A while back when I was a young, optimistic, enthusiastic web designer (not that I’ve changed) I took part in a debate at my local web meet-up to discuss whether there should only be one browser. (I was young and reckless back then, I know.) I thought it may be interesting to bring up the debate again. I’m aiming to present both sides of the argument (not all of the below echo my thoughts) as well as I can remember, add my own views and then I’m opening the floor to you, dear reader, for discussion.

Just to confirm, the title of the debate was “Should there only be one browser” - not “Should there only be IE/Firefox/Safari” etc. There is a difference. And please have an open mind, meaning that the following points are relevant to web designers and normal internet users.

Issue 1: Competition

Imagine the space race if you will. Two nations competing to achieve something not done before. New boundaries and so forth. Without the race (read competitive) element, we may not yet have made space travel possible. So what is it that I’m trying to say? Competition drives innovation and technology. If only one browser existed, the rate of innovation would likely be much slower than in a multi-browser world.

Winner: Multi-browser world. Although there may be less need to learn as much technology in a one-browser world.

Issue 2: Hassle for the designer

Designer meaning front-end developer here - the HTML/CSS coder. It’s an every day occurrence that your beautiful code isn’t quite producing the desired results in a certain browser. Wouldn’t it be fantastic if all browsers rendered the same (and correctly for that matter)? From personal experience, that could shave 5-10% of coding time. For others, I’m sure this could worth celebrating.

Winner: One browser world. Although I have a suggestion in the conclusion.

Issue 3: Security

One browser rules them all. Result? Security issues. Let’s hypothesise and say that there was only one browser and also that a very malicious, contagious, nasty processor-melting-hard-drive-eating-browser-specific virus was released. It’s almost a cert that you’ll get it at some point. Do you stay off the Internet until a patch is released? In a multi-browser world you could switch browsers for a few days. But not if there’s only one. Time to backup.

Winner: Multi-browser world. Unless the one browser was impenetrable. Which I doubt, somewhat.

Debate Conclusions

It’s worth knowing what came out of the debate. The following points came out as the general consensus:

There should be more than one browser, but every browser should use the same rendering engine.

This is an interesting point. It would solve the dilemma of designers spending too long fixing browser-specific issues. It wouldn’t hold back innovation either as browsers could still compete on the bells and whistles - essentially improving user experience and adding features without disruption to the design world.

My Thoughts

I have one final point before handing it over to you. Imagine the world of cars (how cliché) - cars are produced to serve different functions (off-road, family travel, sports.) Browsers are the same. Some browsers cater to different people’s needs. I can’t imagine a browser that would suit everyone’s demands and so I cannot see a one-browser world personally. But, it’s fun to debate…

“There should only be one browser “

Discuss…