[jonhohle]

We had about 10-15 years or so where the web wasn’t so complex and fast moving that a browser needed constant updates for things to work. Now browsers are more complex that entire operating systems and anything older than a few years just won’t work and publishers think that’s ok. I remember as late as 2008 verifying websites in Lynx (or elinks or links2) to ensure screen readers and low end devices would have a reasonable experience.

Now anything older than a few years is garbage that can be abandoned and websites have no problem using GBs of RAM. What a wasteful, fickle industry software is.

[pndy]

One of my pals was back then writing his thesis around web browsers, modern technologies and components that at that time were considered to be crucial in the upcoming years. He included Acid tests and browser market share; also covered Internet Explorer dominance and Firefox that managed to break it. All of this in context of standard computers - smartphones were about to become a thing.

We went a full circle and whole world nearly runs on a single browser engine. And beyond that if we consider the portability of modern software.

Yet, this Blink-Chromium monoculture is not a matter of concern to competition regulators. Whether because "it is what it is" or perhaps because of some deep shenanigans we don't see, it's terrifying because we lost choice and we're dependable on Google whims. All the hope lies in these small projects that bloomed around, and perhaps even in Firefox - if Mozilla will be ready to take own examination of conscience. But even so, wind of change might be not that strong.