Ladybird and servo are not replacements for a feature full web browser and are years away from fulfilling that role if at all.
The hype is unfounded. Yet another browser engine designed using the same tools with the same methods isn't going to yield an organization resistant to the monetary and social problems that Mozilla has faced.
It's not about the tech. It's about the org making the tech. Dev time is expensive, and there isn't a way to pay for it. Eventually people get tired of working for free and begin to treat life realistically - f#@$ you, pay me. That is the correct and expected outcome.
Ladybird as a browser has nothing special going for it other than hype. It's a walking vulnerability that has to play catch-up to be a contender as a web browser.
Chromium was/is "the" open browser, and it only happened because google and friends footed the bill.
Where ladybird and servo could shine is as an embeddable renderer that doesn't have to have all the other features of a fully kitted browser.
> Dev time is expensive, and there isn't a way to pay for it. Eventually people get tired of working for free and begin to treat life realistically - f#@$ you, pay me. That is the correct and expected outcome.
That must be why there are no successful open source projects in the world and nobody ever works on software for long unless it's for money (https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/fs-motives.html)
But realistically, KHTML is no longer steering the boat. Is Konqueror a meaningful choice these days? Hell, even Apple isn't steering the boat with WebKit anymore.
If Ladybird gets big, what stops it from being captured by a major commercial contributor?
What we need to be thinking about is how to make browser components more embeddable, and I suspect the sensible target is Gecko at this point.
This gives us the wedge into the market. You have the Vivaldis, Edges, and Operas of the world who have figured out market fit and their technical needs, and the goal is to provide them a compelling alternative to building around WebKit/Blink. The offer you can present them is "building around Gecko or Ladybird means you don't have to spend half your time unwinding every stupid and self-serving choice Google made".
At least in the short-mid term, you're not cleaving off the people who actually LIKE Chrome, or simply download it because they don't know better, but you can at least capture that other 5%.
The hype is unfounded. Yet another browser engine designed using the same tools with the same methods isn't going to yield an organization resistant to the monetary and social problems that Mozilla has faced.
It's not about the tech. It's about the org making the tech. Dev time is expensive, and there isn't a way to pay for it. Eventually people get tired of working for free and begin to treat life realistically - f#@$ you, pay me. That is the correct and expected outcome.
Ladybird as a browser has nothing special going for it other than hype. It's a walking vulnerability that has to play catch-up to be a contender as a web browser.
Chromium was/is "the" open browser, and it only happened because google and friends footed the bill.
Where ladybird and servo could shine is as an embeddable renderer that doesn't have to have all the other features of a fully kitted browser.