Apple's Conquest Of Mobile Browsing Continues With Google Phone Platform
from the open-source-browser dept
Google's GPhone (non-)announcement wasn't a big surprise, but some of the tidbits that are now emerging about the Android mobile OS are intriguing. For example, in a new video, Google's Steve Horowitz mentions that the default Android web browser will be based on Webkit, which he says is "the industry standard these days." Webkit is the open source package of web browser libraries that's at the heart of Apple's Safari web browser, and was originally based on the Linux Konquerer browser. Nokia gave the libraries a big boost last year when it announced a WebKit-based browser for its own mobile phones. And this year, Apple used WebKit as the foundation for the iPhone's web browser. The Google announcement further consolidates WebKit's status as a leading platform for mobile web browsers. The choice of WebKit for mobile browsing makes sense. Mobile browsers need to be fast and have a small footprint, and Apple originally chose the Konquerer codebase because it found it to be much leaner than Mozilla's codebase. The growing popularity of WebKit is good news for Mac Safari users (like me), who are less likely to see those annoying "your browser is not supported" messages when they visit websites. It's also good for the broader web-browsing public, as it represents the rise of a third major competitor in the browser market. As WebKit continues to grow in popularity, it will make more sense for website developers to focus on conforming to standards rather than customizing a site to the quirks of a particular browser. That, in turn, will force Microsoft (and Mozilla, but mostly Microsoft) to focus on conforming to the standards themselves, contributing to a virtuous circle of standards compliance that ultimately makes everyone's lives easier.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: browsers, mobile, open source, webkit
Companies: apple, google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I dream of that day. But I won't believe it can exist until I see it (maybe in my next life?).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Standards
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just think, if every browser conformed to standars, what the hell would be the difference between one browser and the next? They would all be the same and then the competition would be who allows the most fluff.
ack
[ link to this | view in thread ]
umm you don't know what you are talking about....
Standards Compliance has little or nothing to do with how useful a browser is, how the bookmarks/favorites are arranged, whether it has tabbed browsing or not, what it's security is like, what addons it supports, etc...
If all browsers magically became 100% compliant to all relevant standars the majority of users wouldn't even notice on the majority of popular sites. But web developers sure would notice, and they would kneel down and give thanks to whatever entity performed such a miracle!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: umm you don't know what you are talking about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nokia WebKit is not same as Apple's WebKit
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wrong
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: umm you don't know what you are talking about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Hairball treatments.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Open Standards
Conversely, there is no standard in the mobile phone world. We have M$, Apple, OpenMoko, Symbian. It's kind of a wild west, at the moment. Google is just trying to capitalize on that, and give developers a chance to code for an "open" standard.
I like to go on the "just think if M$ or Apple controlled..." types of rants. I'll give you an example. What if one company controlled IEEE 802.11b. Just stacked that body with a bunch of corporate shills. Wouldn't that be a nightmare. "This router only works with genuine Microsoft parts" or "Will only work with Airport".
So, I tend to believe that open, transparent standards are good. Now, the fact that Google still decides what ultimately stays in the code is a bit problematic...but, oh well. I'll fight that battle another day, once Sauron is neutralized.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
He was speaking about their "core", because this is what allows you to view web pages which were not explicitly written for your browser. Imagine being a web programmer and having to write separate HTML for 20 different common web browsers? Standards give a unified foundation so that actual progress can be made, instead of a 10-year battle over how to impliment technology which was old news a decade ago.
Hell, why don't we do away with all standards! SCREW OPERATING SYSTEMS, with their attempt to allow programs to run the same on different configurations. Screw OpenGL and Direct3D, whose main use is to provide a standard to allow 3D graphics to run across different hardware platforms! All programs should just be written separately for every platform, because it promotes COMPETITION BASED ON FEATURES!
So, when you go and buy some Spreadsheet program, instead of having a Mac and PC version, you'll have the:
Intel x86
-Willamette
-Northwood
-Prescott
-Gallatin
-Cedar Mill
Intel x86-64
-Conroe
-Allendale
-Merom
-Kentsfield
-Yorkfield
-Penryn
AMD 32-bit
AMD 64
...etc etc...
Wow! There could be hundreds of independent versions of the same core application. And the best part is, since they would most likely be forced to be developed somewhat independently (independent of standards), NONE OF THE FILES WOULD WORK ON THE OTHER PLATFORMS!
Hell, everyone could design their own file-system too! Or if you want to make images in your app, MAKE YOUR OWN IMAGE FORMAT, because otherwise all products would be the same. Reinvent the wheel every time, just for the sake of being different. I know that is the type of mentality that OOP is all about! (If you missed that reference, then wiki it)
Oh YA! DOWN WITH STANDARDS!
Your right, this DOES sound like a better world!
(BTW- If you are being sarcastic, then this is directed at anyone who was inadvertently agreeing with your stated opinion)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Innofest2007
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wow
It may even force Apple to conform to standards too!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WebKit != Apple
In fact, almost all the "fancy" features you see in the iPhone browser (full-page view and spot zooming, for example) were available in the 2006 public beta of Microsoft's Deepfish browser.
Get up off your knees in the Apple office. Claiming WebKit is somehow "Apple's" is disrespectful to all the thousands of opensource hours that went into it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]