I really wish a patron would step up and sponsor this project. Not just by money, but also by plugging it in their browser-carrying products. Maybe Hauwei of Samgsung; they now sling a browser derived of another for-profit --usually competitor-- company's browser.
fifilura 53 minutes ago [-]
I don't really see why they would do that?
embedding-shape 49 minutes ago [-]
So right now Servo is funded by the community, and this is no good because why? Instead you propose that this project should be funded by a for-profit company with it's own objectives in this world (that often starts with "more money"), again leading me to ask why?
The setup right now seems to give enough people enough time to work on it to move forward, why on earth would you want to involve companies infamous for their shit software quality, like Samsung?
flossly 26 minutes ago [-]
> So right now Servo is funded by the community, and this is no good because why?
Because look at Mozilla... You need to get the browser in front of people. A browser that works on the real web, is such a huge project, you cannot do it as a hobby community-funded project for ever. You need user-share-%.
Samsung can put it in front of Samsung appliance users.
lukan 37 minutes ago [-]
Probably because broad adoption would help making it a real option to use in the near future?
So sure, Samsung would bundle it with their usual crap, but if it helps making the engine more mature, great, but I also don't see why they would in the first place.
doublerabbit 33 minutes ago [-]
It had broad adoption, Mozilla threw it away.
The same would occur again.
lukan 32 minutes ago [-]
Servo never had. But yes, mozilla management let FF go down the drain.
macic 1 hours ago [-]
The Hurd of browser engines
flossly 1 hours ago [-]
I remember waiting on the Mozilla project to deliver something that could browse as well on linux as closed source browsers on windows/mac did.
It... took... long...
But there it was. And it still works.
embedding-shape 47 minutes ago [-]
Was this recent? Because Firefox were the browser that worked better than all the rest, for quite many years, maybe 2005-2010, and Firefox had no competition basically until Chrome arrived on the scene.
Just the fact that Firefox got browser tabs before anyone else, and Firebug, just took it to another level compared to all the other browsers available at the time.
vlovich123 10 minutes ago [-]
Your history is off. Opera was the first mainstream browser to implement tabs and boy was Opera also much faster than Firefox at its peak (both UI, resource usage, and rendering) which overlaps that “peak” Firefox period by a lot.
Firefox was great because it was open source but it wasn’t ever really the “best” browser - it was the best open source browser.
saidinesh5 23 minutes ago [-]
> Hardware accelerated video decoding (for video playback or for WebRTC) is available via VA-API for both X11 and Wayland. Since firefox-101.0.1-4 package it's enabled by default for Intel/AMD users.
I remember this affecting my laptop video watching a lot. Google meet feeling sluggish on Firefox is also something I remember until very recently..
lukan 34 minutes ago [-]
Firefox was bad on linux for a long time. Even running the windows ff build via wine/proton got you better performance than the "native" build (I think that was around 10 years ago).
Hot take... There is something about programming projects spending 10x (or 1000x) the effort to parallelize execution when everything is still restricted by von Neumann architecture.
wannabe44 6 minutes ago [-]
This. I don't want your browser engine to use all my cores. I want the rest of my cores to be compiling C++.
skavi 1 minutes ago [-]
that's something you, the user, are free to enforce with priorities, pinning, etc.
poly2it 2 minutes ago [-]
Thanks to the scheduler, you can do both!
p-e-w 2 hours ago [-]
What can one actually do with Servo today?
It’s apparently still not ready to be used as a browser engine (and may never be), so what exactly is it for?
Servo doesn't implement the whole web platform, but your own desktop app isn't the whole web. You can generally work around any limitations or missing features. And it might be lighter than CEF or whatever.
gyulai 7 minutes ago [-]
Couldn't agree more. Looking at [1], it seems to me like Servo has a much better adoption story than Ladybird. The latter seems to be just building a browser that's going to be crashy and not really work on the web. The former is addressing problem spaces where, even with the limitations of the half-finished state it's in, it can be usefully applied: WebView/Electron-replacement and headless browsers. Things not currently on this list that could/should be: HTML rendering for desktop E-Mail clients. Also, I wonder to what extent they're implementing paged media and capable of targetting PDF output or similar (like weasyprint). That could be another domain, where you don't need full web-scale abilities.
And yet, somehow, Ladybird seems to be the darling of the masses (in certain circles at least). Doing vibe-ports to Rust, while going closed-contribution also, in my mind, sits in a marked contrast to the origin story that initially generated so much goodwill.
Regardless of actual use as an (embedded) browser, it is useful in the sense that it can be used to provide (another) source of validation about whether specs and WPT [1] tests are properly and clearly defined. That helps for long term browser compatibility.
