11 ms·

Well i have no complains about Safari but their Extension system is really costing them users. At this point I uBlock Origin is by far the most reliable AdBlock

Well i have no complains about Safari but their Extension system is really costing them users. At this point I uBlock Origin is by far the most reliable AdBlocker you can find and my having the developers explaining that in the future maybe only Firefox will support it it's kinda of sad. Of course we know that Google has to make money from Ads so its understandable but what about Apple ? They are putting heavy focus in privacy, would it be good if they open their browser to make sure their users will not move to Chrome/Firefox or other browser ?

lotsofpulp 7y ago
I don’t see any ads with Firefox focus/1 blocker as my content blocker.
kache_ 7y ago
The day ublock origin doesn't work on chrome is the day users will flock to firefox. We have seen time and time again that users aren't afraid of switching browsers. This is because since their core functionality is so similar, small advantages will tip the scales.
- blablabla123 7y ago
  Exactly, especially for people who don't do web development the difference is hardly there. Actually I recently started to prefer Safari, despite its less smoother Tab UX but this was enough reason to make me switch to Firefox (Nightly). I'm also surprised that it seems to start faster than Safari.
- hans1729 7y ago
  As a chrome-user: this. Firefox lost me years ago due to performance differences, and since chrome works fine for me, there was no ux-related reason to switch back. The day I'll see ads everywhere will be the day I'm back to firefox, and without second thoughts at that. If I really like your service, I'll happily pay for it. I hate ads, the psychological strats behind them are completely unacceptable. I'd happily pay google a subscription-rate, if that's what it takes tbh. Take my money, not my attention.
  - sprafa 7y ago
    Firefox is fast again
    - Endy 7y ago
      Firefox always was fast. You were using it wrong.
  - collyw 7y ago
    I think Firefox is faster than Chrome these days. Unfortunately I prefer the web developer tools in Chrome, so I use Chromium as I wasn't a fan of every URL I type going to Google.
    - treypitt 7y ago
      Likewise. Unfortunately, some services such as YouTube TV don't work on chromium. Also if you're not on linux, updating is a pain (you must do it manually iirc)
      - collyw 7y ago
        Opera was my other workaround.
        BuckRogers 7y ago
        Have you tried the Edge[0] preview dev tools? I have not but I know it also has an extension[1] for VSCode that seems interesting. [0]https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com/ https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com/ [1]https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ms-edgedevtools.vscode-edge-devtools https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ms-edged...
        collyw 7y ago
        I use Linux.
- dondada 7y ago
  You'd be surprised how many people don't use adblockers. There will be a few people switching but I don't think anymore than 1% of total Chrome users
  - dmix 7y ago
    People always downplay the power that technical users have on regular people. Who do you think the moms and friends all listen to? Their technical friends. This of course won't hit 90% of users but it's enough to have a large influence well beyond just power users. Few companies survive pissing off the nerds when there is legitimate competition available in consumer products.
    - citilife 7y ago
      Tell that to Oracle...
      - dmix 7y ago
        B2B enterprise sales is a totally different beast than free consumer software. That type of boardroom decision making is inherently disconnected from the technical capabilities and even integration success rates.
    - packet_nerd 7y ago
      > Few companies survive pissing off the nerds I wish this sage advice was part of every business executive's education. :-)
  - loeg 7y ago
    It's a rapidly shrinking majority. There's a network effect here where people learn about things and share with their friends. You're probably not wrong that there will not be a rapid initial migration. Maybe more over a longer time period. Maybe not.
  - 9dl 7y ago
    You'd be surprised how not many people need to change trend And for small browser like safari it will be fast death And for chrome On mobile chrome is already (for me) dead coz it not allow extensions
- iamnotacrook 7y ago
  You say that (and I agree - I use Firefox everywhere because there's no Chrome plugin support on Android) but I'm genuinely curious to see what happens if/when Chrome stops supporting ublock origin. I suspect - sadly - that there won't be the "flocking to firefox" we might be hoping for. Just enough ads will get blocked with a new, gimped ublock origin, or built-in ad blocking of some flavour, to prevent any meaningful exodus.
- tyingq 7y ago
