5 ms·

This is an important point, but it's ancillary to what I'm getting at here. (And, contrary to sibling comment, I'm well aware that "Chrome on iOS" is just a wra

This is an important point, but it's ancillary to what I'm getting at here. (And, contrary to sibling comment, I'm well aware that "Chrome on iOS" is just a wrapper around the Webkit view.) There's an important role of competition, and I sometimes do wish that Apple allowed alternative implementations. On the other hand, alternative implementations are also alternative vectors for security holes, and one of Apple's primary business differentiators at this point is "security and privacy"—so I'm also sympathetic to the reasons they don't allow other implementations on their system.

bhawks 9y ago
Two points: 1. Today we have 4 browser implementors. Only one of them doesn't also own an operating system (FF). We lost opera year or two ago. I would argue that a significant factor in this shrinking landscape is the fact that Apple has locked away ~10% of the market forever (and this 10% is not a random sampling - it includes many high value customers). Sure implementing a browser is technically challenging - my argument is that Apple's policy has altered the environment in such a way that there is no longer any reward for overcoming that challenge unless you have an operating system or some other large interest that requires you to make a browser. This will have effects on the web as a platform for years to come. 2. Security is a core principle for all browser implementors - due to the nature of a browser you won't get far without it. Privacy is a can of worms - all implementors will pay lip service to it. Whether or not they deliver on it is another topic entirely. A blanket ban on browser development in the name of security is heavy handed. Browser implementors love security and would gladly follow any procedures and policies the platform chooses to enforce. Apple's kill switches give them more than enough leverage to protect users from bad security actors. Now privacy, given that WKWebviews apis allow developers today to evaluate arbitrary JavaScript and monitor the users navigation Apple has already trusted developers to respect user privacy. A browser implementor wouldn't have much more ability to damage user expectation of privacy as a normal app developer already does. Looking at the facts I cannot help but come to the conclusion that Apple's policies and actions are hurting the web in a way the no other browser implementor could.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  I don't see it any different than what Google is doing with Chrome, specially with ChromeOS.
  - wor3q 9y ago
    You can always install other os along with other browser on a chromebook. You can install whatever engine you want on android. With ios you cannot do anything, you're just stuck with safari.
    - pjmlp 9y ago
      Installing other OS is by definition not ChromeOS anymore.
      - wor3q 9y ago
        Replacing chrome in chromeOS would make it not chromeOS too. But you can use chromium instead of chrome if you want, and nothing stops you from developing same OS with different browser and installing it on Chromebook. With iOS it is safari and no way to go around it.
- alwillis 9y ago
  1. Today we have 4 browser implementors. Only one of them doesn't also own an operating system (FF). We lost opera year or two ago. I would argue that a significant factor in this shrinking landscape is the fact that Apple has locked away ~10% of the market forever (and this 10% is not a random sampling - it includes many high value customers). Sure implementing a browser is technically challenging - my argument is that Apple's policy has altered the environment in such a way that there is no longer any reward for overcoming that challenge unless you have an operating system or some other large interest that requires you to make a browser. This will have effects on the web as a platform for years to come. You are wrong. I get you’re making a political argument because you have something against Apple, but what you’re suggesting is just wrong on the merits. Apple’s global iPhone marketshare is around 15%; it’s 35-40% in the US. When the W3C was going to shove XHTML 2 down our throats, where you had to have perfectly conforming XML markup to have a valid webpage, Apple helped form with Mozilla and Opera, the WHATWG that lead to HTML5 and web standards that made sense. It was Apple that said no to shipping Flash on the iPhone, which was the beginning of the end for proprietary media plugins. You seemed to forget about the ecosystem of open source developers that have lead the charge on implementing new open standards; Igalia was obviously able to work with Apple (and Google) to implement CSS Grid: https://blogs.igalia.com/mrego/2017/03/16/css-grid-layout-is-here-to-stay/ https://blogs.igalia.com/mrego/2017/03/16/css-grid-layout-is... Much of the variable font spec is based on Apple’s TrueType GX technology from the 1990s: https://atadistance.net/2016/09/20/truetype-gx-model-lives-on-in-opentype-variation-fonts/ https://atadistance.net/2016/09/20/truetype-gx-model-lives-o... Sure, they were behind on several important technologies, but they’ve made a ton of progress this past year or so. I created a Service Worker in the latest Safari Tech Preview that shipped two days ago: https://webkit.org/blog/8042/release-notes-for-safari-technology-preview-46/ https://webkit.org/blog/8042/release-notes-for-safari-techno... You also might want to check the feature list; you might be surprised: https://webkit.org/status/ https://webkit.org/status/ Apple is a convenient target for a lot of things; I get that, but I can’t see how anything you’ve said holds up when we take an objective look at things.

