4 ms·

Having investigated this possibility as someone in the Apple ecosystem, I think Android might be ahead of iOS for web development. Reason? Browsers on iOS are

by csytan 8y ago

Having investigated this possibility as someone in the Apple ecosystem, I think Android might be ahead of iOS for web development. Reason? Browsers on iOS are crippled: no dev tools, no view as desktop, and no alternatives to Webkit. Another reason is no mouse support. Essentially you'd be using it as a very expensive thin client. What is intriguing about using Android is that you can actually install Ubuntu on your Android device: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6eC-CH8UG4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6eC-CH8UG4

zenbob 8y ago
iOS has "Request Desktop Site" as an option in Safari. Is view as desktop something other than that?
- mynameisvlad 8y ago
  I'd say it's equivalent, but not a fantastic option. I think all it does is send over a different user agent for a desktop browser. On responsive web sites, I just see the same thing with the feature on as with it off. On sites that redirect based on UA, I've seen it take me to the desktop page instead.
  - function_seven 8y ago
    I wish the "Request Desktop" option actually faked a typical screen size (say, 1280 x 800, 96dpi) and all the other attributes that would make a site think it's displaying on a desktop browser. It's frustrating to really want the desktop version, and have no way of doing that when the site is too "smart" for me. I know what I'm in for (lots of zooming and panning). For some sites, it's the only way to reach certain features that the site didn't include in their mobile version.
- graeme 8y ago
  It doesn't work on a lot of sites. The user agent is still mobile safari, and web devs often have bugs for that browser in a larger screen form factor. Needs a desktop user agent.
stcredzero 8y ago
Browsers on iOS are crippled: no dev tools, no view as desktop, and no alternatives to Webkit. The degree to which this is true is pretty egregious. It has been since the beginning. How is it that Apple can keep browsers on iOS this locked down, while there was some sort of anti-trust ruling against Microsoft favoring their own browser on Windows?
- Jtsummers 8y ago
  Apple doesn’t have the same market share Microsoft had at the time of the 1990s anti-trust case. They haven’t exercised the same level of anticompetitive and monopolistic practices. Get them to 90% of the market share. Get them to cripple other companies by withholding (or threatening to withhold) OEM-priced licenses if they work with a competitor. Get them to drop billions on a broken web browser to undercut their competitors (they lost money on IE in order to cut into Netscape). Then we can go after Apple for their browser (and other) policies.
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    Get them to 90% of the market share. This is where Microsoft blew it. Instead of taking over all the business desktops in the world, they should've left it just at a huge fraction, but got their customers into their own tightly controlled walled garden. Get them to cripple other companies by withholding (or threatening to withhold) OEM-priced licenses if they work with a competitor. I'm reminded of how they'll not let you publish your app if it uses a different browser engine.
    - Jtsummers 8y ago
      Apple does not have such a sufficient hold on the market that anyone has to target their users for customers. Android has the majority of the market share for mobile devices by a pretty decent margin. Apple has not gone out of its way like MS did to block people from entering the general market (like MS did with BeOS and Netscape), let alone the market on their system. BeOS was going to be sold by Compaq. MS told Compaq that they'd have to pay the higher, direct-to-customer, cost for Windows licenses if they also sold BeOS, as opposed to the OEM license cost. Compaq nixed the deal with Be, because they couldn't afford the hit to their profit margin (PC margins were slim then, though they got tighter in the future). MS spent the money to develop IE, and then a billion dollars marketing it. And they gave it away for free. Why? Because Netscape offered the potential (though still in its infancy) for web apps that would reduce/eliminate the market for native applications, which MS relied on. Not because MS sold applications (they did, and do, of course), but because they sold the OS that most native apps ran on. Apple may eat up a lot of profits (30% cut) and restrict a lot of options (can't use third party browser engines, limits on use of embedded languages and side loading applications). But they aren't pulling off half the shit MS did, and have nowhere the influence to do it if they wanted to (w.r.t. market share).
sjwright 8y ago
For me the only thing missing from iOS is the ability to share directory trees, which is why we get swiss-army-knife apps like Coda instead. If Coda suits your needs that's great, but I'd prefer it if a Git client could create a directory that is in turn accessible from other apps like editors, command line emulators, etc.
- chipotle_coyote 8y ago
  I'm pretty sure Working Copy can do that, at least for apps that support opening directories in place like Textastic. WC 3.6 can even import folders from any app that uses iCloud Drive folders or local storage and mirror them to a git repo, so editors don't need to know anything about git. The MacStories folks write about this here: https://www.macstories.net/ios/my-markdown-writing-and-collaboration-workflow-powered-by-working-copy-3-6-icloud-drive-and-github/ https://www.macstories.net/ios/my-markdown-writing-and-colla...
Tade0 8y ago
I've met a guy who had Ubuntu on his tablet, but that was back when Ubuntu Touch was freshly released so it's still a mystery to me how he managed to put it there, especially given that it seemed to be the sole OS on that device.
ekun 8y ago
Funny you mention the mouse support because in the blog post here you cannot scroll through it using a mouse which is pretty annoying.