  "The day ublock origin doesn't work on chrome..." The manifest v3 proposal takes chrome down to roughly the same level as Safari for ad blocking plugins. https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#issuecomment-496009417 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#iss... So, that day isn't far off. It was supposed to be in canary last month, I haven't checked.
- mumblemumble 7y ago
  This was true during an intermediate period where all browsers were more-or-less equivalent. It wasn't true before then, when many sites were designed with Internet Explorer in mind, and tended to work less well on other browsers. I don't think it will be true now, either, now that most sites are designed with Chrome in mind, and tend to work less well on other browsers. The big difference is that the functionality problems 20 years ago were easier to explain, and therefore easier to get people upset about. It's a lot easier to weave a compelling political story about straight-up incompatibility than it is to weave one about degraded performance due to differing just-in-time compiler optimization behavior. Also, we seem to be stuck in a situation where people are still so fixated on a monarch that hasn't been in power for over a decade that they maybe haven't been so concerned that the old monarch's overthrower has consolidated power to become a new monarch.
  - magashna 7y ago
    There seems to be this idea that some sites work worse with FF but in all the time Chrome has existed, I've never found any sites that didn't work with FF.
    - asdff 7y ago
      Maybe it's ublock, but I've had plenty of sites that just don't work on firefox. barclaycard, blackboard, and the schools web print system (dts) are my recent examples.
    - leereeves 7y ago
      I agree. I've never encountered a site that didn't work in FF. But I have seen sites that don't work in Safari.
      - viraptor 7y ago
        zoom web client doesn't do audio on ff. It's a bit of a special case and they do have a dedicated app, so it's not the end of the world.
- collyw 7y ago
  That will be a good thing.
- bryanlarsen 7y ago
  Counter-example: Firefox on Android is pretty much the only thing that supports UBO there, and its market share is negligible. I find that baffling.
  - jannes 7y ago
    Firefox on Android is a usability shitshow compared to Chrome on Android. And I say that as someone who doesn't like Google products. I think most people who wanted adblocking on Android switched to Brave instead, which is essentially a Chrome fork without the Google stuff and with better tracking protection.
    - bryanlarsen 7y ago
      Firefox Preview is a lot better. But it doesn't support UBO yet, so I'm still on the old one.
    - dec0dedab0de 7y ago
      Firefox on Android is a usability shitshow compared to Chrome on Android. What makes you say that? Firefox has been my primary mobile browser for over 5 years, am I missing something?
      - RenRav 7y ago
        I personally never liked the nav bar and everything at the top. It loads sites much better than Brave and feels more precise for things like dismissing cookie/signup notifications, but navigating the interface always felt tedious. If they just had options for interface layout or nav bar contents it would be great.
      - smush 7y ago
        FFAndroid (Fennec?) does strange things. A few examples: 1. You are on this web page in Fennec[1], and you want to do a web search. Click the address bar, type in your query, hit go. Sometimes, Fennec will start the progress bar and act like it is searching, but will draw another tab in the main viewport before resetting the progress bar and changing the url to the SERP you want. If you don't know its going to do that, it looks like Fennec completely ignored your search and loaded another tab. 2. Fennec will sometimes lose its cool and stop rendering pages. The UI layers will respond, you can open hamburger menus, tab listings and thumbnails, but no matter what tab you select, it no longer renders anything but a blank canvas in the viewport. You have to force close Fennec to restore normal behaviors. 3. Fennec will after a long time of being active lose its extensions like noscript et al, you have to force close and re-open to get them to show up in the hamburger menu again. Stated as a die-hard Firefox for Android fan. [1] %s/Fennec/<whateverItActuallyIs/g
- XzetaU8 7y ago
  Or they will flock to Brave browser. https://twitter.com/brave/status/1088914000379731970 https://twitter.com/brave/status/1088914000379731970
- johnnycab 7y ago
  >The day ublock origin doesn't work on chrome is the day users will flock to firefox. >This is because since their core functionality is so similar, small advantages will tip the scales. It is a a bold assertion, which is not backed up by the data. Despite Mozilla repositioning Firefox recently and reclaiming some lost ground, it is to a larger extent, still only maintaining a steady set of core users. To make an assumption that small advantages will tip the scales in favour of FF is wishful thinking, as demonstrated by some of the conversations. Furthermore, it is inherently not in the best interests of Google to actively promote ad-blocking policy unless it serves it's own purpose, coupled with the acute awareness of why power users and developers pick Chrome ─ they are well positioned to throttle any competition. https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20850135 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20850135 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20052623 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20052623
