Ask HN: Why exactly is Chromium dominance such a bad thing?
How does this affect any company outside of the other two rivals not being able to play catch up?
How does this affect any company outside of the other two rivals not being able to play catch up?
I bet some of that is caused by their prevention.
Arc, Brave, Edge, Vivaldi or any other Chromium-based project can't really make a difference on the web yet, big thanks to the Chromium codebase; changing mostly visual bits, adding some cryptoish features, built-in adblocker, more hooks to system for usage analysis, etc. Even still, too many things going to the Google's services, maybe because of addons or phishing protection.
I don't know if it's some kind of "if it works, don't fix it" and/or "don't reinvent the wheel" thinking but that's for sure web and users pays the price not the companies.
I think similar things for Android, Firefox, Windows and Linux. They're dominating their positions and holding their territories at all hazards and sometimes this defence means destruction of alternatives, without regard to qualifications and qualities.
This is a bad thing for me.
I do know that questions like yours were common when MSFT made IE 6.0. We all know that ultimately was a disaster. Give Google a year or two of "not directly affecting" other businesses and then get back to me
Support ticket from Carvana yesterday told me to try chrome if I was experiencing problems. An open web won’t stay open for long if there’s a browser monopoly.
Do you think Google would try to crush competition the way MS did with their browser?
Public corporations do things in their own interests. USA legal environment guarantees that. Google has been a decent actor in the past, but have slid into monopolizing ad sales and into surveillance capitalism.
Google will use a Chrome market dominance to warp standards for their own purposes. You personally may or may not like the warping or the results.