3 ms·

Drastic title for an incredibly weak article that barely even bothers to make a case. So Safari has a bug. Why does that warrant immediately labelling it abando

Drastic title for an incredibly weak article that barely even bothers to make a case. So Safari has a bug. Why does that warrant immediately labelling it abandonware?

frozenport 9y ago
"Safari is the new IE" has been a complaint for many years. The author is providing supporting evidence. Here is an article from 2015 http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-safari-web-browser-is-becoming-the-new-internet-explorer-2015-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-safari-web-browser-is-b...
- sanbor 9y ago
  As web developer I back this. I didn't hear it before but say that in the office because is the browser that often has weird css bugs. But to be fair Edge also requires some dedication and their update deployment is a nightmare. Their latest stable release was on April but because Windows rolling update strategy some users might be using a 2 year old Edge that doesn't support css variables.
  - frozenport 9y ago
    As a HN reader i'm shocked by the number of downvotes my post recieved. Articles with the title Safari is the New IE routinely recieve dozens of upvotes. Maybe some Apple devs downvoted my post :-)
- zghst 9y ago
  If anything, these journalist are incredibly misinformed and shallowly invested in the issue (they do love clicks though). There's not a sentence about the power usage of browsers, performance on mobile browsers, the mass amount of APIs that have been added over the past few years, the evolution of JavaScript that is happening in tandem with new features that are being released, not even a sentence about how these APIs are extremely immature and still a WIP; all things that if taken in perspective will highlight the nuances of Safari's strategy of slow adoption. Apple could make a browser that has all these features (where APIs are slow to being adopted on sites that users most use, low impact) or they could keep investing in iOS (where APIs are mass adopted from day one on apps used by hundreds of millions, high impact).
  - bradleyjg 9y ago
    Why is it an either/or? They are the largest company by market cap in the world with more than $8B in profit last quarter. They should be able to handle both.
    - zghst 9y ago
      It is precisely an either/or because it has made $8B in profit last quarter. Apple as a massive company must make thousands, hundreds of thousands of tiny decisions to make it's business more profitable. Investing in iOS attracts more customers and buy in to its products and services. Investing in Safari is not a key differentiator for their business and rivals will be able to easily implement the same features. Apple is smart not to play Google's game. If Apple were to engage in this, the browser now becomes a selling point of the phone. Apple goes from iOS/iPhone company to Safari company. They give away their offering/unique selling point that no other company has, along with their massive advantages as a market leader. Because their tech and business strategy is more developed in this space (browsers), Google can start acquiring customers at a lower cost than Apple without having to differentiate its core product more than the fact that it has more APIs/features. We see Google already does this to a degree, they market their products more on the feature set rather than the mission and brand. Web technologies also inherently support Google's business strategy, the more APIs in the browser, the more data Google can collect on Apple's users, the more advanced targeting they can do to swipe away Apple's customers and collect intelligence on what Apple is up to. Do not be fooled, every time there is an API added to the browser, there are teams of people at Google ready to capitalize on it to help drive profits. It would be a bad, bad bet for Apple to start all of sudden focusing its energies on Safari. As a SWE, it is completely understandable why Apple gives Safari little love, I'm okay with it.
Spooky23 9y ago
IE was a totally different situation. With IE you started with no forward motion plus a flawed product with lots of deficiencies, and then evolved to a product with no coherent direction (i.e. IE 7-10). Apple is very consistent with their products: upgrade or else. The only exception really is iTunes, and that's only because not supporting older versions would lead them afoul of merchantability laws for devices. The Apple approach is not great, but at least it's comprehensible. Try certifying any product or configuration with Microsoft -- you have a minimum of 6 versions of Windows 10 alone, not to mention the various Windows 7, 8, 8.1 and Windows server browsers.
Avernar 9y ago
Safari is full of bugs and incompatibilities. Every time I develop something for the web it's always "works on Firefox, works on Chrome, works on IE/Edge and works on... Nope! Something broke on safari again." And the thing that bugs me the most about it is that it's tied to the iOS version you have on mobile. Eventually you're prevented from upgrading it because your device doesn't support the new iOS version.

