I think part of the problem is that browsers don't really serve their original purpose anymore.

Google functionally controls just enough of a monopoly via chrome that they can generally do whatever they want (and not do whatever they don't want to do). So that standards still mostly can't do anything google isn't enthusiastic about dumping dev time into.

And they're just barely not enough of a monopoly that they can't just go wild and actually turn the browser into a locked down capital-P Product. Safari and Firefox (in that order... much to my chagrin) are holding them back from that.

So browsers just kind of hang out, not doing too terribly much, when obviously there are strong technical forces that want the browser to finally finish morphing from a document viewer to an application runtime. Finally fulfill the dream of silverlight and java applets/JNLP and so on. But nobody wants to bother doing that if they don't get to control it (and firefox doesn't have the dev power to just trailblaze alone in OSS spirit).

So instead the js people just have to plow along doing their best with the app-runtime version of NAND chips since the incentives don't want to offer them anything better at the browser/platform level.

▲

ChadNauseam 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Google functionally controls just enough of a monopoly via chrome that they can generally do whatever they want

Crazy statement. Any API not supported by Safari might as well not exist.

	▲	paulryanrogers 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		How many APIs in Chrome today will never appear in Safari? WebSQL? WebUSB? It seems like Safari bends towards whatever is in common use, at least within a few years.

▲

branko_d 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> app-runtime version of NAND

In the last 10 years, 3D NAND memory has scaled 10x (in bits per unit area). So… maybe not the best analogy?

	▲	mrsilencedogood an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I mean NAND circuit primitives. Jokingly referring to the fact that NAND operations are all you need to build a complete logic system, but it's not very fun/ergonomic. And I'm joking that js is basically doing that but with whatever random js stuff browsers provide - which is basically just "js can do function calls. I guess let's build our entire framework on function calls."

▲

jgalt212 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> there are strong technical forces that want the browser to finally finish morphing from a document viewer to an application runtime

I really hope that never happens if only because the web dev on ramp will discourage anyone without preexisting technical chops.

▲

ozim 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We are mostly there and I am all for it.

No other GUI runtime or framework delivers true cross platform implementation. HTML, CSS and js are as open and as standard as it gets.

GTK sucks in its own ways and is not international standard.

▲

pdntspa 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> because the web dev on ramp will discourage anyone without preexisting technical chops.

This is a good thing! It keeps salaries high and keeps the dilettantes out. I am sick of getting my work devalued by morons

There are too many people trying to build "tech" who shouldn't be. We need more gatekeepers

	▲	likium 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		We need lower barriers so users aren’t beholden to a handful of walled gardens. When big tech can’t collude, salaries might in fact go up.