5 ms·

It would be nice if some of their contributions were less "throw it over the wall once or twice a year". It would be nicer still if they stopped thinking their

It would be nice if some of their contributions were less "throw it over the wall once or twice a year". It would be nicer still if they stopped thinking their browser only needs to get new features once per year. Safari is rapidly getting a reputation as the new IE6. Fully supporting ES6 means nothing when everything is being transpiled and minified anyway, and the (arguably) dominant mobile browser your (kinda) forced to target doesn't support features that shipped in every other browser years ago, heck many missing features have even stabilised in other browsers years ago. The dev builds on desktop are just a token gesture that further displays how far behind the times WebKit/Safari/MobileSafari are falling. Here are just a few things not supported in any Apple browser, Including the "Technology Preview" on desktop: CSS Motion Path; CSS Device Adaptation; Client Hints: DPR, Width, Viewport-Width; inputmode attribute; MediaRecorder API; Network Information API; Web Animations API; Pointer events; Web App Manifest; seamless attribute for iframes; Payment Request API; Credential Management API; Push API; FIDO U2F API; Permissions API; Screen Orientation; Object RTC (ORTC) API for WebRTC; Proximity API; Ambient Light API; Battery Status API; Vibration API; Web MIDI API; getUserMedia/Stream API; WebAssembly; 'SameSite' cookie attribute; Public Key Pinning; XHTML+SMIL animation;

