[Yzupnick]

Monopolies are ok if they are created and kept through legitimate means. And I think WebKit's monopoly on phones is legitimate and well deserved. If Microsoft put together a comparable engine (and it is very possible they have, I haven't tested it) then I would be happy that there is competition. But diversity for diversity's sake is not a good reason to not use WebKit. In fact it is very possible it would do more harm then good.

I am hoping* that Microsoft drops IE (the rendering engine not the browser), and throws it's support behind the Gecko engine. With Microsoft supporting Gecko, and Google and Apple supporting WebKit, we should see nice growth browser's capabilities.

*I know this won't happen, but who says a man can't dream.

[kprobst]

The issue is not whether the monopoly is good or bad, but rather that its existence creates what is essentially a monoculture. I'd rank that as more of a concern, especially when we're talking about consumer devices.

[ddagradi]

A monoculture where developers aren't hindered by supporting a mediocre browser with a breadth of missing features? Count me in.

[daeken]

You do realize that everyone said this in support of IE6 taking over the market, right? Don't repeat the mistakes of the past.

[taken11]

IE6 is single vendor, single platform, it is closed source, so it does not at all compare to webkit which is cross platform, open source and on top of that multi vendor.