@i2fun
First, grow up. The infantile name calling does not make ME look bad, it only reflects on you and your juvenile makeup.
Second, your "understanding" notwithstanding, you are wrong. At this point the LARGEST contributor to WebKit is Apple. Period. This is not a debatable point. You just need to visit the change logs. Just because it is based on the KHTML foundation does NOT say ANYTHING about code proportions.
"That CrApple at first refused to give back to under the license agreement after creating Safari with it. Only by being publically rebuked did they finally fork back improvements into the project."
Again, you are wrong, and know nothing about which you speak. The issue had NOTHING to do with refusal to give back code, it had to do with the difficulty of access to the aforementioned change logs for webCore and the JavaScript engines. In response, Apple moved them to OpenDarwin.
In fact, if you had known ANYTHING about the subject you would have known to criticize Apple for keeping all non-rendering code proprietary. Then again, the idea of you as open source champion is pathetic.
"The main reason these other projects wouldn't be affected is quite simple. If.... you're not blinded by the CrApple Egomaniac Steve Jobs's arrogance and self justification of his own greedy objectives!"
Again, no. If you had BOTHERED to do even a cursory examination of the issue, you would have seen that the certificates involved are specific to FaceTime, and as such, only effect the iPhone and iPod Touch. That said, you would have had a valid concern, but still been in error, if you had discussed the other security issues, which, contrary to your quoted errata, DO effect the other WebKit browsers. Guess what happened after the update? That's right, Chrome received an update. Care to guess what was in it?
http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/?source=ln
"And not having Facetime is precisely why these other programs and Operating Systems don't have any of these Security Holes!"
Again, as I just demonstrated you are in error.
"That these days mobile OS's are actually built around browser as the central part of the OS."
Thanks for making it clear you understand neither mobile OSes in general, or iOS in specific. It makes reading your pablum that much easier. Please explain, if this is true, why WebKit had to be PORTED to iOS!!!
"But the problem is not in the KHTML code itself. But rather Apple's own poor integration and implementation of it into the iOS kernel!"
Oh really?!? Care to provide a SINGLE citation to back that up?
"So you'll just go on believing that Apple owns Webkit because they used it's KDE KHTML Engine as the basis to write their Web Browser on, solely for Facetime.... lolz"
Being that I neither said any of that, nor can it be inferred from what I DID say, I fail to see your point. Other than that you are an idiot.
"Just remember if KDE actually wrote KHTML and started the Webkit project as they did using their code then that simply means Safari was created based on KDE's Konqueror Engine. But then Apple couldn't claim it as totally their creation. Which it's not!"
Please provide a citation to where Apple EVER makes this claim. In fact, they go out of their way to credit KHTML, and its open source links and roots. But Primer: KHTML is NOT WebKit, which came later, and KDE did NOT start the WebKit project. WebKit WAS created by Apple, as it was a fork of the KHTML source specifically by Apple, and made available for any platform, unlike the original Konqueror.
That does not mean that Apple are the sole devs, however, and no one claims they are, except for you whilst spouting straw man nonsense. Google, KDE, Bitstream, even Nokia have contributed code, but by FAR the largest contributor is Apple.
Please explain, pray tell, how exactly KHTML managed to pass Acid 2.
Please also explain how KHTML relates to WebKit2, which was designed, by Apple, from the ground up.
"So based on all CrApple iFan and iFad ignorance, Apple only claims problems are KDE's Webkit project's fault. The credit for the good stuff will always belong to CrApple!!! haha..."
And here you make your ignorance and absolute bias plain as day!
1) WebKit is NOT KDE's. Period. This is not a debatable point. In fact, the difference between them was one of the issues central to the dispute you yourself mentioned above.
2) You contradict yourself, here, and are too dense to notice. You just finished frothing at the mouth about how WebKit is KDE's and not Apple's, and that Apple incorrectly claims WebKit as their own, but go on to say that Apple is trying to deflect blame to KDE, by putting the onus on WebKit. You can't have it both ways. If Apple claims WebKit is their own, then blaming the issues on WebKit is Apple blaming themselves, and taking responsibility. Or are you too daft even to see that?
Discussion on:
Message 6 of 1
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
