> They are going to feature paint themselves into a corner and have to make the choice of "cut off some chunk of the web"

This of course is actually much more likely (and functionally happened) with pre-WHATWG standards because they'd standardize things that were infeasible and no browser ever implemented, ever.

And at the same time everyone had their own weird nonstandard extensions (does no one remember the whacky stuff like https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Pre... and how absolutely garbage-awful it was for maintainability?)

> They are going to feature paint themselves into a corner

Has the web not done that, several times over at this point? We've lost too many online standards to count, from all of the FAANG vendors.

> The all gas no brakes add features like were a start up forget about thoughtful or engineering is a bad way to sustain something.

If native smartphone runtimes were not complete dogshit, I'd probably agree with you. Without the industry's cooperation though, expanding the lowest-common-denominator platform was an inevitability. People want emulators, game streaming, proper download management, the real features that the OEMs are too afraid to publish. If they won't provide that, then their users will find another way.

And so, these "all gas no brakes" features are a product of legitimate demand. It's sad, yeah; but what's even sadder is the miserly behavior from companies like Apple that market user freedom as a security apocalypse. The openness of the web has finally caught-up with it's most-restricted users.