10 ms·

Let's crash the integrated browser in Facebook

242 points by stedaniels 10y ago

stiGGG 10y ago
Is GitHub now a blog?
- rasengan 10y ago
  I actually noticed github being used like this a lot too.
- mattcoles 10y ago
  There is code shared too, so it seems nice to have it all in one place.
- falcolas 10y ago
  With github.io, it's been a blog for quite some time. Putting contents in a readme is only a slightly different (though probably more inefficient for github) use.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
vnchr 10y ago
Is this for protest or mischief?
- robert_foss 10y ago
  Yes.
yladiz 10y ago
Is the browser on Android in Facebook worse than using the default browser? In iOS, I think Facebook has to use the WebKit web view so it acts the same as Safari. (The criticisms about it being able to more easily/aggressively track you are still true though.)
- sleepychu 10y ago
  Particularly since I don't use the default browser and I have a mode in my browser for reading articles nicely; yes it is much worse. The option to use your real browser drifts in and out of messenger, I suspect I'm subject to some AB testing. Somehow FB always manage to forget my previous setting for this option :-(.
- Normal_gaussian 10y ago
  I don't know about now, but a year or two back I stopped using the (Android) app and used the mobile website because the experience was significantly better. I'm aware that my close friends are in the same position.
- maaaats 10y ago
  > Is the browser on Android in Facebook worse than using the default browser? Yes. As I use Firefox as my default browser on Android. Then I miss all my extensions and features, like ad blockers and reading mode.
- untog 10y ago
  The "default browser" for most Android users is Chrome, whereas in-app webviews use the system WebView. Google have decoupled it from OS releases in recent years and it's updated through the Play Store, so it's not awful... but it still lags behind and is missing features. Not to mention, the in-app browser has no shared cookie storage etc, so all your logins are wiped.
cfitz 10y ago
I was surprised to read Facebook's in-app browser accounts for 48% of mobile internet traffic from iOS (versus 34% for Android). Thank you https://twitter.com/BenedictEvans https://twitter.com/BenedictEvans for that stat. While I am all for escaping the "black box" that is Facebook's in-app browser due to our inability to see what they are loading/tracking on the backend, that likely won't happen until people stop using Facebook all together, as it is more convenient for the everyday user. Simply put, Facebook's in-app browser creates less visual noise than a link opening externally in Safari (where there is often the animation of a new tab being created). This ignores the fact, however, that Facebook requires this behavior and thus I cannot be sure that my above statement "everyday people prefer a more convenient / less UX noisy solution" holds true.
- eric_h 10y ago
  I hate every instance of the in-app browser. I always long press on a link and open it in safari whenever that's possible - those integrated browsers don't support my adblock plugin and are already slower than native safari.
  - signal11 10y ago
    TweetBot does a reasonable job here IMHO. It allows you to choose which browser opens links by default -- it supports Firefox, Chrome, Safari as well as its own in-app browser which is a WKWebView, which means it's just as fast as native Safari and respects your content blockers. Choosing a non-default browser is possible by long pressing on a link. EDIT - (thanks saagarjha) newer versions of Tweetbot appear to use SFSafariViewController not WKWebView.
    - eric_h 10y ago
      So I've heard. I've been meaning to install TweetBot for ages, just haven't gotten around to it (and Twitter.ipa is the app in which I most often do the long press to open links).
    - saagarjha 10y ago
      Actually, it's not that simple. There are a couple ways to load websites on iOS: * UIWebView: Old, slow, but dead simple. * WKWebView: The new "WebKit" drop-in replacement for UIWebView. It uses Safari's Nitro engine, and allows for full customization for the chrome, but does not allow for content blocking. Most new apps use this. * SFSafariViewController: A "Safari view"; you have no control over the UI chrome (or browsing history, etc.), but it uses Nitro and loads content blockers. * Safari app: The actual app. Loads content blockers.
rcodiopo 10y ago
Nice englando
josecanhelp 10y ago
I just wish they allowed you to disable the in-app browser. Because of this, I deleted the facebook app from my phone and use my browser to access it. It's been great for productivity too.
- johnnydoe9 10y ago
  The safest way to use facebook is to use a wrapper so it can't track anything, like Metal for Facebook or Swipe then open links of Flynx btw. I highly recommend this approach, floating browsers are pretty good for productivity.
- smorks 10y ago
  You can disable it, at least on Android. App Settings -> Links open externally
codingdave 10y ago
I dropped off Facebook long enough ago that I didn't even know this was a thing. But I cannot imagine the thought process where someone thinks that Facebook is a good wrapper around web browsing.
- qrbLPHiKpiux 10y ago
  Today i learned aomething, too. But almost half of internet traffic?!!
  - 4ndr3vv 10y ago
    *Almost half of iOS traffic
- lmm 10y ago
  Multitasking on mobile OSes still sucks, to the point where an application with an embedded web browser can be nicer than trying to use the application and your actual web browser at the same time.
  - codingdave 10y ago