  - secabeen 7y ago
    I have started moving my friends and family from Chrome to FF. Biggest piece is the privacy angle, but the multi-site containers is also pretty important. It's nice to be able to block facebook API calls from other sites, etc. etc.
gowthamgts12 7y ago
Apple is making this move indeed to protect the privacy of its users more. They allow implementing content blockers rather than ad-blockers. See the difference here: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158#issuecomment-533381350 https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158#issuecommen...
- helpPeople 7y ago
  " they are more secure in that they can't possibly collect your browsing history (not that uBO does), but lack the level of customisation and power that a regular blocker like uBO can provide." Quite the spin to make a negative a positive. "Privacy" is the new buzzword.
  - jakobegger 7y ago
    Not a spin. Normal extensions can potentially monitor everything you do inside your browser, even in incognito mode. They could even impersonate you. That's a huge gaping security hole, and I think Apple is doing the right thing by preventing that. They've spent a lot of effort with sandboxing to limit the attack surface of native apps -- it's logical that they do the same inside the browser.
    - ivl 7y ago
      It's absolute spin. If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. Now there is a security hole, yes, but closing it comes at a huge cost: the removal of useful ad blocking. I suspect more and more uBO users will be forced to move to Firefox and/or install a pihole.
      - lotsofpulp 7y ago
        There is no spin. Apple is pretty open about restricting freedom to increase security. Many people don’t have time or inclination to check which extension is doing what. Proof is the fact that ublock and adblock are bad, but ublock origin is good. Whose non-techy friends and family are going to spend time to figure that one out? In that case, the macOS and iOS content blocking system is better for those users.
scarface74 7y ago
Why would Apple care if Mac users used a none Safari browser? Apple doesn’t lose a penny from users switching browsers. As far as iOS, no matter which “browser” you use, you’re still using WebKit.
- xoa 7y ago
  >Why would Apple care if Mac users used a [non-]Safari browser? Apple doesn't care individually what users use. However, Apple (and everyone else for that matter) does have reason to be concerned about Google's Chrome completely dominating the web in the way IE once did. iOS is certainly their biggest bulwark, but that doesn't mean they'd be delighted if Mac users felt required to use Chrome. Further, they also have made being able to avoid the anti-privacy ad-driven ecosystem to some extent an important differentiating factor. Even with Firefox existing, having a purely Mac focused and maximally optimized browser (FF is only barely catching up this/next version on basic power efficiency for example) that has strong privacy protections with no conflicts of interest is a sales point. That doesn't mean it's a total core focus of course, but neither is there no pressure at all.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    If every single Mac user used Chrome, it wouldn’t matter. The market cares about Safari compatibility because of iOS. Just like most printer manufacturers don’t focus on AirPrint compatibility because of the Mac. That’s just a byproduct of iOS compatibility - which they do care about.
    - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
      It's quite important that developers actually test their desktop layout and functionality (hover states, etc which don't work on a touch screen) with Safari's engine.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        If a site doesn’t work with desktop Safari well, you can tell them to just use Chrome.
samstave 7y ago
Questions: Why cant i uninstall/disable safari on my ios device; fuck you apple Why cant i make a choice for which browser will open a link in ios; fuck you apple —- Why dont my three hyphens work any longer in any browser (three hyphens usually result in an ML full line) fuck you apple Why are you even still doing business with jonny ive; fuck you apple So in closing; while you are the lesser of all evils (except the ive thing); fuck you apple
- tgv 7y ago
  You're probably most happy on Edge.
sjg007 7y ago
I prefer content blockers iOS style vs the alternate.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

