Not necessarily. What we need is a browser industry where negotiations over standards happen in good faith. Because that didn't happen, we got IE6 holding back the web for nearly a decade. Because that didn't happen, we got WHATWG.
Opera, Firefox, Apple and later Google have vividly demonstrated that it is possible to have a diverse range of browsers while safeguarding interoperability and pushing forward on new tech. Microsoft came late to that party after W3C was embarrassed into adopting WHATWG's work and have yet to show solid commitment to being a trustworthy industry player rather than simply cherrypicking from work done by others in order to make themselves look good.*
* OK, so that may be overstating the case and the IE team has contributed under the W3C process. Still, WHATWG is not going to stand still and Microsoft still hasn't gotten on board with that.
Comments
Course it shouldn't. If you're going to kill off browsers then sooner or later we'll end up with one all over again.
Not necessarily. What we need is a browser industry where negotiations over standards happen in good faith. Because that didn't happen, we got IE6 holding back the web for nearly a decade. Because that didn't happen, we got WHATWG.
Opera, Firefox, Apple and later Google have vividly demonstrated that it is possible to have a diverse range of browsers while safeguarding interoperability and pushing forward on new tech. Microsoft came late to that party after W3C was embarrassed into adopting WHATWG's work and have yet to show solid commitment to being a trustworthy industry player rather than simply cherrypicking from work done by others in order to make themselves look good.*
* OK, so that may be overstating the case and the IE team has contributed under the W3C process. Still, WHATWG is not going to stand still and Microsoft still hasn't gotten on board with that.
What's wrong with killing the weakest, so the drove has a better chance to withstand in the future?
Because there's another weakest next in line.