Browser Wars Redux: This Time It's the Apps

itwbennett writes "Yesterday's release of the Amazon Kindle Cloud Reader brought to mind the bad old days of the browser wars, but with a new twist: while the app works on any iOS device, it only works on computers with Safari and Chrome. Blogger Brian Proffitt knows as well as anyone that 'this isn't a deliberate snub of the other browsers. Clearly the developers of this web app had to get it to work on Safari, because that's the only vector to get it onto an Apple device. And, since both Chrome and Safari have a shared ancestor in WebKit, it makes sense that what would work in one browser would work in the other.' But it raises an interesting question: 'If HTML5 and other web technologies are supposed to be open and standardized, then will web app developers have to continually tweak their apps in order to accommodate deficiencies or advantages between browsers, or will browsers have to constantly stay in sync with each other's features just to be able to run all the web apps out there?'"

Comments

Browsers aren't magic

[c0d3g33k]

I'm not sure how "running it in the browser" is supposed to magically erase all the problems that in years past were associated with running in multiple operating systems. The more power and control is given to the browser, the more complex they become, and the less likely it is that different browsers will be able to provide the same experience.

This isn't "browser wars", this is "Operating System Wars, The Sequel". The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Re:Browsers aren't magic

[jellomizer]

However current history shows this isn't true... Browsers right now are the best way to display data, WebKit, Mozilla or IE for HTML 4 strict does an excellent job of following the specs.
HTML 5 is new and not all the features are implemented yet, and right now there is some shield bashing on who has implemented the most useful set of the HTML 5 standard first. So for the developers who are blindly jumping to full HTML 5 are coming across compatibility issues, because not all browsers are close to be fully HTML 5 Compliment.

There is no Magic here. The browser runs on top of the OS and interprets the command send via files and follows the same methods to display the data. It is actually quite easy concepts, it didn't happen before because computing power wouldn't allow useful speed in doing such work without the need to go out and run some custom machine level code. Once Browsers finish their full support in HTML 5 then things will render the same again?

This isn't a browser war type of activity and not an OS War Especially as things work the same in Chrome for Windows, Linux or Mac... The old browser war was each side making their own special commands in complete disregard on what the standard said in hopes that developers will use it over the others and force people to use their browser. Eg. the Netscape Layer Tag, ActiveX or Java Aplets. Right now it is more of a bragging right of saying Hey we got this in first or our implementation is faster then yours. But it doesn't mean the next version your version won't be faster of have that feature... It isn't a war but healthy competition.

In a War the Consumer Looses and Competition the Consumer wins.

Re:Browsers aren't magic

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Try installing an egress detecting firewall and watch how often Chrome phones home.

Mobile Browser Redirects

[John.P.Jones]

I'm just as concerned with the tendency of websites with 'mobile apps' to intentionally break their own website experience when browsing on a mobile device in order to push their native app instead. Deep links redirecting to mobile homepages are also breaking the web (from mobile at least). In many cases the web worked better on my iPhone 1 then it does today on my iPhone 4.

Re:Mobile Browser Redirects

[ShakaUVM]

I'd mod you up, but I'm using Slashdot on a smartphone.

IndexedDB vs WebSQL

[jgon]

Good lord slashdot, I was hoping to see informed technical discussion like that slashdot of old instead of scaremongering gossip over motives for the Book Store compatibility. It has nothing to do with Apple controlling Amazon, or browser wars. The HTML5 database storage spec is not fully standardized, and so chrome and safari both implement the WebSQL spec while Mozilla has chosen to go with their own IndexedDB spec.

The book store will be ported to firefox shortly as both DB implementations basically accomplish the same thing. It came out for Chrome and Safari first because Amazon wanted to circumvent Apple's in-app purchasing requirements on the iPad and that meant working with webkit first. Down the line I am sure that browser makers will eventually converge on either IndexedDB or WebSQL and that will become part of the HTML standard but for now the discrepancy is explainable purely in terms of using a non-standard technology that browser makers are still experimenting with and trying to shake out.

law of the compatibility clusterbuck

[epine]

After forty years of following technology, I assure you that wherever there's a land rush in progress, a compatibility clusterbuck is sure to follow. Early mover advantage is a broken window for everyone else. It's not actually the nature of the standardization process to be out in front of the gypsy caravan waxing behind the Spanish Galleon of zeitgeist redux. As much as we complain about this, the gypsies are a tribe of legendary endurance, hardship, and snark (as often featured here on snarkdote).

Standardization is the introverted naturalist's account of rats, cockroaches, raccoons, ravens, seagulls, and urban deer: what's left behind after progressive forces have eradicated the dodo, pillaged the cod fishery, and turned most of the polar bear population into shaggy rugs of bravado.