I don’t see any ads with Firefox focus/1 blocker as my content blocker.

kache_ 7y ago

The day ublock origin doesn't work on chrome is the day users will flock to firefox. We have seen time and time again that users aren't afraid of switching browsers. This is because since their core functionality is so similar, small advantages will tip the scales.

blablabla123 7y ago
Exactly, especially for people who don't do web development the difference is hardly there. Actually I recently started to prefer Safari, despite its less smoother Tab UX but this was enough reason to make me switch to Firefox (Nightly). I'm also surprised that it seems to start faster than Safari.
hans1729 7y ago
As a chrome-user: this. Firefox lost me years ago due to performance differences, and since chrome works fine for me, there was no ux-related reason to switch back. The day I'll see ads everywhere will be the day I'm back to firefox, and without second thoughts at that. If I really like your service, I'll happily pay for it. I hate ads, the psychological strats behind them are completely unacceptable. I'd happily pay google a subscription-rate, if that's what it takes tbh. Take my money, not my attention.
- sprafa 7y ago
  Firefox is fast again
  - Endy 7y ago
    Firefox always was fast. You were using it wrong.
- collyw 7y ago
  I think Firefox is faster than Chrome these days. Unfortunately I prefer the web developer tools in Chrome, so I use Chromium as I wasn't a fan of every URL I type going to Google.
  - treypitt 7y ago
    Likewise. Unfortunately, some services such as YouTube TV don't work on chromium. Also if you're not on linux, updating is a pain (you must do it manually iirc)
    - collyw 7y ago
      Opera was my other workaround.
      - BuckRogers 7y ago
        Have you tried the Edge[0] preview dev tools? I have not but I know it also has an extension[1] for VSCode that seems interesting. [0]https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com/ https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com/ [1]https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ms-edgedevtools.vscode-edge-devtools https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ms-edged...
        collyw 7y ago
        I use Linux.
dondada 7y ago
You'd be surprised how many people don't use adblockers. There will be a few people switching but I don't think anymore than 1% of total Chrome users
- dmix 7y ago
  People always downplay the power that technical users have on regular people. Who do you think the moms and friends all listen to? Their technical friends. This of course won't hit 90% of users but it's enough to have a large influence well beyond just power users. Few companies survive pissing off the nerds when there is legitimate competition available in consumer products.
  - citilife 7y ago
    Tell that to Oracle...
    - dmix 7y ago
      B2B enterprise sales is a totally different beast than free consumer software. That type of boardroom decision making is inherently disconnected from the technical capabilities and even integration success rates.
  - packet_nerd 7y ago
    > Few companies survive pissing off the nerds I wish this sage advice was part of every business executive's education. :-)
- loeg 7y ago
  It's a rapidly shrinking majority. There's a network effect here where people learn about things and share with their friends. You're probably not wrong that there will not be a rapid initial migration. Maybe more over a longer time period. Maybe not.
- 9dl 7y ago
  You'd be surprised how not many people need to change trend And for small browser like safari it will be fast death And for chrome On mobile chrome is already (for me) dead coz it not allow extensions
iamnotacrook 7y ago
You say that (and I agree - I use Firefox everywhere because there's no Chrome plugin support on Android) but I'm genuinely curious to see what happens if/when Chrome stops supporting ublock origin. I suspect - sadly - that there won't be the "flocking to firefox" we might be hoping for. Just enough ads will get blocked with a new, gimped ublock origin, or built-in ad blocking of some flavour, to prevent any meaningful exodus.
tyingq 7y ago
"The day ublock origin doesn't work on chrome..." The manifest v3 proposal takes chrome down to roughly the same level as Safari for ad blocking plugins. https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#issuecomment-496009417 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338#iss... So, that day isn't far off. It was supposed to be in canary last month, I haven't checked.
mumblemumble 7y ago