by csytan 8y ago

zenbob 8y ago

iOS has "Request Desktop Site" as an option in Safari. Is view as desktop something other than that?

mynameisvlad 8y ago
I'd say it's equivalent, but not a fantastic option. I think all it does is send over a different user agent for a desktop browser. On responsive web sites, I just see the same thing with the feature on as with it off. On sites that redirect based on UA, I've seen it take me to the desktop page instead.
- function_seven 8y ago
  I wish the "Request Desktop" option actually faked a typical screen size (say, 1280 x 800, 96dpi) and all the other attributes that would make a site think it's displaying on a desktop browser. It's frustrating to really want the desktop version, and have no way of doing that when the site is too "smart" for me. I know what I'm in for (lots of zooming and panning). For some sites, it's the only way to reach certain features that the site didn't include in their mobile version.
graeme 8y ago
It doesn't work on a lot of sites. The user agent is still mobile safari, and web devs often have bugs for that browser in a larger screen form factor. Needs a desktop user agent.

stcredzero 8y ago

Browsers on iOS are crippled: no dev tools, no view as desktop, and no alternatives to Webkit. The degree to which this is true is pretty egregious. It has been since the beginning. How is it that Apple can keep browsers on iOS this locked down, while there was some sort of anti-trust ruling against Microsoft favoring their own browser on Windows?

Jtsummers 8y ago
Apple doesn’t have the same market share Microsoft had at the time of the 1990s anti-trust case. They haven’t exercised the same level of anticompetitive and monopolistic practices. Get them to 90% of the market share. Get them to cripple other companies by withholding (or threatening to withhold) OEM-priced licenses if they work with a competitor. Get them to drop billions on a broken web browser to undercut their competitors (they lost money on IE in order to cut into Netscape). Then we can go after Apple for their browser (and other) policies.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Get them to 90% of the market share. This is where Microsoft blew it. Instead of taking over all the business desktops in the world, they should've left it just at a huge fraction, but got their customers into their own tightly controlled walled garden. Get them to cripple other companies by withholding (or threatening to withhold) OEM-priced licenses if they work with a competitor. I'm reminded of how they'll not let you publish your app if it uses a different browser engine.
  - Jtsummers 8y ago
    Apple does not have such a sufficient hold on the market that anyone has to target their users for customers. Android has the majority of the market share for mobile devices by a pretty decent margin. Apple has not gone out of its way like MS did to block people from entering the general market (like MS did with BeOS and Netscape), let alone the market on their system. BeOS was going to be sold by Compaq. MS told Compaq that they'd have to pay the higher, direct-to-customer, cost for Windows licenses if they also sold BeOS, as opposed to the OEM license cost. Compaq nixed the deal with Be, because they couldn't afford the hit to their profit margin (PC margins were slim then, though they got tighter in the future). MS spent the money to develop IE, and then a billion dollars marketing it. And they gave it away for free. Why? Because Netscape offered the potential (though still in its infancy) for web apps that would reduce/eliminate the market for native applications, which MS relied on. Not because MS sold applications (they did, and do, of course), but because they sold the OS that most native apps ran on. Apple may eat up a lot of profits (30% cut) and restrict a lot of options (can't use third party browser engines, limits on use of embedded languages and side loading applications). But they aren't pulling off half the shit MS did, and have nowhere the influence to do it if they wanted to (w.r.t. market share).

sjwright 8y ago

For me the only thing missing from iOS is the ability to share directory trees, which is why we get swiss-army-knife apps like Coda instead. If Coda suits your needs that's great, but I'd prefer it if a Git client could create a directory that is in turn accessible from other apps like editors, command line emulators, etc.

chipotle_coyote 8y ago
I'm pretty sure Working Copy can do that, at least for apps that support opening directories in place like Textastic. WC 3.6 can even import folders from any app that uses iCloud Drive folders or local storage and mirror them to a git repo, so editors don't need to know anything about git. The MacStories folks write about this here: https://www.macstories.net/ios/my-markdown-writing-and-collaboration-workflow-powered-by-working-copy-3-6-icloud-drive-and-github/ https://www.macstories.net/ios/my-markdown-writing-and-colla...

Tade0 8y ago

I've met a guy who had Ubuntu on his tablet, but that was back when Ubuntu Touch was freshly released so it's still a mystery to me how he managed to put it there, especially given that it seemed to be the sole OS on that device.

ekun 8y ago

Funny you mention the mouse support because in the blog post here you cannot scroll through it using a mouse which is pretty annoying.