
Ask HN: How the web would be today, had the KHTML developers chosen the GPL? - jraph
Webkit, used in Safari and other browsers, is a fork of KHTML by Apple, from the KDE project.
And Blink is a fork of Webkit by Google, used in Chrome and many other browsers.<p>If I understand correctly, KHTML developers choosing GPL instead of the LGPL would have prevented Apple from building Safari as a proprietary browser, and Google from building Chrome (but not Chromium). Surely, the landscape of browsers would have been a bit, or radically different today.<p>Would Apple have built Safari under a free license? Or created their own browser engine? Or kept Netscape &#x2F; Firefox? Built their browser around Gecko? 
Would have Google created their own browser engine?<p>How about all these Chromium forks? And those dumb phones that shipped with browsers built on Webkit?<p>What about Internet Explorer and Edge?<p>What about Firefox?<p>One thing to consider: Safari was first released in 2003, three years before GPLv3. So KHTML would have been under GPLv2, or GPLv2 or later. KHTML would, or would not have moved to GPLv3 starting from 2006 (the choice being done given Apple possible involvement in the project; some KDE project being under GPLv2, other under GPLv3, notably rekonq).<p>I know this is impossible to answer, but I am interested in HN&#x27;s thoughts on this (including fictions :-))
======
emilsedgh
My thinking is that Apple would've created Safari anyways but it wouldn't have
been Open Source and Google may have acquired Opera to hand a footing in that
landscape instead of starting their own.

But that's a wild wild guess.

~~~
jraph
Interesting, I hadn't thought of Google acquiring Opera!