This was true during an intermediate period where all browsers were more-or-less equivalent. It wasn't true before then, when many sites were designed with Internet Explorer in mind, and tended to work less well on other browsers. I don't think it will be true now, either, now that most sites are designed with Chrome in mind, and tend to work less well on other browsers. The big difference is that the functionality problems 20 years ago were easier to explain, and therefore easier to get people upset about. It's a lot easier to weave a compelling political story about straight-up incompatibility than it is to weave one about degraded performance due to differing just-in-time compiler optimization behavior. Also, we seem to be stuck in a situation where people are still so fixated on a monarch that hasn't been in power for over a decade that they maybe haven't been so concerned that the old monarch's overthrower has consolidated power to become a new monarch.
- magashna 7y ago
  There seems to be this idea that some sites work worse with FF but in all the time Chrome has existed, I've never found any sites that didn't work with FF.
  - asdff 7y ago
    Maybe it's ublock, but I've had plenty of sites that just don't work on firefox. barclaycard, blackboard, and the schools web print system (dts) are my recent examples.
  - leereeves 7y ago
    I agree. I've never encountered a site that didn't work in FF. But I have seen sites that don't work in Safari.
    - viraptor 7y ago
      zoom web client doesn't do audio on ff. It's a bit of a special case and they do have a dedicated app, so it's not the end of the world.
collyw 7y ago
That will be a good thing.
bryanlarsen 7y ago
Counter-example: Firefox on Android is pretty much the only thing that supports UBO there, and its market share is negligible. I find that baffling.
- jannes 7y ago
  Firefox on Android is a usability shitshow compared to Chrome on Android. And I say that as someone who doesn't like Google products. I think most people who wanted adblocking on Android switched to Brave instead, which is essentially a Chrome fork without the Google stuff and with better tracking protection.
  - bryanlarsen 7y ago
    Firefox Preview is a lot better. But it doesn't support UBO yet, so I'm still on the old one.
  - dec0dedab0de 7y ago
    Firefox on Android is a usability shitshow compared to Chrome on Android. What makes you say that? Firefox has been my primary mobile browser for over 5 years, am I missing something?
    - RenRav 7y ago
      I personally never liked the nav bar and everything at the top. It loads sites much better than Brave and feels more precise for things like dismissing cookie/signup notifications, but navigating the interface always felt tedious. If they just had options for interface layout or nav bar contents it would be great.
    - smush 7y ago
      FFAndroid (Fennec?) does strange things. A few examples: 1. You are on this web page in Fennec[1], and you want to do a web search. Click the address bar, type in your query, hit go. Sometimes, Fennec will start the progress bar and act like it is searching, but will draw another tab in the main viewport before resetting the progress bar and changing the url to the SERP you want. If you don't know its going to do that, it looks like Fennec completely ignored your search and loaded another tab. 2. Fennec will sometimes lose its cool and stop rendering pages. The UI layers will respond, you can open hamburger menus, tab listings and thumbnails, but no matter what tab you select, it no longer renders anything but a blank canvas in the viewport. You have to force close Fennec to restore normal behaviors. 3. Fennec will after a long time of being active lose its extensions like noscript et al, you have to force close and re-open to get them to show up in the hamburger menu again. Stated as a die-hard Firefox for Android fan. [1] %s/Fennec/<whateverItActuallyIs/g
XzetaU8 7y ago
Or they will flock to Brave browser. https://twitter.com/brave/status/1088914000379731970 https://twitter.com/brave/status/1088914000379731970
johnnycab 7y ago
>The day ublock origin doesn't work on chrome is the day users will flock to firefox. >This is because since their core functionality is so similar, small advantages will tip the scales. It is a a bold assertion, which is not backed up by the data. Despite Mozilla repositioning Firefox recently and reclaiming some lost ground, it is to a larger extent, still only maintaining a steady set of core users. To make an assumption that small advantages will tip the scales in favour of FF is wishful thinking, as demonstrated by some of the conversations. Furthermore, it is inherently not in the best interests of Google to actively promote ad-blocking policy unless it serves it's own purpose, coupled with the acute awareness of why power users and developers pick Chrome ─ they are well positioned to throttle any competition. https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/user-activity https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20850135 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20850135 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20052623 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20052623
- secabeen 7y ago
  I have started moving my friends and family from Chrome to FF. Biggest piece is the privacy angle, but the multi-site containers is also pretty important. It's nice to be able to block facebook API calls from other sites, etc. etc.

