59 comments

[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 85.8 ms ] thread
Ladybird is great, but Omarchy is a weird choice. Why can't DHH / Basecamp sponsor David's hobby distro if he wants?

The browser ecosystem is dangerously centralized and another independent rendering engine would be welcome. In contrast, I don't see the value in yet another flavor-of-the-week Linux distro. Even sponsoring Arch directly would make more sense here.

Great to see CF sponsoring Ladybird! One of the most important projects out there right now.

I run vanilla arch/i3, so not super interested in Omarchy itself - but am curious to know how polished of a distro they can come up with. I may give it a try soon.

My big question about Ladybird, will it support BSD also ?

>Ladybird has since grown into a cross-platform browser supporting Linux, macOS, and other Unix-like systems

Cool, seems it will support BSD, hopefully that sticks with this new funding.

> Omarchy 3.0 was released just last week with faster installation and increased Macbook compatibility, so if you’ve been Linux-curious for a while now, we encourage you to try it out!

"If you're curious about trying Linux, why not install this obscure mouseless tiling TUI distro to guarantee you'll never attempt to use Linux again!"

I'm curious what makes LadyBird so special compared to other major browsers like Firefox and Chromium?
Honestly nice move on CF's part, have to say; there's more real energy moving in the open source world since Lunduke started commenting.
Refreshing to see a big corpo support these cool projects!
May be one day Ladybird will be the default on Omarchy. And on a fast system with fast USB you could install Omarchy in under 2 minute.

Someday I hope Omarchu becomes the standard way to develop Ruby Rails on, just like how Ruby Rails was always on macOS and not Windows.

Cool to see Ladybird get some corporate love. I wish Firefox got more varied sponsoring from multiple sources, too.
I’m skeptical. Cloudflare clearly wants to move us to a future where only approved browsers are allowed to access the web. People have been fiercely debating whether that’s a terrible thing, or whether that’s the least bad practical solution on offer for website owners. I don’t want to make a judgement on that, but I don’t think the observation that CF is pushing us in that direction is very controversial. But an independent open source web browser is obviously against that ethos. So what’s the play here exactly? Just for goodwill?

(Regardless of motivation, they’re lending more support than most other companies, so it’s applaudable nonetheless.)

> Cloudflare clearly wants to move us to a future where only approved browsers are allowed to access the web

CloudFlare is in the CDN business.

If CloudFlare gatekeeps who can access their CDN, then people will move to a different CDN. Because people want their websites to be accessed by as many people as possible.

Your statement does not compute.

Glad to see them sponsoring struggling indie developers like DHH.
not sure - if I were holding the CF purse strings I'd give any money to DHH or his endeavors but I do think the folks over at Ladybird are doing some awesome things wrt to the browser.
This sponsorship is very important for the project. Not for financial reasons, but because it gathered recognition from the company that creates much of the critical infrastructure and bot protection services.

Without this recognition, the engine could have been blocked by impassable CAPTCHAs, which for the end user would mean the project is dead at its roots.

I cannot for the life of me understand the Omarchy hype. The Linux community has been theming their distribution installs for decades. What distinguishes this from that?
(comment deleted)
The post does not mention how much money they are giving. Maybe I am a pessimist, but unless the number is in tens of millions or hundreds of millions (very unlikely), I don't think it helps the development of an independent browser very much. Google probably has poured over billions of dollars into Chrome development over the years, and if you look at what Chrome supports, it's massive. I seriously doubt anybody else can match their feature set, not to mention involvement in drafting the latest standards.
These 2 projects are so different in complexity. Ladybird is a foundational ground-up browser, meanwhile Omarchy is just an opinionated arch setup. I wonder why they were both mentioned in one article.
The momentum that Omarchy seems to have is impressive. I wonder if a tighter collaboration with Framework is in the cards, especially with their founder and CEO submitting pull requests to the project[1].

[1] https://github.com/basecamp/omarchy/pull/1368

hmm. Increasingly it feels like I shouldn't be using cloudflare.
I don't use it myself since I'm a long time Linux user, but I'm a big fan of Omarchy brining Linux to the masses. This is great that Cloudflare is sponsoring it!
> Supporting the future of the open web

This really is some orwellian language coming from Cloudflare.

I'm well into the Linux world and have been for years. I've never heard of Omarchy. Do they also sponsor the same way projects that are the basis of Arch Linux, for example? I'm thinking about pacman, infra, etc.
Why is it that Servo has been around for ages, chugging along, making progress, and then Ladybird comes along and gets, pretty much instantly, anointed as the last great hope against Chrome? What does everyone else know about Servo that I don't?
ITT: some of you would rather see Omarchy fail and thus Linux desktop adoption slowed down because you don't agree with DHH's 'controversial' political views.

Guess we'll have to keep waiting for someone with a 'clean' record to show up and promote Linux.