    Oh, I get that... but in my (possibly dated) mind, Facebook is a web site, and you run your mobile browser to view it, not the other way around. I mean, this feels to me like the days when dial-up was fading, but my parents would still connect to AOL to browse the Internet.
    - deong 10y ago
      Do you really think more people tap the Safari icon and then type "facebook.com" in the URL bar than just tap the icon for the Facebook app? I can't imagine that ratio is even remotely close to 1:1. I'd bet a good dinner than 95+% of interactions on mobile are through the app.
    - rvense 10y ago
      I think Facebook is an app and then you click a link and you see the article. The rest is nerdetails.
wimagguc 10y ago
Reading this from the HN iOS app that, too, has this terrible popup-browser-feature. I doubt they track too much beyond clicks, so perhaps there's a user interface upside to this that I don't see? Are users actually happy with it? What I'm missing is the public uproar: if Facebook were to open every website in an iframe I'm sure there would be a massive protest, but on mobile it seems like everyone is fine.
- jmfurlott 10y ago
  I don't think HN has an official app, iirc. I just save the bookmark to my home screen
- ascagnel_ 10y ago
  There's no official HN iOS app. If the app is more modern, it'll use the new Safari View Controller that integrates content blockers (vs. the old web view). Facebook tracks every link through their own (slow) redirect service, so they can track every link out. The "Like" buttons also act as page trackers, even if you're not logged in.
yohann305 10y ago
Bear with me here. I remember of a time when Microsoft used to force you to use Internet Explorer on a default Windows OS install. They got sued for this which forced them to give user a choice to choose one browser from a selection of browsers (story: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/196170-microsoft-is-finally-allowed-to-once-again-set-ie-as-the-default-browser-in-windows https://www.extremetech.com/computing/196170-microsoft-is-fi...) The more I think of it, the more Facebook becomes the equivalent of an operating system for the average user. You can send/receive messages, do image editing, surf the web, but you have no choice of which software to use to do these tasks Once you're in FB ecosystem you're forced to use their array of services. I see the same pattern happening again. I wonder if people will rise to the occasion and put a halt to this, just like it was done to Microsoft a decade (or so) ago. I'd love to hear your thoughts? On a different note: Apple app store has strict guidelines on any app that is trying to recreate an "app store" or OS system in their store and would reject/remove such an app. FB might be playing with fire here?
- bryanlarsen 10y ago
  This was only illegal because Microsoft was deemed a monopoly. One could certainly argue that Facebook has a monopoly, but such an argument would definitely be much more difficult than the one against Microsoft.
  - yohann305 10y ago
    i see, you've got a point. When we think FB, we should be reminded that FB also owns other major social companies like Instagram and Whatsapp to name a few. FB might be a bigger fish than we might be aware of. Thoughts?
    - theseatoms 10y ago
      > ...than we might be aware of... It's a 400 billion dollar company and, as the GP noted, most people's default web experience.
    - ma2rten 10y ago
ISL 10y ago
One can avoid any browser problems by accessing Facebook using another browser. The only functionality that appears to be missing is Messenger, which, paradoxically, still works on the desktop-served web page.
- slmkbh 10y ago
  I'm using the webapps wrapper on android, with user agent set to desktop. This gives me a mobile version of Fb where the messenger part works, really nifty. And sandboxed too!
- frandroid 10y ago
  Only because there isn't a desktop app... yet ;)
  - ISL 10y ago
    It'll be a strange day if I can ever apt-get install a Facebook app from the Debian repository.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- thearn4 10y ago
  This is exactly why I use Tinfoil for Facebook on my android phone. It's just a webview around FB's mobile site.
  - mlnhd 10y ago
    An iOS equivalent is Friendly
uranian 10y ago
Facebook in app's browser is total horror and I refuse to do any work related to it, even if it would cost me my job! A while ago I made a website for the company I work for, everything was working flawless across all major browsers including mobile. Then some e-commerce dude asked me to fix a few style issues for Facebook browser. I didn't even know of it's existence by then! This browser goes way beyond IE6 incompatibility, I spend 2 days in hell trying to fix the style issues, which is nearly impossible because there is not even a proper way to test your changes. To start I first had to install that stupid FB app/virus in my phone, after that everything you type in the address bar generates some totally useless crap suggestions and advertising all the way, it was quite a puzzle/hack to even reach my own development server through all this misery.. I eventually had to decide to redo the entire styling of the website so it works with FB browser, or simply give up. I very fortunately managed to convince my manager to not support FB browser, but I must have lost some credibility that I was not able to fix this seemingly simple style issue.
- elaus 10y ago
  I too first learned of the Facebook browser when a client complained that his websites has some issues with it. Kinda weird how we as developers (that like to keep up to date with web tech) can be completely unaware of a browser that apparently generates 40% of mobile traffic .
godmodus 10y ago
Tip, install a "secure browser" - it would be detected as a low end platform because it doesn't send everything they need to "optimise" the experience, and offer you a stripped down version. Whoever installs fb on mobile is asking for it.
