVine and PlayReady. I figured they'd just go with PlayReady and be done with it - does WideVine have any real advantages?

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/chromium-mic...

https://www.ghacks.net/2019/04/03/chromium-based-microsoft-e...

[vatueil]

Microsoft PlayReady DRM still the only way to play Netflix in 4K on a PC, correct?

I guess there's no reason not to include Widevine as well, but it's funny how this means the new Microsoft Edge supports features no other Chromium-based browser is allowed to use, including Google Chrome.

Getting rid of DRM in general is fine with me, but I don't understand why the focus on Widevine in particular given that its availability is relatively less restricted.

[MaxBarraclough]

> Microsoft PlayReady DRM still the only way to play Netflix in 4K on a PC, correct?

I believe so, yes. (The Win10 app is powered by PlayReady.)

Mandatory link to the netflix-1080p hack, enabling 1080p Netflix playback on Chrome [0]. I don't think it does 4k though, and I believe it causes awful CPU loads.

[0] https://github.com/truedread/netflix-1080p/blob/master/READM...

[Avery3R]

some content distributors only support widevine

[eitland]

> How one rationalizes Chrome to be more "anti-trust-y" is contrary to logic.

IMO it was not Chrome that was the problem as much as:

... the way Google has rammed it down the troat of the Internet

... the way Google keep sabotaging other browsers from the server side (yep, ask the Edge team about YouTube or Firefox users about GSuite)

... the way a number of developers has picked up these bad habits and forget (or "forget") to check their sites in all browsers

... and of course the bait and switch they are playing now.

[marcus_holmes]

I remember when Chrome launched. And the cheers that followed. Finally, someone was doing something about the complete mess that browsers were in.

So "ramming it down the throat of the internet"... not so much. It was eagerly adopted by everyone because the only alternatives at the time were IE (with it's curious off-standard interpretation of... well...everything) and Firefox (which at the time was unusably slow and difficult).

It's a huge shame that we've got to this point with it, because it has been the driving force behind the massive improvement in browsers over the last dozen years. It's like watching an old friend being forced to humiliate themselves to keep a job :(

[eitland]

> I remember when Chrome launched. And the cheers that followed. Finally, someone was doing something about the complete mess that browsers were in.

I never preferred Chrome myself but I welcomed it.

> So "ramming it down the throat of the internet"... not so much.

That was later when they started to add it to Java JRE downloads and what not.

> and Firefox (which at the time was unusably slow and difficult).

I'm kind of impatient with computers but the difference between Firefox and Chrome was always to small for me to care about compared to what I had to let go to move away from Firefox.

> It's a huge shame that we've got to this point with it, because it has been the driving force behind the massive improvement in browsers over the last dozen years.

According to many of us it has also been a driving force behind making the web less cross browser friendly.

> It's like watching an old friend being forced to humiliate themselves to keep a job :(

More like my friend who became boss and started taking advantage of it until finally a number of old friends are speaking out agains him.

[hesarenu]

Its seems people are more willing to give up freedom for privacy.

[soraminazuki]

No need for whataboutism here, as no one is here to argue that Google’s competitors don’t engage in anti-competitive behavior. This is about how Google uses its open source products to shape web standards to their sole benefit, while using its “openness” to pretend otherwise. The author explicitly singles out Chrome, because it has a huge influence on the entire web despite the little attention it receives from consumers.

> The proof is in the pudding on Chrome's tangible open source impact

Yes, the more influence Chrome has, the better it is for Google.