One of the comments in the "we need an anti-Chrome movement" post mentions that Firefox gets a big part of their funding from Google. I haven't verified this but, I suspect it's probably the case.
Is there an argument to be made that browsers must be made more simple? I feel like anyone trying to make a web browser nowadays would need to pour a very large amount of money into development to keep up with web standards, which are largely being pushed by Google via Chrome. It does have a very much "extend and extinguish" feel to it, and we've seen a number of smaller forks have to abandon keeping up with the incredibly fast release cycle of Chrome and Firefox, the later of which I believe basically had to start releasing like Chrome years ago to keep up. [Citation Needed]
It's a very stick in the mud moment but, I think the web has plenty of features now and we'd really be better off not adding more. If anything we'd be a lot better off with less features at this point. I'd love to see web browsers turn back more into a static document type thing but, I don't think that's going to happen.
Put the keyboard down this software is done!!!!