bhawks 9y ago

Two points: 1. Today we have 4 browser implementors. Only one of them doesn't also own an operating system (FF). We lost opera year or two ago. I would argue that a significant factor in this shrinking landscape is the fact that Apple has locked away ~10% of the market forever (and this 10% is not a random sampling - it includes many high value customers). Sure implementing a browser is technically challenging - my argument is that Apple's policy has altered the environment in such a way that there is no longer any reward for overcoming that challenge unless you have an operating system or some other large interest that requires you to make a browser. This will have effects on the web as a platform for years to come. 2. Security is a core principle for all browser implementors - due to the nature of a browser you won't get far without it. Privacy is a can of worms - all implementors will pay lip service to it. Whether or not they deliver on it is another topic entirely. A blanket ban on browser development in the name of security is heavy handed. Browser implementors love security and would gladly follow any procedures and policies the platform chooses to enforce. Apple's kill switches give them more than enough leverage to protect users from bad security actors. Now privacy, given that WKWebviews apis allow developers today to evaluate arbitrary JavaScript and monitor the users navigation Apple has already trusted developers to respect user privacy. A browser implementor wouldn't have much more ability to damage user expectation of privacy as a normal app developer already does. Looking at the facts I cannot help but come to the conclusion that Apple's policies and actions are hurting the web in a way the no other browser implementor could.

pjmlp 9y ago
I don't see it any different than what Google is doing with Chrome, specially with ChromeOS.
- wor3q 9y ago
  You can always install other os along with other browser on a chromebook. You can install whatever engine you want on android. With ios you cannot do anything, you're just stuck with safari.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Installing other OS is by definition not ChromeOS anymore.
    - wor3q 9y ago
      Replacing chrome in chromeOS would make it not chromeOS too. But you can use chromium instead of chrome if you want, and nothing stops you from developing same OS with different browser and installing it on Chromebook. With iOS it is safari and no way to go around it.
alwillis 9y ago
1. Today we have 4 browser implementors. Only one of them doesn't also own an operating system (FF). We lost opera year or two ago. I would argue that a significant factor in this shrinking landscape is the fact that Apple has locked away ~10% of the market forever (and this 10% is not a random sampling - it includes many high value customers). Sure implementing a browser is technically challenging - my argument is that Apple's policy has altered the environment in such a way that there is no longer any reward for overcoming that challenge unless you have an operating system or some other large interest that requires you to make a browser. This will have effects on the web as a platform for years to come. You are wrong. I get you’re making a political argument because you have something against Apple, but what you’re suggesting is just wrong on the merits. Apple’s global iPhone marketshare is around 15%; it’s 35-40% in the US. When the W3C was going to shove XHTML 2 down our throats, where you had to have perfectly conforming XML markup to have a valid webpage, Apple helped form with Mozilla and Opera, the WHATWG that lead to HTML5 and web standards that made sense. It was Apple that said no to shipping Flash on the iPhone, which was the beginning of the end for proprietary media plugins. You seemed to forget about the ecosystem of open source developers that have lead the charge on implementing new open standards; Igalia was obviously able to work with Apple (and Google) to implement CSS Grid: https://blogs.igalia.com/mrego/2017/03/16/css-grid-layout-is-here-to-stay/ https://blogs.igalia.com/mrego/2017/03/16/css-grid-layout-is... Much of the variable font spec is based on Apple’s TrueType GX technology from the 1990s: https://atadistance.net/2016/09/20/truetype-gx-model-lives-on-in-opentype-variation-fonts/ https://atadistance.net/2016/09/20/truetype-gx-model-lives-o... Sure, they were behind on several important technologies, but they’ve made a ton of progress this past year or so. I created a Service Worker in the latest Safari Tech Preview that shipped two days ago: https://webkit.org/blog/8042/release-notes-for-safari-technology-preview-46/ https://webkit.org/blog/8042/release-notes-for-safari-techno... You also might want to check the feature list; you might be surprised: https://webkit.org/status/ https://webkit.org/status/ Apple is a convenient target for a lot of things; I get that, but I can’t see how anything you’ve said holds up when we take an objective look at things.