4 ms·

Let me quote the article I referred to: >"My attempt to install an alternative browser ended with this message: Firefox requires iOS 10.3 or later." A Samsung

by qplex 9y ago

Let me quote the article I referred to: >"My attempt to install an alternative browser ended with this message: Firefox requires iOS 10.3 or later." A Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 2013 - same age as that iPad - has Android 7.1 with all the latest bells and whistles (Firefox). I expect to upgrade to Android 8.0 (LineageOS 15) later this year. Edit: The author tried to install Firefox because Safari had become so slow it was unusable.

coldtea 9y ago
The hardware is not obsolete even without an "alternative browser".
innagadadavida 9y ago
Please link to the benchmarks that show safari to be slower than Firefox. If an app developer choos s to stop supporting older iOS, that is something Apple has no control over. You are fundamentally at odds with what Apple provides. You have the freedom to choose android and lineagos and maintain all that yourself. If that works better, Good for you and no need to depend on Apple.
- qplex 9y ago
  Obviously it's impossible to provide such metrics since you can not run Firefox on older iPads. It does not run on Android < 4.1 either, but the devices remain useful since you can update Android even if the vendor support is long gone. Thus an Android tablet with similar hardware as the iPad has potential for a longer lifespan. I've not yet seen any valid arguments to counter this.
  - innagadadavida 9y ago
    The argument agianst using some hobby OS is that of security and trustability and maintainability. If you are personally comfortable doing it - good. Not everyone does, though.
    - qplex 9y ago
      Older iOS versions have multiple unfixed vulnerabilities. They will most likely never get fixed either. How exactly does that work for security, trustability?
- Fnoord 9y ago
  > Please link to the benchmarks that show safari to be slower than Firefox. I thought this was common knowledge; at the very least it is common knowledge that Firefox is on par with Chrome right now and usually pulls ahead slightly with 57/58. [1] [2] [3] [4] and one benchmark where Safari came ahead [5]. So I consider my prejudice that this is common knowledge wrong (if anyone else got such benchmarks, by all means). Realistically, nobody cares about Safari. macOS has a low market share, and running Safari on it won't allow you to integrate with other browsers (if you stick to Apple ecosphere that's OK though). On iOS you got no choice; you'll always use WebKit, but running something like Firefox allows you to integrate it with your other devices. And on other devices, Safari doesn't run. > You have the freedom to choose android and lineagos and maintain all that yourself. Maintain all that yourself is a hyperbole. There is nothing to maintain if you run LineageOS. All you do is install the most recent version (for my port its ~every week). The only thing you need to maintain is your baseband. Contrast that to you running an iOS version from August 2016. Do you think there have been zero vulnerabilities in the software you're using for 1,5 years? Think again. [1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=firefox-quantum-bench&num=1 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=firefox-... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/7cymaz/quick_firefox_quantum_57_vs_chrome_62_benchmarks/ https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/7cymaz/quick_firef... [3] http://www.zdnet.com/article/just-how-fast-is-firefox-quantum// http://www.zdnet.com/article/just-how-fast-is-firefox-quantu... [4] https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/firefox-quantum-vs-chrome https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/firefox-quantum-vs-chrome [5] https://www.kaklabs.com/browser/benchmark-browser-safari-11-chrome-63-firefox-57 https://www.kaklabs.com/browser/benchmark-browser-safari-11-...
  - innagadadavida 9y ago
    Just useless benchmarks. None of them show any real world website load and render times. That is what matters to the end user. With JavaScript it is easy for the initial load time to overshadow whatever gains you get after jit warms up. Also safari uses WebKit and it has been maintained and updated decently.
    - Fnoord 9y ago
      > None of them show any real world website load and render times. Not really, because not all users visit the same websites, and even then it doesn't matter equally on every website. That's why we have... benchmarks. Multiple, btw. But feel free to share your benchmarks. > Also safari uses WebKit and it has been maintained and updated decently. Not sure why you mention that, but I'll casually mention it has certainly not been maintained and updated decently on your ancient iPhone/iOS. I don't have to be Chinese/Russian/NSA folks to know that much.

by qplex 9y ago

coldtea 9y ago

The hardware is not obsolete even without an "alternative browser".

innagadadavida 9y ago

Please link to the benchmarks that show safari to be slower than Firefox. If an app developer choos s to stop supporting older iOS, that is something Apple has no control over. You are fundamentally at odds with what Apple provides. You have the freedom to choose android and lineagos and maintain all that yourself. If that works better, Good for you and no need to depend on Apple.

qplex 9y ago
Obviously it's impossible to provide such metrics since you can not run Firefox on older iPads. It does not run on Android < 4.1 either, but the devices remain useful since you can update Android even if the vendor support is long gone. Thus an Android tablet with similar hardware as the iPad has potential for a longer lifespan. I've not yet seen any valid arguments to counter this.
- innagadadavida 9y ago
  The argument agianst using some hobby OS is that of security and trustability and maintainability. If you are personally comfortable doing it - good. Not everyone does, though.
  - qplex 9y ago
    Older iOS versions have multiple unfixed vulnerabilities. They will most likely never get fixed either. How exactly does that work for security, trustability?
Fnoord 9y ago
> Please link to the benchmarks that show safari to be slower than Firefox. I thought this was common knowledge; at the very least it is common knowledge that Firefox is on par with Chrome right now and usually pulls ahead slightly with 57/58. [1] [2] [3] [4] and one benchmark where Safari came ahead [5]. So I consider my prejudice that this is common knowledge wrong (if anyone else got such benchmarks, by all means). Realistically, nobody cares about Safari. macOS has a low market share, and running Safari on it won't allow you to integrate with other browsers (if you stick to Apple ecosphere that's OK though). On iOS you got no choice; you'll always use WebKit, but running something like Firefox allows you to integrate it with your other devices. And on other devices, Safari doesn't run. > You have the freedom to choose android and lineagos and maintain all that yourself. Maintain all that yourself is a hyperbole. There is nothing to maintain if you run LineageOS. All you do is install the most recent version (for my port its ~every week). The only thing you need to maintain is your baseband. Contrast that to you running an iOS version from August 2016. Do you think there have been zero vulnerabilities in the software you're using for 1,5 years? Think again. [1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=firefox-quantum-bench&num=1 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=firefox-... [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/7cymaz/quick_firefox_quantum_57_vs_chrome_62_benchmarks/ https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/7cymaz/quick_firef... [3] http://www.zdnet.com/article/just-how-fast-is-firefox-quantum// http://www.zdnet.com/article/just-how-fast-is-firefox-quantu... [4] https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/firefox-quantum-vs-chrome https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/firefox-quantum-vs-chrome [5] https://www.kaklabs.com/browser/benchmark-browser-safari-11-chrome-63-firefox-57 https://www.kaklabs.com/browser/benchmark-browser-safari-11-...
- innagadadavida 9y ago
  Just useless benchmarks. None of them show any real world website load and render times. That is what matters to the end user. With JavaScript it is easy for the initial load time to overshadow whatever gains you get after jit warms up. Also safari uses WebKit and it has been maintained and updated decently.
  - Fnoord 9y ago
    > None of them show any real world website load and render times. Not really, because not all users visit the same websites, and even then it doesn't matter equally on every website. That's why we have... benchmarks. Multiple, btw. But feel free to share your benchmarks. > Also safari uses WebKit and it has been maintained and updated decently. Not sure why you mention that, but I'll casually mention it has certainly not been maintained and updated decently on your ancient iPhone/iOS. I don't have to be Chinese/Russian/NSA folks to know that much.