lnanek2 10y ago
> First of all integrated in-app browsers suck. I couldn't agree more. Every day I try to open a link in Facebook, Gmail, Slack, etc. and it opens it inside the app in a half functional WebView control and I have to go dig in the menu to try to get it to open in a full browser just to do whatever I need to do (usually request desktop site, then post some code review comments or squash and merge on github, etc.). There used to be settings for some of these apps to avoid this. The Google app has a setting that let you skip it for searches entered in the search bar widget on the home screen, for example, but more often than not there's simply no setting to avoid it and you are stuck with the bad behavior for as long as you use the app.
_joel 10y ago
I install Firefox with uBlock extensions and set external links to open via FB app in that. It works fine for me on Android. What is annoying though and has FB has a habit of removing the preference to open in external tabs when you update. Dark patterns abound.
chinathrow 10y ago
If you wish to avoid all FB apps (FB/Messenger) and still want to use messaging, use https://mbasic.facebook.com https://mbasic.facebook.com - it works, it's fast, it's HTML only, but yes, no push notifications and no browser lock-in as mentioned within the article.
fdim 10y ago
I also hate when apps are doing this, especially when you can't disable it! I really don't know how doing that benefits the user. Recently I was bit by Instagram app on ios (reported by the client, I am an android user) - it even breaks their own login flow! E.g. You can't open a link from within their app and login to some 3rd party site via Instagram. It simply times out and doesn't even replace the page - thus hides the actual problem. What is worse, is that typical user would blame site developers for this. In the end I had to refactor the flow to avoid login when user is coming from the app... If you choose to do this, do it this right!
greggman 10y ago
Integrated browsers really bug me and I wish Apple would update their TOS to require launching Safari (or better the user's choice) The problem with integrated browsers is the AFAICT the app doing the integration can read everything that goes through it. That means if you click link and it links to page that asks you to login the app hosting the integrated browser can read the keys/input/network traffic. How can I trust any such app not to be spying on me? Sure I have to trust Apple with Safari or Google with Chrome or Mozilla with Facebook but that's 3 companies to trust, not one company per app * every 3rd party library they integrated. At maybe a more minor level it also means the hosting app can read every URL you visit from linked pages.
- tluyben2 10y ago
  > Integrated browsers really bug me and I wish Apple would update their TOS to require launching Safari (or better the user's choice) Making the users pick what happens when a browser action runs seems good, however opening a separate new browser (like many apps and even sometimes facebook on android do) is, at least to me, a horrible experience. Not sure what would be best as the current situation is not very good I agree.
scarface74 10y ago
"It's easier for them to track what you read on the web more aggressively and that's not very good." That premise is right about Facebook but not necessarily with all iOS apps that have "in app browsers" iOS provides two methods to provide an in app browser - the traditional webview where the parent app has access to everything you enter - but doesn't have access to your browser cookies from Safari, your bookmarks, history etc and the web controller which is basically a separate process running Safari inside your app. It looks basically the same except the app has no access to your cookies, passwords, bookmarks, but you do have access to all of the above functionality and any ad blocker you have installed. I don't use the FB app for just that reason. I use the mobile site.
chatmasta 10y ago
I only browse Facebook via mobile safari. I do not have the iOS fb app installed. It does way too much and it squeezes as much metadata as it can out of every single permission you grant it.
gnicholas 10y ago
FB's integrated browser is also bad for accessibility. For starters, it doesn't support larger text, even if the user has set the OS-wide preference for larger text. And if you want to open a linked article in an app that does offer large text or other accessibility features, Facebook doesn't make it easy? Instead of using the standard Share pane, they only show that you can share to Safari (which lets you then share to other apps, as all well-behaved apps do). Why? Presumably because in the standard Share pane you'd see things like Email and Messages, and maybe you'd send the article via those channels instead of posting it on FB or sending it via FB message to a friend. Basically, they want to keep you in the ecosystem, so they make it difficult to leave. And they don't mind if accessibility ends up as collateral damage. To their credit, they recently added the ability to copy the link, which was missing when I wrote this article [1] on the inaccessibility of tech companies' news apps (including FB), which are much less accessible than media companies' news apps. 1: https://hackernoon.com/the-importance-of-text-accessibility-in-news-apps-45ac8cca2e9a https://hackernoon.com/the-importance-of-text-accessibility-...
bradhe 10y ago
How much of a "browser" is this browser? Is it just a wrapper around some kind of web view or does it have a native engine and all that? Wondering realistically what the surface area for compatibility actually is.

