7 ms·

And so? Yes people (and companies) would fork your code, but the most realistic scenario would be that the original ladybird would still be the most relevant br

And so? Yes people (and companies) would fork your code, but the most realistic scenario would be that the original ladybird would still be the most relevant browser of it's family, just like firefox, so the problem kinda resolves by itself

bayindirh 2y ago
Then why KDE's Konqueror is not the most prominent browser of the KHTML family, but Safari is?
- rice7th 2y ago
  Because apple themselves forked it. Only a handful of companies have the power to basically change the web browser market, and apple sure was one. Nowadays every company copies from chrome, so why would anyone bother forking ladybird?
  - bayindirh 2y ago
    Doesn't this contradict with what you said? According to your previous comment, even if Apple has forked KHTML, it shouldn't harm Konqueror, and it shall prevail as the most popular of its family. However, Konqueror/KHTML is now dead and we only have a closed source Safari. I can't fathom your comments back to back.
    - rice7th 2y ago
      Apple didn't kill KHTML, the web did. As I've already stated, any company that may fork a similar project would actually cause more benefit than harm. KHTML died because the web started to get very complex very fast and KDE volounteers couldn't keep up with that pace, unlike Apple employees. Now that the web is a bit more stable, with less standards that are more thought-out (webassembly), it's a lot easier to maintain a web browser. So if tomorrow Microsoft hops in and announces it's intent to fork ladybird, then the latter would not only be fine, but it would probably recieve a new wave of contributors.
efilife 2y ago
Imagine if ladybird gets used regularly by ~1000 nerds, which is its current audience, then gets forked by microsoft and the current ME gets replaced by ladybird. Even if ladybird got over 9000 users, there's no competing with megacorps. Also, its* not it's
- paddim8 2y ago
  Well maybe they're ok with that? They want browser diversity. Getting Microsoft to use a new engine is better for diversity than if they just used chromium like now.
  - bayindirh 2y ago
    Getting Microsoft to use a new engine and contribute back to the original repository is better for diversity, but forking and running away with it is certainly not.
    - beretguy 2y ago
      > Getting Microsoft to use a new engine and contribute back to the original repository is better for diversity Oh no no no. We don't need microsoft contributing anything into this. They will mess up everything and push their agenda.
      - bayindirh 2y ago
        Ideally, yes. Microsoft should stay away from this, but I wanted to highlight that adopting a technology doesn't automatically make it better for diversity. Google was almost killing Go overnight because they wanted more user data from people using the language.
    - r3trohack3r 2y ago
      > Forking and running away with it is certainly not If your goal is browser diversity, this would take an ecosystem of 2 browser engines and turn it into an ecosystem of 4. That seems in-line with the goal of browser diversity.

bayindirh 2y ago

Then why KDE's Konqueror is not the most prominent browser of the KHTML family, but Safari is?

rice7th 2y ago
Because apple themselves forked it. Only a handful of companies have the power to basically change the web browser market, and apple sure was one. Nowadays every company copies from chrome, so why would anyone bother forking ladybird?
- bayindirh 2y ago
  Doesn't this contradict with what you said? According to your previous comment, even if Apple has forked KHTML, it shouldn't harm Konqueror, and it shall prevail as the most popular of its family. However, Konqueror/KHTML is now dead and we only have a closed source Safari. I can't fathom your comments back to back.
  - rice7th 2y ago
    Apple didn't kill KHTML, the web did. As I've already stated, any company that may fork a similar project would actually cause more benefit than harm. KHTML died because the web started to get very complex very fast and KDE volounteers couldn't keep up with that pace, unlike Apple employees. Now that the web is a bit more stable, with less standards that are more thought-out (webassembly), it's a lot easier to maintain a web browser. So if tomorrow Microsoft hops in and announces it's intent to fork ladybird, then the latter would not only be fine, but it would probably recieve a new wave of contributors.

efilife 2y ago

Imagine if ladybird gets used regularly by ~1000 nerds, which is its current audience, then gets forked by microsoft and the current ME gets replaced by ladybird. Even if ladybird got over 9000 users, there's no competing with megacorps. Also, its* not it's

paddim8 2y ago
Well maybe they're ok with that? They want browser diversity. Getting Microsoft to use a new engine is better for diversity than if they just used chromium like now.
- bayindirh 2y ago
  Getting Microsoft to use a new engine and contribute back to the original repository is better for diversity, but forking and running away with it is certainly not.
  - beretguy 2y ago
    > Getting Microsoft to use a new engine and contribute back to the original repository is better for diversity Oh no no no. We don't need microsoft contributing anything into this. They will mess up everything and push their agenda.
    - bayindirh 2y ago
      Ideally, yes. Microsoft should stay away from this, but I wanted to highlight that adopting a technology doesn't automatically make it better for diversity. Google was almost killing Go overnight because they wanted more user data from people using the language.
  - r3trohack3r 2y ago
    > Forking and running away with it is certainly not If your goal is browser diversity, this would take an ecosystem of 2 browser engines and turn it into an ecosystem of 4. That seems in-line with the goal of browser diversity.