5 ms·

Just imagine www didn't exist and Apple already had ios and apps. If someone came up with the idea of www and an app called web browser , would apple accept it

Just imagine www didn't exist and Apple already had ios and apps. If someone came up with the idea of www and an app called web browser , would apple accept it in the app store? They would only accept it if they build it themselves. At some point is there a risk that Apple may also start to ban the web browser, despite that it's under strict control on IOS?

grey-area 10y ago
This is why you don't build on someone else's platform. Apple/Google/Platform Owner will always do what's right for them, not the customer, and not the developer, for example banning Amazon from selling books in their kindle app, not allowing competing browsers (they recognise the power of the web as a platform), not allowing competing sales mechanisms (where they don't get a cut), and here not allowing developers to update their apps except through the store mechanism. I have some sympathy with Apple here, and see why they're doing it (they have to control what software is installed for security reasons as well as platform protection), but this is all about control over what you install on your own device. Sometimes their actions will be in the best interests of customers, even if not the best interests of developers, but most of the time their actions are simply aimed at preserving their control of the platform and control of the money flowing through it. The web is the one exception to this rule which works across all platforms and devices (because it is so dumb and simple), and has survived attempts to corral it to a walled-in commercial offering remarkably well.
- ChrisMorrisOrg 10y ago
  I agree - they're definitely putting the customer's security first. If people want to use an open environment, the web browser is always available on iOS anyway. Apple are completely within their rights to restrict their application platform.
  - trhway 10y ago
    >Apple are completely within their rights to restrict their application platform. it is like to say that GM is completely withing their rights to restrict where you can drive your GM car. Mind you, that is coming in pretty near future too - giving all the computerization/connectivity/self-driving of the cars which would make the cars into GM's "application platform" with DMCA protecting such a platform too like it protects Apple/Google/FB/etc...
    - bluesign 10y ago
      Actually it is more like GM preventing you to update some software components in your car, which almost all car manufacturers do.
    - briandear 10y ago
      Not the same thing. It's like GM telling aftermarket accessories manufacturers that if they want to sell their products through GM dealers that they must meet GM standards. The inability to use Rollout has no real impact on consumers.. except by improving safety.
      - trhway 10y ago
        >if they want to sell their products through GM dealers that they must meet GM standards. i wonder whether you're intentionally skipped that part or just don't know that in case of non-jailbroken iPhone the "GM dealers" is the only way to get "aftermarket accessories". There is no "if they want to sell their products through", instead there is "if they want to sell their products at all".
- carterehsmith 10y ago
  Try making e.g. a game that is not on someone else's platform. Make a game that is not for PC or XBox or PS or Nintendo or iOS or Android or Facebook or Java or whatever. Count money. Oops, there isn't any. Or, try making a Photoshop clone, CAD software or similar without being on someone else's platform. Oops. "it don't work" :)
  - chii 10y ago
    there are many games not in platforms you listed. those games are called board games, and they have been a resurgence of them lately. as for video games, yes you'll be beholden to the platforms you build it under. this is why I say to devs, always build it cross platform!
  - Nexxxeh 10y ago
    I hope you are wrong. Age of Ascent did play tests that were rather fun (and impressive) when I caught them, and that's in-browser no-plugin.