242 points by stedaniels 10y ago

stiGGG 10y ago

Is GitHub now a blog?

rasengan 10y ago
I actually noticed github being used like this a lot too.
mattcoles 10y ago
There is code shared too, so it seems nice to have it all in one place.
falcolas 10y ago
With github.io, it's been a blog for quite some time. Putting contents in a readme is only a slightly different (though probably more inefficient for github) use.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

vnchr 10y ago

Is this for protest or mischief?

robert_foss 10y ago
Yes.

yladiz 10y ago

Is the browser on Android in Facebook worse than using the default browser? In iOS, I think Facebook has to use the WebKit web view so it acts the same as Safari. (The criticisms about it being able to more easily/aggressively track you are still true though.)

sleepychu 10y ago
Particularly since I don't use the default browser and I have a mode in my browser for reading articles nicely; yes it is much worse. The option to use your real browser drifts in and out of messenger, I suspect I'm subject to some AB testing. Somehow FB always manage to forget my previous setting for this option :-(.
Normal_gaussian 10y ago
I don't know about now, but a year or two back I stopped using the (Android) app and used the mobile website because the experience was significantly better. I'm aware that my close friends are in the same position.
maaaats 10y ago
> Is the browser on Android in Facebook worse than using the default browser? Yes. As I use Firefox as my default browser on Android. Then I miss all my extensions and features, like ad blockers and reading mode.
untog 10y ago
The "default browser" for most Android users is Chrome, whereas in-app webviews use the system WebView. Google have decoupled it from OS releases in recent years and it's updated through the Play Store, so it's not awful... but it still lags behind and is missing features. Not to mention, the in-app browser has no shared cookie storage etc, so all your logins are wiped.

