[dba-Tech] FYI: Moving to "nirvana": if Microsoft were to shift to WebKit, you can thank Opera.

 Hi Jim --

Thank you for your reply.

I must note I haven't written a word on defense of MS in my last posting you have replied to. Why do you repeat that "mantra": "Microsoft-bad-boys, Microsoft-bad-boys..."? 
BTW, I do suppose Microsoft does learn well from their own mistakes, and they do pay high price for that lessons - and it's everybody's own choice to use their technologies and tools (and "share their fails") or not.

But the issue I mentioned wasn't about Microsoft - the issue, which was so well articulated by the author (from FireFox/Mozilla/Gecko/Servo "camp") I referred to, I have to repeat:

"What we do know is that in technology, we've never been served well by monocultures - we know this for sure. I worry that in our desire for clearer definition, easier standards, faster progress, we're forgetting that we know this. Same as it ever was, I suppose."

And so my question is: "Why do you and Hans expect that WebKit monoculture will play well in long run?" (Forks do not make Webkit "mutli-cultural" as it's explained in the article I've referred to).

As far as I see "Mozilla-boys" do not have any strong objections on existence of Trident engine, actually they greet the fact that there are several competing rendering/Javascript engines, and they expect more to come in the near future...

Thank you.

-- Shamil

Понедельник, 18 февраля 2013, 12:16 -08:00 от "Jim Lawrence" <accessd at shaw.ca>:
>Hi Shamil:
>
>From a developers point of view, I have never had any issues with Mozilla as
>they have either made and/or adhered close to the industry standards. In
>this business they are one of the good guys and I hope they keep doing what
>they are doing.
>
>Imagine a railway that has half a dozen variations of track widths. That
>would be a disaster in the making. All our equipment communicates via
>standards in protocols and that does not mean each company using those
>protocols is part of a uniculture. Imagine what would happen in a family if
>every member spoke a different language and refused to communicate in a
>common agreed upon dialect.
>
>Microsoft, with its browser has been the industry bad-boy. I suspect that
>much their deviation from the industries standards stems from the time when
>they were the computer uniculture and what was good for Microsoft was good
>for the industry. I think the company has been a little bitter and has been
>resistant to the new directions and has been muddying the browser market for
>the last five years and now they are suffering appropriately. 
>
>OTOH, I do think or at least hope, that Microsoft can get over themselves
>and that they have learned to be a good citizen like Mozilla and the calls
>for MS to change their FE to Webkit will no longer be necessary.
>
>Jim 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:  dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Salakhetdinov
>Shamil
>Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 9:59 AM
>To: Discussion of Hardware and Software issues
>Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] FYI: Moving to "nirvana": if Microsoft were to shift
>to WebKit, you can thank Opera.
>
> Hi Jim --
>
>Thank you for the link - what about the following opinions coming from
>"Firefox-camp" (read the articles):
>
>"What we do know is that in technology, we've never been served well by
>monocultures - we know this for sure. I worry that in our desire for clearer
>definition, easier standards, faster progress, we're forgetting that we know
>this. Same as it ever was, I suppose."
>
>http://lilly.tumblr.com/post/43088488614/a-few-folks-have-asked-me-what-i-th
>ink-of-the-news
>
>"Why Mozilla Matters" -  "At the Mozilla mission level,  monoculture
> remains a problem that we must fight. The web needs multiple
>implementations of its evolving standards to keep them interoperable."
>
>https://brendaneich.com/2013/02/why-mozilla-matters
>
>-- Shamil
<<< skipped >>>
>