  - Vendan 10y ago
    You are confusing platforms though. The various app stores are vastly different then how it works on Windows, and PC in general for that matter. I get to choose all the way down to the OS, very few phones get that kind of choice. On top of that, iPhone app store is one of the most controlling out there. Even android allows you to install out of band, and to install other app stores and that kind of thing.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    > Make a game that is not for PC Or is the right challenge "make a game for PC that isn't in the microsoft app store"? Which is in fact no hindrance at all. It's not really "someone else's platform" just by using someone's software. They have to be in control.
ChrisMorrisOrg 10y ago
I strongly doubt Apple would ever ban web browsers. The amount browsing done on iOS is too significant, it wouldn't make sense to ban them.
- chj 10y ago
  At this moment Apple is effectively banning web browsers except their own safari. The other browsers you see on iOS are just a wrapper over the native webkit view.
  - jvzr 10y ago
    Probably a controversial opinion, but seeing how Safari is the only browser behaving correctly on macOS (performance- and battery-wise), I'd assume only Apple has the motivation to make a correct browser for iOS. Imagine the kerfuffle if Google had Chrome on iOS. 2% of "PC" users complain of Chrome hitting their battery hard on macOS. iOS has a much bigger market share. Competition is healthy, I agree. But sometimes the best interest of the vendor and the users don't align, and I'm more confident Apple is prioritizing battery life and performance over other things, while Google will prioritize those other things (like ads and data collection). I can't imagine them allowing adblockers on iOS (exactly as they don't on Android, afaik)
    - chii 10y ago
      why not let the consumer decide their browser of choice? Apple isn't prevented from creating battery efficient code by allowing others to write a browser.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - syntheticcdo 10y ago
        The consumer is free to choose Android.
  - wruza 10y ago
Gorbzel 10y ago
This is misleading FUD disguised as an innocent question. The strategy is to pose a seemingly reasonable hypothetical that, in reality, encourages folks to disregard common sense, ignore security best practices, and instead embrace their worst suspicions about the role that ecosystems play in modern technology. Reject this naive approach to reality. No, we will not disregard Tim Berners-Lee's role, timing, or place in history. We will not pretend that Cupertino should ignore their responsibility to prevent arbitrary code execution on one of the most widely deployed platforms on the planet. If anything, we celebrate that despite Apple being a giant target for quite a bit of criticism these days (some deserved, some not), for the most part, people on this thread recognize what a giant, unacceptable vulnerability Rollout.io is. Tech must advance beyond adversarial, animus-based, abrasive reactions to other operating systems, ecosystems, and the like. No time like the present and no better opportunity than some ignorant HN strawman.
Vinnl 10y ago
They already have, to some extent. The only web browser (or, well, rendering engine) allowed on iOS is ones using the WebKit they provide. This is the reason is took ages for Firefox to appear on iOS, and even today isn't actually Firefox and thus can't make use of features usually in Firefox like supporting websites using CSS Grid, or WebAssembly, or Service Workers, or WebRTC, or...
tinus_hn 10y ago
Apple would not, because they don't allow apps to provide a JavaScript runtime. It would be possible to build a browser without JavaScript though.
- Jyaif 10y ago
  Possible, but forbidden by Apple as well. ( section 2.5.6 of https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ )
  - tinus_hn 10y ago
    Yes, but if the web was a new invention that probably wouldn't be in the rules.