cfitz 10y ago

I was surprised to read Facebook's in-app browser accounts for 48% of mobile internet traffic from iOS (versus 34% for Android). Thank you https://twitter.com/BenedictEvans https://twitter.com/BenedictEvans for that stat. While I am all for escaping the "black box" that is Facebook's in-app browser due to our inability to see what they are loading/tracking on the backend, that likely won't happen until people stop using Facebook all together, as it is more convenient for the everyday user. Simply put, Facebook's in-app browser creates less visual noise than a link opening externally in Safari (where there is often the animation of a new tab being created). This ignores the fact, however, that Facebook requires this behavior and thus I cannot be sure that my above statement "everyday people prefer a more convenient / less UX noisy solution" holds true.

eric_h 10y ago
I hate every instance of the in-app browser. I always long press on a link and open it in safari whenever that's possible - those integrated browsers don't support my adblock plugin and are already slower than native safari.
- signal11 10y ago
  TweetBot does a reasonable job here IMHO. It allows you to choose which browser opens links by default -- it supports Firefox, Chrome, Safari as well as its own in-app browser which is a WKWebView, which means it's just as fast as native Safari and respects your content blockers. Choosing a non-default browser is possible by long pressing on a link. EDIT - (thanks saagarjha) newer versions of Tweetbot appear to use SFSafariViewController not WKWebView.
  - eric_h 10y ago
    So I've heard. I've been meaning to install TweetBot for ages, just haven't gotten around to it (and Twitter.ipa is the app in which I most often do the long press to open links).
  - saagarjha 10y ago
    Actually, it's not that simple. There are a couple ways to load websites on iOS: * UIWebView: Old, slow, but dead simple. * WKWebView: The new "WebKit" drop-in replacement for UIWebView. It uses Safari's Nitro engine, and allows for full customization for the chrome, but does not allow for content blocking. Most new apps use this. * SFSafariViewController: A "Safari view"; you have no control over the UI chrome (or browsing history, etc.), but it uses Nitro and loads content blockers. * Safari app: The actual app. Loads content blockers.

rcodiopo 10y ago

Nice englando

josecanhelp 10y ago

I just wish they allowed you to disable the in-app browser. Because of this, I deleted the facebook app from my phone and use my browser to access it. It's been great for productivity too.

johnnydoe9 10y ago
The safest way to use facebook is to use a wrapper so it can't track anything, like Metal for Facebook or Swipe then open links of Flynx btw. I highly recommend this approach, floating browsers are pretty good for productivity.
smorks 10y ago
You can disable it, at least on Android. App Settings -> Links open externally

codingdave 10y ago

I dropped off Facebook long enough ago that I didn't even know this was a thing. But I cannot imagine the thought process where someone thinks that Facebook is a good wrapper around web browsing.

qrbLPHiKpiux 10y ago
Today i learned aomething, too. But almost half of internet traffic?!!
- 4ndr3vv 10y ago
  *Almost half of iOS traffic
lmm 10y ago
Multitasking on mobile OSes still sucks, to the point where an application with an embedded web browser can be nicer than trying to use the application and your actual web browser at the same time.
- codingdave 10y ago
  Oh, I get that... but in my (possibly dated) mind, Facebook is a web site, and you run your mobile browser to view it, not the other way around. I mean, this feels to me like the days when dial-up was fading, but my parents would still connect to AOL to browse the Internet.
  - deong 10y ago
    Do you really think more people tap the Safari icon and then type "facebook.com" in the URL bar than just tap the icon for the Facebook app? I can't imagine that ratio is even remotely close to 1:1. I'd bet a good dinner than 95+% of interactions on mobile are through the app.
  - rvense 10y ago
    I think Facebook is an app and then you click a link and you see the article. The rest is nerdetails.

wimagguc 10y ago

Reading this from the HN iOS app that, too, has this terrible popup-browser-feature. I doubt they track too much beyond clicks, so perhaps there's a user interface upside to this that I don't see? Are users actually happy with it? What I'm missing is the public uproar: if Facebook were to open every website in an iframe I'm sure there would be a massive protest, but on mobile it seems like everyone is fine.

jmfurlott 10y ago
I don't think HN has an official app, iirc. I just save the bookmark to my home screen
ascagnel_ 10y ago
There's no official HN iOS app. If the app is more modern, it'll use the new Safari View Controller that integrates content blockers (vs. the old web view). Facebook tracks every link through their own (slow) redirect service, so they can track every link out. The "Like" buttons also act as page trackers, even if you're not logged in.

