The future of the web

The World Wide Web began as a decentralized system for sharing linked documents, designed by Tim Berners-Lee in 1989 to help researchers at CERN exchange information efficiently. At its core, it emphasized universal accessibility and simplicity, relying on hypertext to connect human-readable content across systems and borders.

Early browsers like ViolaWWW, created by Pei-Yuan Wei in 1992, pushed this vision forward. While remaining document-centric, ViolaWWW introduced innovations such as embedded scripting, table rendering, and rudimentary stylesheets — foreshadowing the interactive potential of the web while still prioritizing structured text and navigability.

Over time, however, this original intent gave way to a web increasingly dominated by complex applications, advertising systems, and centralized control — often at odds with its foundational principles of openness, decentralization, and clarity.

1.1 HTML/CSS/JS as a UI Stack

Despite the web’s textual beginnings, HTML, CSS, and JavaScript have evolved into a robust stack for building user interfaces. Frameworks like Tauri leverage this stack to create cross-platform applications, allowing developers to build native apps using a HTML/CSS/JS UI layer. This approach streamlines development and maintains performance across platforms.

Tauri distinguishes itself by utilizing the system’s native webview components—such as WebView2 on Windows, WebKit on macOS, and WebKitGTK or other available webview implementations on Linux—avoiding the need to bundle a full browser engine like Chromium and its Blink rendering engine. This architecture results in significantly smaller application binaries and lower memory usage compared to frameworks like Electron, which package the entire Chromium runtime. By combining a Rust-based backend with a frontend built using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, Tauri offers a lightweight, secure, and performant solution for cross-platform application development.

At its core, this trio of technologies now functions more as a general-purpose user interface stack than a purely web-oriented one. Whether rendering in a browser, within a native application shell, or even on embedded devices, HTML/CSS/JS excels at describing structured layout, interactive logic, and visual presentation. Its abstraction layer has matured beyond the web, becoming a universal frontend toolkit decoupled from traditional websites and capable of driving modern software interfaces across ecosystems.

1.2 WebViews vs. Full Browsers

WebViews and full browsers both render web content, but they differ significantly in scope, architecture, and use case. A WebView is a lightweight rendering engine embedded inside native applications, offering just enough capability to display and interact with HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. It lacks browser-specific features such as tabbed navigation, bookmarks, address bars, or extension APIs. The host application controls how content is loaded, presented, and interacted with, making WebViews ideal for bundling UI elements within native software.

In contrast, full browsers are feature-rich environments designed for general-purpose browsing. They include user-facing chrome (UI), multi-tab management, complex caching systems, developer tools, and security sandboxes. This added functionality incurs greater memory and storage costs, making them heavier at runtime. Modern browser engines like Blink (Chromium), WebKit (Safari), and Gecko (Firefox) are embedded in full browsers and sometimes re-used in WebViews—but the difference lies in what surrounds them.

By leveraging system-native WebViews—such as WebView2 on Windows, WebKit on macOS, and WebKitGTK or other variants on Linux—frameworks like Tauri allow developers to sidestep the bulk of full browsers. This results in smaller binary sizes, lower resource consumption, and tighter UI control, without sacrificing the expressiveness of HTML/CSS/JS. In this sense, WebViews act more as a rendering substrate than a browser, enabling developers to treat HTML, CSS, and JavaScript as a true UI layer rather than a delivery mechanism for websites.

1.3 Apple’s Control via the App Store

Apple’s App Store policies have long been a point of contention, with critics arguing that they enforce a monopoly over app distribution. The company’s strict guidelines and revenue-sharing models have raised concerns about limiting innovation and favoring Apple’s interests over developers’.

The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), which came into effect in 2024, aims to address such concerns by designating certain large tech companies as “gatekeepers” and imposing obligations to ensure fair competition. Apple was designated as a gatekeeper under the DMA for its control over iOS, the App Store, and Safari. In April 2025, the European Commission fined Apple €500 million for breaching the DMA’s anti-steering provisions, which require app stores to allow developers to inform users about purchasing options outside the platform. The Commission found that Apple’s restrictions limited both developers’ ability to promote alternatives and consumers’ access to more affordable options.

Apple’s stringent control over its development ecosystem poses significant challenges for innovative cross-platform frameworks like Tauri. While Tauri enables developers to build lightweight, secure applications using a HTML/CSS/JS UI layer and Rust, deploying these applications on iOS necessitates adherence to Apple’s specific requirements. Notably, Apple mandates that all iOS applications be developed using Xcode, its proprietary integrated development environment (IDE), and compiled with the latest iOS SDKs. As of April 29, 2024, Apple requires that apps submitted to the App Store be built with Xcode 15 and the iOS 17 SDK or later. This requirement effectively compels developers to use macOS and Apple’s development tools, limiting the flexibility to employ alternative frameworks or development environments.