gowthamgts12 7y ago

Apple is making this move indeed to protect the privacy of its users more. They allow implementing content blockers rather than ad-blockers. See the difference here: https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158#issuecomment-533381350 https://github.com/el1t/uBlock-Safari/issues/158#issuecommen...

helpPeople 7y ago
" they are more secure in that they can't possibly collect your browsing history (not that uBO does), but lack the level of customisation and power that a regular blocker like uBO can provide." Quite the spin to make a negative a positive. "Privacy" is the new buzzword.
- jakobegger 7y ago
  Not a spin. Normal extensions can potentially monitor everything you do inside your browser, even in incognito mode. They could even impersonate you. That's a huge gaping security hole, and I think Apple is doing the right thing by preventing that. They've spent a lot of effort with sandboxing to limit the attack surface of native apps -- it's logical that they do the same inside the browser.
  - ivl 7y ago
    It's absolute spin. If the extension can't inspect the traffic it can't meaningfully filter content. Now there is a security hole, yes, but closing it comes at a huge cost: the removal of useful ad blocking. I suspect more and more uBO users will be forced to move to Firefox and/or install a pihole.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      There is no spin. Apple is pretty open about restricting freedom to increase security. Many people don’t have time or inclination to check which extension is doing what. Proof is the fact that ublock and adblock are bad, but ublock origin is good. Whose non-techy friends and family are going to spend time to figure that one out? In that case, the macOS and iOS content blocking system is better for those users.

scarface74 7y ago

Why would Apple care if Mac users used a none Safari browser? Apple doesn’t lose a penny from users switching browsers. As far as iOS, no matter which “browser” you use, you’re still using WebKit.

xoa 7y ago
>Why would Apple care if Mac users used a [non-]Safari browser? Apple doesn't care individually what users use. However, Apple (and everyone else for that matter) does have reason to be concerned about Google's Chrome completely dominating the web in the way IE once did. iOS is certainly their biggest bulwark, but that doesn't mean they'd be delighted if Mac users felt required to use Chrome. Further, they also have made being able to avoid the anti-privacy ad-driven ecosystem to some extent an important differentiating factor. Even with Firefox existing, having a purely Mac focused and maximally optimized browser (FF is only barely catching up this/next version on basic power efficiency for example) that has strong privacy protections with no conflicts of interest is a sales point. That doesn't mean it's a total core focus of course, but neither is there no pressure at all.
- scarface74 7y ago
  If every single Mac user used Chrome, it wouldn’t matter. The market cares about Safari compatibility because of iOS. Just like most printer manufacturers don’t focus on AirPrint compatibility because of the Mac. That’s just a byproduct of iOS compatibility - which they do care about.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    It's quite important that developers actually test their desktop layout and functionality (hover states, etc which don't work on a touch screen) with Safari's engine.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      If a site doesn’t work with desktop Safari well, you can tell them to just use Chrome.

samstave 7y ago

Questions: Why cant i uninstall/disable safari on my ios device; fuck you apple Why cant i make a choice for which browser will open a link in ios; fuck you apple —- Why dont my three hyphens work any longer in any browser (three hyphens usually result in an ML full line) fuck you apple Why are you even still doing business with jonny ive; fuck you apple So in closing; while you are the lesser of all evils (except the ive thing); fuck you apple

tgv 7y ago
You're probably most happy on Edge.

sjg007 7y ago

I prefer content blockers iOS style vs the alternate.