yohann305 10y ago

Bear with me here. I remember of a time when Microsoft used to force you to use Internet Explorer on a default Windows OS install. They got sued for this which forced them to give user a choice to choose one browser from a selection of browsers (story: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/196170-microsoft-is-finally-allowed-to-once-again-set-ie-as-the-default-browser-in-windows https://www.extremetech.com/computing/196170-microsoft-is-fi...) The more I think of it, the more Facebook becomes the equivalent of an operating system for the average user. You can send/receive messages, do image editing, surf the web, but you have no choice of which software to use to do these tasks Once you're in FB ecosystem you're forced to use their array of services. I see the same pattern happening again. I wonder if people will rise to the occasion and put a halt to this, just like it was done to Microsoft a decade (or so) ago. I'd love to hear your thoughts? On a different note: Apple app store has strict guidelines on any app that is trying to recreate an "app store" or OS system in their store and would reject/remove such an app. FB might be playing with fire here?

bryanlarsen 10y ago
This was only illegal because Microsoft was deemed a monopoly. One could certainly argue that Facebook has a monopoly, but such an argument would definitely be much more difficult than the one against Microsoft.
- yohann305 10y ago
  i see, you've got a point. When we think FB, we should be reminded that FB also owns other major social companies like Instagram and Whatsapp to name a few. FB might be a bigger fish than we might be aware of. Thoughts?
  - theseatoms 10y ago
    > ...than we might be aware of... It's a 400 billion dollar company and, as the GP noted, most people's default web experience.
  - ma2rten 10y ago

ISL 10y ago

One can avoid any browser problems by accessing Facebook using another browser. The only functionality that appears to be missing is Messenger, which, paradoxically, still works on the desktop-served web page.

slmkbh 10y ago
I'm using the webapps wrapper on android, with user agent set to desktop. This gives me a mobile version of Fb where the messenger part works, really nifty. And sandboxed too!
frandroid 10y ago
Only because there isn't a desktop app... yet ;)
- ISL 10y ago
  It'll be a strange day if I can ever apt-get install a Facebook app from the Debian repository.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
thearn4 10y ago
This is exactly why I use Tinfoil for Facebook on my android phone. It's just a webview around FB's mobile site.
- mlnhd 10y ago
  An iOS equivalent is Friendly

uranian 10y ago

Facebook in app's browser is total horror and I refuse to do any work related to it, even if it would cost me my job! A while ago I made a website for the company I work for, everything was working flawless across all major browsers including mobile. Then some e-commerce dude asked me to fix a few style issues for Facebook browser. I didn't even know of it's existence by then! This browser goes way beyond IE6 incompatibility, I spend 2 days in hell trying to fix the style issues, which is nearly impossible because there is not even a proper way to test your changes. To start I first had to install that stupid FB app/virus in my phone, after that everything you type in the address bar generates some totally useless crap suggestions and advertising all the way, it was quite a puzzle/hack to even reach my own development server through all this misery.. I eventually had to decide to redo the entire styling of the website so it works with FB browser, or simply give up. I very fortunately managed to convince my manager to not support FB browser, but I must have lost some credibility that I was not able to fix this seemingly simple style issue.

elaus 10y ago
I too first learned of the Facebook browser when a client complained that his websites has some issues with it. Kinda weird how we as developers (that like to keep up to date with web tech) can be completely unaware of a browser that apparently generates 40% of mobile traffic .

godmodus 10y ago

Tip, install a "secure browser" - it would be detected as a low end platform because it doesn't send everything they need to "optimise" the experience, and offer you a stripped down version. Whoever installs fb on mobile is asking for it.

lnanek2 10y ago

> First of all integrated in-app browsers suck. I couldn't agree more. Every day I try to open a link in Facebook, Gmail, Slack, etc. and it opens it inside the app in a half functional WebView control and I have to go dig in the menu to try to get it to open in a full browser just to do whatever I need to do (usually request desktop site, then post some code review comments or squash and merge on github, etc.). There used to be settings for some of these apps to avoid this. The Google app has a setting that let you skip it for searches entered in the search bar widget on the home screen, for example, but more often than not there's simply no setting to avoid it and you are stuck with the bad behavior for as long as you use the app.