crazysim 10y ago
Wasn't Battery Status API discovered to be harmful to privacy and on the way out in all browsers?
- grzm 10y ago
  Sounds like Apple and Mozilla are planning to: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/07/apple_mozilla_kill_api_to_batter_battery_snitching/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/07/apple_mozilla_kill_a...
  - gsnedders 10y ago
    It was never enabled in any of the Apple-owned ports of WebKit, IIRC it was enabled in the GTK and Qt ports, but I could be wrong there. So Apple killing it isn't really true—they're just deleting code that was already gone at compile-time for them.
wux 10y ago
This looked like a pretty long list of unsupported APIs, so I decided to do some research: - CSS motion path is not an official standard; it is implemented only in Blink (Chrome/Opera). - CSS device adaptation is a W3C working draft. It is available prefixed in IE/Edge and Opera Mini, but is unprefixed in 0% of shipping browsers. - Client Hints: DPR, Width, Viewport-Width is an IETF working draft implemented only in Blink (Chrome/Opera). - inputmode is supported in 0% of shipping browsers. - MediaRecorder API is a W3C working draft supported in Blink (Chrome/Opera) and Firefox but not IE/Edge or Safari. - Network Information API is not an official standard; it is supported only in Chrome for Android. (Source: caniuse.com) I stopped going through the list at this point. At least from the top of your list, none of these features are "shipped in every other browser" and some are shipped in no browsers at all. I'm not sure how it shows that Safari is "far behind the times." If anything, the list seems to show that Chrome implements many non-standard APIs not available elsewhere. Combined with its mindshare (if not marketshare), this suggests that Chrome--not Safari--is in some ways the new IE6.
- techdragon 10y ago
  I'd edit my post to remove the items that aren't standard or even working drafts yet, but unfortunately the time window has passed so I can't now. But I can't agree that Chrome is in any way the new IE6. Chrome is actively participating in the public view in the process of web standards. Apple seems to 'participate' insofar as they are on lists of participating companies. Apple pretty much adds just one batch of features per year, and does so through a completely opaque process that outside developers are almost completely irrelevant to. Chrome at least listens to outside opinions, while one of the defining traits of the IE6 years was having to work under the umbrella of a "we don't care, just use what we gave you" attitude from the IE6 developers. Also, the fact I had to open chrome in order to post this comment to HN is an amusing addition to this little "how broken is the web" discussion.
  - grzm 10y ago
    I suspect the reason gp included the IE6 comparison at all was in response to yours, after looking into ES6 support across browsers for features you specifically called out, which I think is fair to do. As for opening Chrome to post your comment, are you having issues with other browsers when you do so? I generally use Safari in Mac OS X and iOS without a problem.
adamlett 10y ago
It would be nice if some of their contributions were less "throw it over the wall once or twice a year". Some of their contributions are. See Swift. It would be nicer still if they stopped thinking their browser only needs to get new features once per year. Safari Technology Preview ships every 2 weeks. I use it as my main browser. It is as solid as any other browser.
glenndebacker 10y ago
"Safari is rapidly getting a reputation as the new IE6." And that is just a ridiculous comparison done by people who have never witnessed that period or are having a different agenda. One of my first jobs (more then a decade ago) as a young developer was being a web developer for an American/Belgian e-commerce site. One of the things that was very important - because every customer counts - that the site displayed and worked perfectly in any browser (IE6, FF/Mozilla, Safari and Opera at the time) That was a situation that wasn't a lot of fun because you had standard HTML that more or less worked in any browser with the exception of IE6. There where a lot of moments that I really hated my job because of the frustrations that IE6 often brought to the table. That is in no way comparable with Safari today. And while I would like to have Apple more rapidly implementing new API's, with IE we could only dream of having an IE version that got new features every year. Years have we have witnessed the fallout of IE6, that will never be the case with Safari to this day. IE6 was a vehicle to create an internet that only worked with Microsoft standards so that others couldn't be a valid alternative hence the IE6 markup vs the rest. You can't do that by dragging your feet when implementing API's, you only price yourself out of the market in that way.
- tobltobs 10y ago
  I have lived through those awful IE6 times and imho Safari is the new PITA of web development. Nowadays you don't have to create workarounds for CSS problems or same JS incompatibilities, Safari sucks at implementing even the most basic HTML5 APIs. It is like with CSS 10 years ago. This nice new CSS feature (HTML5 API) which would perfectly solve your problem? Sorry you can't use it because IE (Safari) does not support it (maybe never will).
  - stephenr 10y ago
    > Safari sucks at implementing even the most basic HTML5 APIs Would you care to give some examples? The last time this played out on HN, the list of unsupported things was not HTML5, and many were unfinished/unstable, or listed as in-progress by the WebKit team.
    - 10y ago
jayflux 10y ago
It would be nicer still if they stopped thinking their browser only needs to get new features once per year. Safari is rapidly getting a reputation as the new IE6. ----------------- To be fair, they had a 9.1 release this year, which included: Picture element support Support for CSS variables Etc https://developer.apple.com/library/content/releasenotes/General/WhatsNewInSafari/Articles/Safari_9_1.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014305-CH10-SW1 https://developer.apple.com/library/content/releasenotes/Gen... So if they do this again, we're looking more at 6 month cycles. The whole safari is the new IE6 stuff is hyperbole which I don't actually hear that many developers saying.. IE6 was bad because it didn't follow any standards, not because it updated slower than the competition.

crazysim 10y ago

Wasn't Battery Status API discovered to be harmful to privacy and on the way out in all browsers?

grzm 10y ago
Sounds like Apple and Mozilla are planning to: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/07/apple_mozilla_kill_api_to_batter_battery_snitching/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/07/apple_mozilla_kill_a...
- gsnedders 10y ago
  It was never enabled in any of the Apple-owned ports of WebKit, IIRC it was enabled in the GTK and Qt ports, but I could be wrong there. So Apple killing it isn't really true—they're just deleting code that was already gone at compile-time for them.

wux 10y ago

This looked like a pretty long list of unsupported APIs, so I decided to do some research: - CSS motion path is not an official standard; it is implemented only in Blink (Chrome/Opera). - CSS device adaptation is a W3C working draft. It is available prefixed in IE/Edge and Opera Mini, but is unprefixed in 0% of shipping browsers. - Client Hints: DPR, Width, Viewport-Width is an IETF working draft implemented only in Blink (Chrome/Opera). - inputmode is supported in 0% of shipping browsers. - MediaRecorder API is a W3C working draft supported in Blink (Chrome/Opera) and Firefox but not IE/Edge or Safari. - Network Information API is not an official standard; it is supported only in Chrome for Android. (Source: caniuse.com) I stopped going through the list at this point. At least from the top of your list, none of these features are "shipped in every other browser" and some are shipped in no browsers at all. I'm not sure how it shows that Safari is "far behind the times." If anything, the list seems to show that Chrome implements many non-standard APIs not available elsewhere. Combined with its mindshare (if not marketshare), this suggests that Chrome--not Safari--is in some ways the new IE6.

