Discussion on the diversity of browser kernel fields by Opera's "death"

In the eyes of many dead loyal people, the pure Opera no longer exists at the moment of turning to Webkit. Webkit, backed by Google and Apple, has in fact won, especially today, when Android and iOS Mobile smart devices are prevalent.

From the perspective of linlis personal blog), Opera's behavior is undoubtedly beneficial to users and front-end developers, but it also involves crisis, which may cause the loss of "diversity" on the Internet, so what should we choose?

Recently, Opera announced that the adoption of the new version of Webkit kernel has caused a great shock in the industry. Front-end engineers suffering from browser compatibility have applauded. For them, this means less work, and they hope Firefox and IE can keep up with the pace of Opera and switch to Webkit as soon as possible.

Since I have been writing HTML and CSS at work, I can understand this point very well. Indeed, as the front-end becomes increasingly complex and the user experience requirements become increasingly high today, front-end engineers have a huge workload in browser compatibility, they must ensure that the website can have the same experience as possible in different browsers.

However, since we all use W3C standards as browsers, why do different browsers produce so many different results?

This is a very interesting question. First of all, W3C is a very academic standard-making institution. They will not be involved in commercial matters, so they will not ask browser manufacturers, how do you develop your browser? That is to say, if the browser vendor does not comply with W3C standards, it is okay.

In addition, W3C standards are not meticulous. They are open enough because CSS is open and allows the cascade of multiple style sheets ), for example, it does not specify many attributes such as the default font size of each webpage, and the decision of these attributes is handed over to the browser. Browsers can first selectively abide by W3C standards, and then they have a lot of room to exert themselves, which leads to the compatibility of web pages in each browser.

Let's look at the Webkit kernel. If you open its website, you will find that almost all of the Webkit teams are Google and Apple engineers, and Webkit is the kernel of Chrome and Safari.

In addition to Webkit, the browser kernel also includes the Trident kernel of IE, the Gecko kernel of Firefox, And the Presto kernel of Opera. Now, Opera has abandoned Webkit, there are only three websites, Webkit, Trident, and Gecko.

Yes, you may have seen that Webkit is the powerful Wei Guo, because they rely on the two mountains of Apple and Goolge. If you turn your eyes on mobile devices, then Webkit is almost the same. With the help of Webkit, compatibility issues have indeed become fewer and fewer.

Because of the market share of Webkit, We will almost certainly base the first version of the front-end on the Webkit browser. on mobile devices, we can almost ignore compatibility issues. From this perspective, Webkit brings great convenience and greatly improves the efficiency of front-end development.

Let's do a setup. What if Firefox and IE are switched to Webkit in the future?

For front-end engineers devoted to adjusting browser compatibility throughout the day, they will definitely cheer, which means there will be no more compatibility problems, but it will not be very serious ). What about ordinary users? This is still a good thing, because they will enjoy a consistent user experience, and even because of the liberation of front-end engineers, the front-end level of the website will be generally improved.

But everything has two sides. When we enjoy these benefits, we will accept the dictatorship of Webkit. In fact, this is basically the case in the mobile Internet field.

The relationship between Webkit and W3C also changes when Webkit is a dominant one, which is not good for the development of W3C standards. Because Webkit is basically equal to W3C, Webkit will directly become a standard, and the browser kernel field will lack diversity. diversity is an important condition for the development of browser kernels and W3C standards, it is also an important condition for Internet development.

Let's look at Opera's previous contributions to the Internet to see how important this diversity is. The popular HTML5 this year is the first supported by Opera, and the Responsive Design is also attributed to Opera's first support for Media Query. Therefore, if we still want to retain this diversity, we should not want Firefox and IE to move to the Webkit camp.

This is a very conflicting choice. On the one hand, our engineers and users will enjoy the great convenience and user experience brought by the Unified kernel. On the other hand, diversity brings benefits to the development of the Internet kernel and W3C standards.

Many times, we often lose our eyes and become unselectable when considering the benefits. We can think from another perspective. Which of the two solutions brings more harm? If the two sides share their power, it seems that this problem is not difficult to choose. Because we want a more open and free Internet.