Firefox Friday: the homogenization of browsers and the death of innovation
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.













Comments
37
Subscribe to commentsDrekeMar 15th 2010 4:08AM
"Browser vendor 5 years have shown anything is that the browser vendors don't really care that much for the W3C"
Whatever gave you that idea? The browser vendors are actively involved in the W3C. They are working on HTML5 at the W3C, as a matter of fact.
DamianMar 15th 2010 4:53AM
But that's only because HTML5 is their standard and the W3C is the only defined neutral ground. Look how many browser vendors invested in or implemented XHTML 2...
SilverWaveMar 12th 2010 4:33PM
Nope, no offence, but you are full of it :-)
MS Hah! total bollocks.
Mozilla had slowed down - true... but Chrome has shaken things up and hopefully Firefox get back to basics - e.g. parsing speed and JS speed.
tbh I think Mozilla are on the right track open source is all about sharing and the whole being bigger than the sum of the parts. Their problems are in large part because they have been so successful, Jetpack looks interesting and is a good idea in principle... have to see how good the execution is.
Cheers.
SilverWaveMar 12th 2010 4:39PM
Talking of missing a trick - how come you guys don't include Keywords in your meta?
Sebastian AnthonyMar 12th 2010 4:42PM
I have no idea; will ask the design team :)
sodapopMar 12th 2010 4:44PM
"Once upon a time, difference was revered." I first browsed the web with Mosaic - I don't think it was difference Netscape and MS strove for, I think it was simply "better" with more features. And then dominance. Safari came about because Netscape nor Microsoft were not acceptably supporting the Mac platform. Sure, there were Mac browsers but IE lacked all the important MS only stuff and Netscape....
But what I think the major browsers have been up to lately is all about performance and everything under the hood. Security, plus speedy and stable Javascript are imperative. Browser specific features alienates users and locks developers down. IE's uniqueness is what alienated most developers. And these days it gives us a huge headache because we have to support IE6 which is a 3 legged race horse.
However, you cannot bash Mozilla. They gave us plugins which give us new features all the time. Plus they are a nonprofit org.
The one browser feature I wish was given more attention is the side panel. With so many mobile sites and lite sites - the side panel has huge potential.
You really can't bash Mozilla in good spirit. They gave us plug-ins and there are always new plug-ins created.
Sebastian AnthonyMar 12th 2010 7:15PM
I can't bash, but I can CAJOLE!
Plugins are great, but what's next?
Firefox basically took a lot of great features, whacked in plugins... and voila! There hasn't actually been a whole lot since then.
I remain hopeful (JetPack is really the extension of Firefox's plugin 'thing'), but we'll have to see how 2010 plays out :)
sodapopMar 13th 2010 4:15PM
Cajoling is allowed.
RahabibMar 12th 2010 5:22PM
personally, if rendering engines get their stuff together and become compliant then it would be a race for plugins and UI experience, which is all people want these days.
I remember when adding in new browser html code was cool. Hell, I even remember everyone putting at the bottom "best if viewed in Netscape 3" or "Best if viewed in IE3." It was like the web designers fueled the war. Then IE took over and now everyone is worried about it working exactly the same on every browser. If it isnt in IE6 you cant use it :(.
The net is no longer cool.... its a means to and end, and people dont want to wage war anymore. Call it battle fatigue, but I am tired of not having every browser not being compliant because of it.
DrekeMar 12th 2010 6:23PM
"Where is our damn innovation?"
Uh, hello? Opera Unite, anyone?
Sebastian AnthonyMar 12th 2010 7:14PM
Unite's great!
I'm not sure if I want it in a web browser, nor does it really shift the browsing paradigm, but it's definitely very cool.
DrekeMar 12th 2010 6:27PM
"Opera, after becoming freeware in 2005, has almost frozen its feature list"
Huh?
http://www.opera.com/docs/history/
"The browser war has ended, and with it innovation has died. It was an odd war, with no real monetary or territorial significance."
Huh? Mozilla makes hundreds of millions of dollars in PROFITS each year off of Firefox.
Browser war has ended? Heh.
Seriously.
Sebastian AnthonyMar 12th 2010 6:38PM
For what it's worth, I think Mozilla's entire revenue was something like $80 million in 2009.
kusumaMar 12th 2010 11:59PM
how about xul website pages ?
3tearMar 13th 2010 12:57AM
http://www.collegehumor.com/article:1802516
kgersenMar 13th 2010 6:53AM
it's just that Adobe Flash ended the browser war.
Question is why it takes so long to have new HTML standards, so long that Flash took over.
HTML 4 is from 1999, HTML 5 still not out ... 10+ years in computer science is like 100+ years in another industry. ok the W3C screwed big time by abandoning HTML for XHTML but the WHATWG took over and started working in June 2004 on HTML5... 2004!!!
something wrong here.
gronneMar 13th 2010 12:14PM
Honestly, I actually think the lack of innovation makes sense right now. First the platform innovates and then the developers innovate. It's a cycle and right now the developers are the one's making huge strides forward with JavaScript and the browsers are rightly in a period of reacting to that. JavaScript is pushing client-side resource management to the front of the line unlike any other web technology. With Flash you'd have one video. With JavaScript there's no limit to how much crap people can stick in a web page.
Browsing the web is starting to be more like gaming where certain hardware specs are required for basic usability, not just performance. That's a huge paradigm shift.