grey-area 10y ago

This is why you don't build on someone else's platform. Apple/Google/Platform Owner will always do what's right for them, not the customer, and not the developer, for example banning Amazon from selling books in their kindle app, not allowing competing browsers (they recognise the power of the web as a platform), not allowing competing sales mechanisms (where they don't get a cut), and here not allowing developers to update their apps except through the store mechanism. I have some sympathy with Apple here, and see why they're doing it (they have to control what software is installed for security reasons as well as platform protection), but this is all about control over what you install on your own device. Sometimes their actions will be in the best interests of customers, even if not the best interests of developers, but most of the time their actions are simply aimed at preserving their control of the platform and control of the money flowing through it. The web is the one exception to this rule which works across all platforms and devices (because it is so dumb and simple), and has survived attempts to corral it to a walled-in commercial offering remarkably well.

ChrisMorrisOrg 10y ago
I agree - they're definitely putting the customer's security first. If people want to use an open environment, the web browser is always available on iOS anyway. Apple are completely within their rights to restrict their application platform.
- trhway 10y ago
  >Apple are completely within their rights to restrict their application platform. it is like to say that GM is completely withing their rights to restrict where you can drive your GM car. Mind you, that is coming in pretty near future too - giving all the computerization/connectivity/self-driving of the cars which would make the cars into GM's "application platform" with DMCA protecting such a platform too like it protects Apple/Google/FB/etc...
  - bluesign 10y ago
    Actually it is more like GM preventing you to update some software components in your car, which almost all car manufacturers do.
  - briandear 10y ago
    Not the same thing. It's like GM telling aftermarket accessories manufacturers that if they want to sell their products through GM dealers that they must meet GM standards. The inability to use Rollout has no real impact on consumers.. except by improving safety.
    - trhway 10y ago
      >if they want to sell their products through GM dealers that they must meet GM standards. i wonder whether you're intentionally skipped that part or just don't know that in case of non-jailbroken iPhone the "GM dealers" is the only way to get "aftermarket accessories". There is no "if they want to sell their products through", instead there is "if they want to sell their products at all".
carterehsmith 10y ago
Try making e.g. a game that is not on someone else's platform. Make a game that is not for PC or XBox or PS or Nintendo or iOS or Android or Facebook or Java or whatever. Count money. Oops, there isn't any. Or, try making a Photoshop clone, CAD software or similar without being on someone else's platform. Oops. "it don't work" :)
- chii 10y ago
  there are many games not in platforms you listed. those games are called board games, and they have been a resurgence of them lately. as for video games, yes you'll be beholden to the platforms you build it under. this is why I say to devs, always build it cross platform!
- Nexxxeh 10y ago
  I hope you are wrong. Age of Ascent did play tests that were rather fun (and impressive) when I caught them, and that's in-browser no-plugin.
- Vendan 10y ago
  You are confusing platforms though. The various app stores are vastly different then how it works on Windows, and PC in general for that matter. I get to choose all the way down to the OS, very few phones get that kind of choice. On top of that, iPhone app store is one of the most controlling out there. Even android allows you to install out of band, and to install other app stores and that kind of thing.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Dylan16807 10y ago
  > Make a game that is not for PC Or is the right challenge "make a game for PC that isn't in the microsoft app store"? Which is in fact no hindrance at all. It's not really "someone else's platform" just by using someone's software. They have to be in control.

ChrisMorrisOrg 10y ago

I strongly doubt Apple would ever ban web browsers. The amount browsing done on iOS is too significant, it wouldn't make sense to ban them.

chj 10y ago
At this moment Apple is effectively banning web browsers except their own safari. The other browsers you see on iOS are just a wrapper over the native webkit view.
- jvzr 10y ago
  Probably a controversial opinion, but seeing how Safari is the only browser behaving correctly on macOS (performance- and battery-wise), I'd assume only Apple has the motivation to make a correct browser for iOS. Imagine the kerfuffle if Google had Chrome on iOS. 2% of "PC" users complain of Chrome hitting their battery hard on macOS. iOS has a much bigger market share. Competition is healthy, I agree. But sometimes the best interest of the vendor and the users don't align, and I'm more confident Apple is prioritizing battery life and performance over other things, while Google will prioritize those other things (like ads and data collection). I can't imagine them allowing adblockers on iOS (exactly as they don't on Android, afaik)
  - chii 10y ago
    why not let the consumer decide their browser of choice? Apple isn't prevented from creating battery efficient code by allowing others to write a browser.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - syntheticcdo 10y ago
      The consumer is free to choose Android.
- wruza 10y ago

Gorbzel 10y ago

This is misleading FUD disguised as an innocent question. The strategy is to pose a seemingly reasonable hypothetical that, in reality, encourages folks to disregard common sense, ignore security best practices, and instead embrace their worst suspicions about the role that ecosystems play in modern technology. Reject this naive approach to reality. No, we will not disregard Tim Berners-Lee's role, timing, or place in history. We will not pretend that Cupertino should ignore their responsibility to prevent arbitrary code execution on one of the most widely deployed platforms on the planet. If anything, we celebrate that despite Apple being a giant target for quite a bit of criticism these days (some deserved, some not), for the most part, people on this thread recognize what a giant, unacceptable vulnerability Rollout.io is. Tech must advance beyond adversarial, animus-based, abrasive reactions to other operating systems, ecosystems, and the like. No time like the present and no better opportunity than some ignorant HN strawman.

Vinnl 10y ago

They already have, to some extent. The only web browser (or, well, rendering engine) allowed on iOS is ones using the WebKit they provide. This is the reason is took ages for Firefox to appear on iOS, and even today isn't actually Firefox and thus can't make use of features usually in Firefox like supporting websites using CSS Grid, or WebAssembly, or Service Workers, or WebRTC, or...

tinus_hn 10y ago

Apple would not, because they don't allow apps to provide a JavaScript runtime. It would be possible to build a browser without JavaScript though.

Jyaif 10y ago
Possible, but forbidden by Apple as well. ( section 2.5.6 of https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/ )
- tinus_hn 10y ago
  Yes, but if the web was a new invention that probably wouldn't be in the rules.