_joel 10y ago

I install Firefox with uBlock extensions and set external links to open via FB app in that. It works fine for me on Android. What is annoying though and has FB has a habit of removing the preference to open in external tabs when you update. Dark patterns abound.

chinathrow 10y ago

If you wish to avoid all FB apps (FB/Messenger) and still want to use messaging, use https://mbasic.facebook.com https://mbasic.facebook.com - it works, it's fast, it's HTML only, but yes, no push notifications and no browser lock-in as mentioned within the article.

fdim 10y ago

I also hate when apps are doing this, especially when you can't disable it! I really don't know how doing that benefits the user. Recently I was bit by Instagram app on ios (reported by the client, I am an android user) - it even breaks their own login flow! E.g. You can't open a link from within their app and login to some 3rd party site via Instagram. It simply times out and doesn't even replace the page - thus hides the actual problem. What is worse, is that typical user would blame site developers for this. In the end I had to refactor the flow to avoid login when user is coming from the app... If you choose to do this, do it this right!

greggman 10y ago

Integrated browsers really bug me and I wish Apple would update their TOS to require launching Safari (or better the user's choice) The problem with integrated browsers is the AFAICT the app doing the integration can read everything that goes through it. That means if you click link and it links to page that asks you to login the app hosting the integrated browser can read the keys/input/network traffic. How can I trust any such app not to be spying on me? Sure I have to trust Apple with Safari or Google with Chrome or Mozilla with Facebook but that's 3 companies to trust, not one company per app * every 3rd party library they integrated. At maybe a more minor level it also means the hosting app can read every URL you visit from linked pages.

tluyben2 10y ago
> Integrated browsers really bug me and I wish Apple would update their TOS to require launching Safari (or better the user's choice) Making the users pick what happens when a browser action runs seems good, however opening a separate new browser (like many apps and even sometimes facebook on android do) is, at least to me, a horrible experience. Not sure what would be best as the current situation is not very good I agree.

scarface74 10y ago

"It's easier for them to track what you read on the web more aggressively and that's not very good." That premise is right about Facebook but not necessarily with all iOS apps that have "in app browsers" iOS provides two methods to provide an in app browser - the traditional webview where the parent app has access to everything you enter - but doesn't have access to your browser cookies from Safari, your bookmarks, history etc and the web controller which is basically a separate process running Safari inside your app. It looks basically the same except the app has no access to your cookies, passwords, bookmarks, but you do have access to all of the above functionality and any ad blocker you have installed. I don't use the FB app for just that reason. I use the mobile site.

chatmasta 10y ago

I only browse Facebook via mobile safari. I do not have the iOS fb app installed. It does way too much and it squeezes as much metadata as it can out of every single permission you grant it.

gnicholas 10y ago

FB's integrated browser is also bad for accessibility. For starters, it doesn't support larger text, even if the user has set the OS-wide preference for larger text. And if you want to open a linked article in an app that does offer large text or other accessibility features, Facebook doesn't make it easy? Instead of using the standard Share pane, they only show that you can share to Safari (which lets you then share to other apps, as all well-behaved apps do). Why? Presumably because in the standard Share pane you'd see things like Email and Messages, and maybe you'd send the article via those channels instead of posting it on FB or sending it via FB message to a friend. Basically, they want to keep you in the ecosystem, so they make it difficult to leave. And they don't mind if accessibility ends up as collateral damage. To their credit, they recently added the ability to copy the link, which was missing when I wrote this article [1] on the inaccessibility of tech companies' news apps (including FB), which are much less accessible than media companies' news apps. 1: https://hackernoon.com/the-importance-of-text-accessibility-in-news-apps-45ac8cca2e9a https://hackernoon.com/the-importance-of-text-accessibility-...

bradhe 10y ago

How much of a "browser" is this browser? Is it just a wrapper around some kind of web view or does it have a native engine and all that? Wondering realistically what the surface area for compatibility actually is.