Making a new browser engine hurts browser compatibility more than it helps it. It now becomes one more target that needs to be tested against, limitations need to be kept tracked of, etc. The best thing for long term browser compatibility is focusing resources into Blink. In regards to the standard we can use LLMs to cross reference the spec, with tests, and with the implementation to make sure all match.
teekert 1 hours ago [-]
Ah, you must be too young to have experienced early Internet Explorer, which attempted just this.
latexr 54 minutes ago [-]
> The best thing for long term browser compatibility is focusing resources into Blink.
That’s what makes Google more dominant, and if you think that’s a good idea you should really put down your LLM and go read up on a bit of history. Do you want to live in a world where a single company controls your access to the web? Are you eager to navigate through ad pages with a little bit of web? To have even more of your data mined?
Browser diversity may be a bit annoying for developers, but it is good for users, and developers are users too. When there’s a lack of diversity, everyone but the dominant player is squeezed.
embedding-shape 46 minutes ago [-]
> The best thing for long term browser compatibility is focusing resources into Blink.
Lol, for Blink perhaps, what about the rest of the ecosystem, the web and the users, like the ones who don't even use Blink?
Very idealistic point-of-view with no basis in reality, sadly, because wouldn't it be nice if we could care about just one engine?
Oxodao 1 hours ago [-]
yeah in a perfect world google dictates how the standard will evolve, we kill all competition so we're sure that you have only one target to build your software against, I'm sure a monopoly will greatly improves innovation and not be used to stiffen competition. /s
1 hours ago [-]
pizza234 2 hours ago [-]
[dead]
bpbp-mango 1 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
jaytaph 1 hours ago [-]
It's a decision they've made. Perfectly reasonable. If they did accept AI code, that's perfectly reasonable too. They just made their policy clear here..
nicce 60 minutes ago [-]
I would personally whitelist people with good enough reputation/contribution history. Might get the best from both worlds. Avoiding AI spam while saving time for the core contributors. If they just have capability to use it responsibly.
The setup right now seems to give enough people enough time to work on it to move forward, why on earth would you want to involve companies infamous for their shit software quality, like Samsung?
Because look at Mozilla... You need to get the browser in front of people. A browser that works on the real web, is such a huge project, you cannot do it as a hobby community-funded project for ever. You need user-share-%.
Samsung can put it in front of Samsung appliance users.
So sure, Samsung would bundle it with their usual crap, but if it helps making the engine more mature, great, but I also don't see why they would in the first place.
The same would occur again.
It... took... long...
But there it was. And it still works.
Just the fact that Firefox got browser tabs before anyone else, and Firebug, just took it to another level compared to all the other browsers available at the time.
Firefox was great because it was open source but it wasn’t ever really the “best” browser - it was the best open source browser.
From https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Firefox_Hardware_acceleration
I think that was around 2022-23.
I remember this affecting my laptop video watching a lot. Google meet feeling sluggish on Firefox is also something I remember until very recently..
https://git.sr.ht/~rabbits/fashware
It’s apparently still not ready to be used as a browser engine (and may never be), so what exactly is it for?
https://github.com/versotile-org/tauri-runtime-verso
Servo doesn't implement the whole web platform, but your own desktop app isn't the whole web. You can generally work around any limitations or missing features. And it might be lighter than CEF or whatever.
And yet, somehow, Ladybird seems to be the darling of the masses (in certain circles at least). Doing vibe-ports to Rust, while going closed-contribution also, in my mind, sits in a marked contrast to the origin story that initially generated so much goodwill.
[1] https://servo.org/made-with/
[1] https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=experimental&label=master&pro...
Making a new browser engine hurts browser compatibility more than it helps it. It now becomes one more target that needs to be tested against, limitations need to be kept tracked of, etc. The best thing for long term browser compatibility is focusing resources into Blink. In regards to the standard we can use LLMs to cross reference the spec, with tests, and with the implementation to make sure all match.
That’s what makes Google more dominant, and if you think that’s a good idea you should really put down your LLM and go read up on a bit of history. Do you want to live in a world where a single company controls your access to the web? Are you eager to navigate through ad pages with a little bit of web? To have even more of your data mined?
Browser diversity may be a bit annoying for developers, but it is good for users, and developers are users too. When there’s a lack of diversity, everyone but the dominant player is squeezed.
Lol, for Blink perhaps, what about the rest of the ecosystem, the web and the users, like the ones who don't even use Blink?
Very idealistic point-of-view with no basis in reality, sadly, because wouldn't it be nice if we could care about just one engine?