Drastic title for an incredibly weak article that barely even bothers to make a case. So Safari has a bug. Why does that warrant immediately labelling it abandonware?

frozenport 9y ago

"Safari is the new IE" has been a complaint for many years. The author is providing supporting evidence. Here is an article from 2015 http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-safari-web-browser-is-becoming-the-new-internet-explorer-2015-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-safari-web-browser-is-b...

sanbor 9y ago
As web developer I back this. I didn't hear it before but say that in the office because is the browser that often has weird css bugs. But to be fair Edge also requires some dedication and their update deployment is a nightmare. Their latest stable release was on April but because Windows rolling update strategy some users might be using a 2 year old Edge that doesn't support css variables.
- frozenport 9y ago
  As a HN reader i'm shocked by the number of downvotes my post recieved. Articles with the title Safari is the New IE routinely recieve dozens of upvotes. Maybe some Apple devs downvoted my post :-)
zghst 9y ago
If anything, these journalist are incredibly misinformed and shallowly invested in the issue (they do love clicks though). There's not a sentence about the power usage of browsers, performance on mobile browsers, the mass amount of APIs that have been added over the past few years, the evolution of JavaScript that is happening in tandem with new features that are being released, not even a sentence about how these APIs are extremely immature and still a WIP; all things that if taken in perspective will highlight the nuances of Safari's strategy of slow adoption. Apple could make a browser that has all these features (where APIs are slow to being adopted on sites that users most use, low impact) or they could keep investing in iOS (where APIs are mass adopted from day one on apps used by hundreds of millions, high impact).
- bradleyjg 9y ago
  Why is it an either/or? They are the largest company by market cap in the world with more than $8B in profit last quarter. They should be able to handle both.
  - zghst 9y ago
    It is precisely an either/or because it has made $8B in profit last quarter. Apple as a massive company must make thousands, hundreds of thousands of tiny decisions to make it's business more profitable. Investing in iOS attracts more customers and buy in to its products and services. Investing in Safari is not a key differentiator for their business and rivals will be able to easily implement the same features. Apple is smart not to play Google's game. If Apple were to engage in this, the browser now becomes a selling point of the phone. Apple goes from iOS/iPhone company to Safari company. They give away their offering/unique selling point that no other company has, along with their massive advantages as a market leader. Because their tech and business strategy is more developed in this space (browsers), Google can start acquiring customers at a lower cost than Apple without having to differentiate its core product more than the fact that it has more APIs/features. We see Google already does this to a degree, they market their products more on the feature set rather than the mission and brand. Web technologies also inherently support Google's business strategy, the more APIs in the browser, the more data Google can collect on Apple's users, the more advanced targeting they can do to swipe away Apple's customers and collect intelligence on what Apple is up to. Do not be fooled, every time there is an API added to the browser, there are teams of people at Google ready to capitalize on it to help drive profits. It would be a bad, bad bet for Apple to start all of sudden focusing its energies on Safari. As a SWE, it is completely understandable why Apple gives Safari little love, I'm okay with it.

Spooky23 9y ago

IE was a totally different situation. With IE you started with no forward motion plus a flawed product with lots of deficiencies, and then evolved to a product with no coherent direction (i.e. IE 7-10). Apple is very consistent with their products: upgrade or else. The only exception really is iTunes, and that's only because not supporting older versions would lead them afoul of merchantability laws for devices. The Apple approach is not great, but at least it's comprehensible. Try certifying any product or configuration with Microsoft -- you have a minimum of 6 versions of Windows 10 alone, not to mention the various Windows 7, 8, 8.1 and Windows server browsers.

Avernar 9y ago

Safari is full of bugs and incompatibilities. Every time I develop something for the web it's always "works on Firefox, works on Chrome, works on IE/Edge and works on... Nope! Something broke on safari again." And the thing that bugs me the most about it is that it's tied to the iOS version you have on mobile. Eventually you're prevented from upgrading it because your device doesn't support the new iOS version.