Web browsers were very limited compared to today’s offerings but still very extensive when compared to other applications. Now, browsers on desktop are at a point where they’re equivalent to an OS in scope.

This frustrates me as it’s led to stagnation, where very few companies can hold their position. Firefox can only keep up due to preexisting groundwork and the large amount of funding from Google. Chrome had billions thrown at it to quickly enter the market.

The thing that kills it the most for me is there is no way to fix the massive amount of effort needed for a web browser. It’s extensive because it has to deal with thousands of situations: image rendering, video rendering, markup language support (HTML), CSS support, JavaScript support, HTML5 support, security features, tabbed browsing, bookmarking and history, search engine integration, cross-platform compatibility, performance optimisation, developer tools, accessibility features, privacy controls, codec support, to name a few.

Now, for my unpopular opinion: stripping back a general-purpose browser to its core, forcing web redesign, and modularising the browser. Rather than watching videos in the browser, an instance of VLC would be started where the video will be streamed. Instead of an integrated password manager and bookmarks, we have something akin to KeepassXC with better integration. Markup documents and articles automatically open in word processing applications. I know this idea seems wholly impossible now, but it often crosses my mind.

  • Cloudless ☼@lemmy.cafe
    10·
    8 months ago

    Remember when Netscape Navigator was the dominant web browser? The early versions of Netscape were light. We had to use Flash Player for interactive media and RealPlayer for video streaming.

    I don’t know how to feel about your opinion. While I like applications (and websites) to be light and simple, the Netscape kind of integration was a mess. Microsoft used ActiveX which was a security nightmare.

    Modern browsers allow feature-rich applications to be built without depending on external services, which provides a seamless experience to users, especially non-technical users.

    What I would prefer is a more bare-bone browser, but with add-ons supporting features as needed. I really dislike how Firefox bundles Pocket when it should be an add-on instead.

    • squid_slime@lemm.eeOP
      71·
      8 months ago

      Sadly I didn’t have access to tech till 2015ish lol but I know of Netscape and I know software was a lot harder to master forsure, this evolved though.

      I’m not harkening back to some rose tinted glasses version of early computing rather I see an issue where the bar to entry is set very high for both hardware and developers as the sheer amount of code, knowledge and hours to build a compatible modern web browser is mad. I dont think modulising the browser equates to harder to use as we made phone with operating systems that were once alien which have a very modular approach when I click a YouTube link in my phones browser it opens the YouTube client, if I click a PDF it opens the PDF client, if I click a phone number it opens the dialer. and so on.