techdragon 10y ago
I'd edit my post to remove the items that aren't standard or even working drafts yet, but unfortunately the time window has passed so I can't now. But I can't agree that Chrome is in any way the new IE6. Chrome is actively participating in the public view in the process of web standards. Apple seems to 'participate' insofar as they are on lists of participating companies. Apple pretty much adds just one batch of features per year, and does so through a completely opaque process that outside developers are almost completely irrelevant to. Chrome at least listens to outside opinions, while one of the defining traits of the IE6 years was having to work under the umbrella of a "we don't care, just use what we gave you" attitude from the IE6 developers. Also, the fact I had to open chrome in order to post this comment to HN is an amusing addition to this little "how broken is the web" discussion.
- grzm 10y ago
  I suspect the reason gp included the IE6 comparison at all was in response to yours, after looking into ES6 support across browsers for features you specifically called out, which I think is fair to do. As for opening Chrome to post your comment, are you having issues with other browsers when you do so? I generally use Safari in Mac OS X and iOS without a problem.

adamlett 10y ago

It would be nice if some of their contributions were less "throw it over the wall once or twice a year". Some of their contributions are. See Swift. It would be nicer still if they stopped thinking their browser only needs to get new features once per year. Safari Technology Preview ships every 2 weeks. I use it as my main browser. It is as solid as any other browser.

glenndebacker 10y ago

"Safari is rapidly getting a reputation as the new IE6." And that is just a ridiculous comparison done by people who have never witnessed that period or are having a different agenda. One of my first jobs (more then a decade ago) as a young developer was being a web developer for an American/Belgian e-commerce site. One of the things that was very important - because every customer counts - that the site displayed and worked perfectly in any browser (IE6, FF/Mozilla, Safari and Opera at the time) That was a situation that wasn't a lot of fun because you had standard HTML that more or less worked in any browser with the exception of IE6. There where a lot of moments that I really hated my job because of the frustrations that IE6 often brought to the table. That is in no way comparable with Safari today. And while I would like to have Apple more rapidly implementing new API's, with IE we could only dream of having an IE version that got new features every year. Years have we have witnessed the fallout of IE6, that will never be the case with Safari to this day. IE6 was a vehicle to create an internet that only worked with Microsoft standards so that others couldn't be a valid alternative hence the IE6 markup vs the rest. You can't do that by dragging your feet when implementing API's, you only price yourself out of the market in that way.

tobltobs 10y ago
I have lived through those awful IE6 times and imho Safari is the new PITA of web development. Nowadays you don't have to create workarounds for CSS problems or same JS incompatibilities, Safari sucks at implementing even the most basic HTML5 APIs. It is like with CSS 10 years ago. This nice new CSS feature (HTML5 API) which would perfectly solve your problem? Sorry you can't use it because IE (Safari) does not support it (maybe never will).
- stephenr 10y ago
  > Safari sucks at implementing even the most basic HTML5 APIs Would you care to give some examples? The last time this played out on HN, the list of unsupported things was not HTML5, and many were unfinished/unstable, or listed as in-progress by the WebKit team.
  - 10y ago

jayflux 10y ago

It would be nicer still if they stopped thinking their browser only needs to get new features once per year. Safari is rapidly getting a reputation as the new IE6. ----------------- To be fair, they had a 9.1 release this year, which included: Picture element support Support for CSS variables Etc https://developer.apple.com/library/content/releasenotes/General/WhatsNewInSafari/Articles/Safari_9_1.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014305-CH10-SW1 https://developer.apple.com/library/content/releasenotes/Gen... So if they do this again, we're looking more at 6 month cycles. The whole safari is the new IE6 stuff is hyperbole which I don't actually hear that many developers saying.. IE6 was bad because it didn't follow any standards, not because it updated slower than the competition.