Comment by bitpush
3 months ago
> Mozilla could have had the no-nonsense, high performance browser backend that everyone uses to build their own browsers
I agree with the sentiment, but you underestimate the level of engineering, coordination, design work, testing it is to do this.
It is admirable that they even have a half-decent browser, but to compete at the top you need soooo much money and motivation.
> It is admirable that they even have a half-decent browser, but to compete at the top you need soooo much money and motivation.
I’m guessing Ladybird will prove you wrong in due time
Ladybird will be a Firefox alternative, nothing more. It can't be, by definition. People are not using Chrome, Edge or Safari because they're great browsers. They use it because it's preinstalled and good enough. They don't care, and they won't care in a future where Ladybird is a thing.
Ask 60% of their (Chrome, Edge, Safari) userbase, and they won't even be able to tell you what their browser is called.
I've never had Chrome preinstalled. I use it because it seems to me a great browser despite some annoyances. I think that goes for most Windows users.
> I’m guessing Ladybird will prove you wrong in due time
It'll be a usable product, but it will be extremely extremely niche, until the dev burns out or just quit it.
I hope I'm wrong, but a browser is a XXL type project and needs proper funding (means = there should be a reason for it to exist, not altruistic as lets have an alternate because reasons ..)
Modern web browsers are in the range of 30 million LOC, probably 50% of that is just pure implementation of web platform standards and engine work.
Do you just need to advertise stuff among content creators these days with common sense going out of the window? It'll take them a decade to catch up without any engineering funding at the level that Apple/Google/Mozilla have.
> Do you just need to advertise stuff among content creators these days with common sense going out of the window?
I’m not a content creator and I don’t really care about Ladybird. I use Safari.
I’m just pointing out that browsers have decades of legacy cruft from mis-steps deciding what the web even should be and someone smart can carve out a path to covering 90% of use cases in 10% of the effort and code. And there are the huge organizational costs Google and others pay that a small organization doesn’t have to.
Your argument is the same as looking at a large company (say Microsoft) and saying no one can compete without trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of engineers. Ladybird has the benefit of hindsight, as well as a non-idiotic structure (I assume).
The defeatism among engineers is sad
1 reply →
> It is admirable that they even have a half-decent browser, but to compete at the top you need soooo much money and motivation.
Let's not forget the CEO who paid herself a $6.9m salary in 2022, $5.6m in 2023.