Furthermore, while Apple does not explicitly mandate the use of Swift, its modern programming language, the company strongly promotes it as the preferred choice for iOS development. Swift is deeply integrated into Apple’s development tools and documentation, and many of the latest APIs and features are optimized for Swift. This emphasis can create additional hurdles for developers using other languages, such as Rust, which is central to Tauri’s architecture. Consequently, the combination of mandatory use of Xcode and the strong promotion of Swift can impede the adoption of innovative frameworks like Tauri on Apple’s platforms, stifling innovation in app development and indirectly affecting overall software development patterns.

1.4 Google’s Stance on Web Standards

Google’s business model is deeply rooted in monetizing dynamic web applications and the behavioral data they generate. Emerging standards like llms.txt—designed to make static, text-based content more accessible to large language models—challenge that model by promoting simpler, machine-readable web formats. Reflecting this tension, Google’s John Mueller dismissed llms.txt as analogous to the outdated keywords meta tag, casting doubt on its usefulness and long-term viability.

A shift towards a web composed solely of textual data gardens—structured, machine-readable content devoid of traditional web applications—poses a significant threat to Google’s business model. Such a transformation would diminish the need for dynamic web applications and reduce the prevalence of semantic HTML elements that facilitate targeted advertising and user engagement metrics. In this context, Google’s advertising algorithms, which depend on rich user interaction data, would face challenges in delivering personalized ads, thereby impacting revenue streams.

Furthermore, Google’s control over app distribution through the Google Play Store has been scrutinized for anti-competitive practices. In December 2023, a jury found that Google had violated antitrust laws by maintaining an illegal monopoly over Android app distribution . The court ruled that Google engaged in anti-competitive practices, such as requiring the Play Store to be pre-installed on devices and restricting alternative app stores. As a result, Google was ordered to allow third-party app stores and alternative payment methods on Android devices.

These practices have significant implications for innovative frameworks like Tauri, which enable developers to build lightweight, cross-platform applications using web technologies. Google’s emphasis on Progressive Web Apps (PWAs) and its control over app distribution channels can hinder the adoption of alternative development approaches that prioritize performance and user experience.

Envisioning an Ideal Web

Reimagining the web as a “textual data garden” shifts the emphasis away from heavyweight web applications and corporate platforms toward a decentralized, low-friction ecosystem of knowledge and functionality. Historically, the web was conceived as a network of hyperlinked documents—structured, accessible, and text-based. A return to this model, enhanced by modern standards for interoperability and readability, could create a more equitable and sustainable digital environment.

By focusing on human- and machine-readable text formats—such as plaintext, Markdown, and lightweight metadata standards like llms.txt—the web can foster a transparent and efficient platform for both people and AI systems. Research in human-computer interaction (HCI) and information retrieval supports the idea that simple, semantically consistent formats improve searchability, reduce cognitive load, and enable more robust AI-driven indexing (Norman, 2013; Hearst, 2009). This textual-first approach counters the trend toward JavaScript-heavy web applications, which introduce complexity, performance bottlenecks, and accessibility issues—especially on low-bandwidth or resource-constrained devices.

1.1 Components of an Ideal Browser for the Textual Web

An ideal web browser designed for this reimagined web would prioritize simplicity, modularity, and interoperability:

• Index and render Markdown: Support for Markdown files stored within directory trees (locally or remotely) enables users to publish and read information in a way that’s lightweight, portable, and easily parsed by both humans and machines. Markdown is less prone to breakage, requires minimal rendering logic, and aligns well with git-based content versioning systems.

• Facilitate app installation via text-defined URLs: A browser capable of interpreting structured .txt or .md files containing installable URLs could act as a decentralized package manager. These URLs could point to bundles (e.g., built with Tauri) that use system-native WebViews and invoke native APIs. Payments could be routed through direct links to verified native payment processors, avoiding centralized app store gatekeeping. This mirrors package managers like apt, npm, or cargo, but with a consumer-friendly front-end grounded in readable text.

• Integrate decentralized identity and permissions: Leveraging standards like DIDs (Decentralized Identifiers) and verifiable credentials would empower users to control access and identity without relying on centralized authentication silos like Google or Facebook.

• Respect minimalism and locality: Instead of requiring constant internet access and remote dependencies, browsers should support caching and rendering local folder structures—making publishing as simple as uploading a zipped Markdown directory to a public URL.

This vision is not a regression, but an evolution—aligning the web with the needs of an AI-integrated future while reducing reliance on bloated web apps, proprietary clouds, and corporate monopolies. It reflects growing movements like the Small Web, IndieWeb, and the rise of edge computing, all of which prioritize resilience, sovereignty, and simplicity over surveillance capitalism and centralization.