Filed under: web 2.0,
Browsers
Whatever
happened to being
different?
Once upon a time, difference was revered. Heck, I still think people, deep down, admire difference.
It takes guts and balls and nerve to stand
out from the crowd, to stand
up for
the ideas and paradigms that are important to us. Being truly different -- doing something that no
one has done before -- pushes boundaries. I'm not talking about wearing eyeliner because the other
kids are doing it; I'm talking about
innovation.
That's the very definition of 'risk'. Turning up to work in a short skirt is risky. Investing your
money in a new venture is risky. Working on something without the promise of an immediate gain
(financial or otherwise), is risk incarnate. But despite the chance of failure, and the associated
loss of face or funds, we
still take risks --
why? Individuals and
corporations invest millions of man hours and billions of dollars into innovation every year. In
many cases they risk everything for one big pay-off.
Often that pay-off never comes. Start-ups and garden-shed inventors come and go with nary a ripple
made in the global market. But does that stop the next generation from risking their chips on a
single throw of the die?
No. Human nature dictates that we get up and try again -- unless you're a web browser developer, of
course. In that case you're one of those kids that reads magazines to find out this month's
eyeliner trend. The major browsers are hopping over each other to be the cool kid in school, while
the science lab goes unoccupied and innovation all but ceases.
In 2009, between the five big browsers -- Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, Safari and Opera --
we saw a grand total of
three new, never-before-seen features:
Chrome
Frame (pretty cool, and a great way to free those poor sods that are locked into IE6);
HTML 5 support (as we've seen since the start of 2010, this is going to be a big
thing this year); and... wait, that's it. There is no third. In 2009 we saw
two new
innovations in browser technology.
Sure, there have been advances but no
changes; no alterations in
how we surf.
True, JavaScript performance has increased considerably. Yes, all of the browsers are approaching
some semblance of standards-compliance. Even Firefox and Chrome have finally joined Opera in the
ability to customize the browser's look and feel.
But so what? We don't
congratulate Intel on producing faster CPUs -- that's just what they're meant to do! Where is the
2009 equivalent of per-tab processes or incognito browsing? Where is our damn
innovation?
No one
really knew, back in 1995, what Netscape's introduction of JavaScript might herald. It was a risky
and bold addition to an otherwise lackluster browser, but when Microsoft fought back in 1996 with
its own version (JScript), the world knew it was going to be big. Meanwhile, Opera was quietly
working on inventions that would soon make an appearance in every other browser: tabs and mouse
gestures. Those were the glory days, before pesky considerations like 'stability' entered the
equation.
But it's now 2010. Chrome and its rapid development demands a lot of attention, but its only real
addition to the field has been per-tab processes. Firefox is treading water and borrowing from
Chrome's open source code to stay afloat -- JetPack is the next big thing, but it's still a ways
off. Opera, after becoming freeware in 2005, has almost frozen its feature list and is simply
focused on improving its performance -- they churn out good browsers, but where has the innovation
and creativity gone?
The problem is a lack of necessity. The browser war has ended, and with it
innovation has died. It was an odd war, with no real monetary or territorial significance. Rather
romantically, the browser war was always been about the end user; it was all about
enriching our web experience -- but then the war ended. With HTML and JavaScript standards
finally reached, big corporations marched on in and
fortified. It was no longer about
merely satisfying the user; it was time to capitalize.
Classically, users can't desire something new, something they've never seen before. We can whine
about stability, or speed, but we don't ask for things that don't exist -- and thus the browser has
become a
platform, rather than a tool. Websites and apps now dictate browser innovation,
when really it should be a symbiotic relationship, with ideas flowing in both directions. Mozilla,
instead of sticking to its guns and innovating, is playing into Google's hands by copy-catting
Chrome -- Google
wants a platform. Google, unlike Firefox, is a large corporate entity
that
needs a platform for its web apps and Chrome OS. Firefox
needs to be different, but is too afraid to push in its chips and take a risk.
Your market share is going to continue dwindling, Mozilla; do something about it!
The only real risk-taker left in the field is
Microsoft... but it too wants a platform for
the Office 2010 web apps! The browser, in 2010, will become a slow-moving,
stability-and-security-comes-first
operating system. With the maturity of the
Internet comes the inexorable maturity of the browser: back in 1996, the dreaded Blink and Marquee
tags were considered proprietary inventions of Netscape and Microsoft; today... shit, I can hardly
tell the difference between the browsers. I use them all interchangeably. The web browser has never
been less
pertinent than it is today.
Looking forward, 2010 could still be bright. Mozilla's
JetPack needs to get a move on, and Opera must continue to
push HTML5. Perhaps, if we're lucky, Microsoft will risk it and roll
Pivot into IE9. That'd be some actual innovation. Woah.
Share
Firefox Friday: the homogenization of browsers and the death of innovation originally
appeared on Download Squad on Fri, 12 Mar 2010
14:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of
feeds.
Permalink |
Email this |
Comments
Microsoft
-
Opera
-
Safari
-
Firefox
-
Internet Explorer
Recommandations
)
and reject those that you are not interested in
(
)
