8 ms·

Let’s be clear: they are important APIs that would allow non-Safari (WKWebView based really) browsers be competitive on macOS.

by st3fan 7y ago

jsjohnst 7y ago
If GP is correct, that’s not the case. They are important APIs for someone who wants to maintain their cross-platform abstraction layer without muddying up their codebase.
threeseed 7y ago
This comment makes no sense to me. How are Firefox and Chrome not competitive given that Safari isn't the overwhelmingly dominant browser ?
- yoz-y 7y ago
  “On macOS” is the important part. Safari is by far the most battery friendly browser there and quite possibly has significant market share too. Mozilla has recently managed to reduce their consumption significantly using these APIs: https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-reduced-power-usage-in-firefox-70-on-macos-with-core-animation/ https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-red...
- st3fan 7y ago
  They are now because they both use those APIs. You can read about the impact of this specific one here: https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-reduced-power-usage-in-firefox-70-on-macos-with-core-animation/ https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-red... Before using those private APIs, with no other options to reach the same performance as Safari, both Chrome and Firefox were in a completely different league.
  - jolux 7y ago
    CALayer and IOSurface are not private...
    - Null-Set 7y ago
      CALayerHost and CAContext were listed in the offending apis in this rejection of an electron app https://github.com/electron/electron/issues/20027 https://github.com/electron/electron/issues/20027
      - jolux 7y ago
        Are those mentioned in the Mozilla post?
      - kalleboo 7y ago
        Firefox does not use CALayerHost. It uses the public IOSurface and CALayer.contents APIs. https://mjtsai.com/blog/2019/11/04/electron-apps-rejected-from-the-mac-app-store/#comment-3103388 https://mjtsai.com/blog/2019/11/04/electron-apps-rejected-fr...
  - threeseed 7y ago
    It is ridiculous to say that Chrome/Firefox are only popular now because they use private APIs. Your own article says that Firefox only recently started using them.
darklion 7y ago
Which Apple may keep private for any number of reasons, none of which have to do with hobbling competitors, nor is it proven that Safari uses these particular APIs to gain a performance advantage for itself in any way whatsoever. So you’re basically just talking out your ass, saying that Apple should open up APIs that have always been private for the sole purpose of helping a competitor who knowingly adopted them in violation of platform rules. “Yes, officer, I broke the law. But I think, now that I’ve broken it, you should just abolish the particular laws that I broke because some people think I’m a big deal.”

Let’s be clear: they are important APIs that would allow non-Safari (WKWebView based really) browsers be competitive on macOS.

by st3fan 7y ago

Let’s be clear: they are important APIs that would allow non-Safari (WKWebView based really) browsers be competitive on macOS.

jsjohnst 7y ago

If GP is correct, that’s not the case. They are important APIs for someone who wants to maintain their cross-platform abstraction layer without muddying up their codebase.

threeseed 7y ago

This comment makes no sense to me. How are Firefox and Chrome not competitive given that Safari isn't the overwhelmingly dominant browser ?

yoz-y 7y ago
“On macOS” is the important part. Safari is by far the most battery friendly browser there and quite possibly has significant market share too. Mozilla has recently managed to reduce their consumption significantly using these APIs: https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-reduced-power-usage-in-firefox-70-on-macos-with-core-animation/ https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-red...
st3fan 7y ago
They are now because they both use those APIs. You can read about the impact of this specific one here: https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-reduced-power-usage-in-firefox-70-on-macos-with-core-animation/ https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2019/10/22/dramatically-red... Before using those private APIs, with no other options to reach the same performance as Safari, both Chrome and Firefox were in a completely different league.
- jolux 7y ago
  CALayer and IOSurface are not private...
  - Null-Set 7y ago
    CALayerHost and CAContext were listed in the offending apis in this rejection of an electron app https://github.com/electron/electron/issues/20027 https://github.com/electron/electron/issues/20027
    - jolux 7y ago
      Are those mentioned in the Mozilla post?
    - kalleboo 7y ago
      Firefox does not use CALayerHost. It uses the public IOSurface and CALayer.contents APIs. https://mjtsai.com/blog/2019/11/04/electron-apps-rejected-from-the-mac-app-store/#comment-3103388 https://mjtsai.com/blog/2019/11/04/electron-apps-rejected-fr...
- threeseed 7y ago
  It is ridiculous to say that Chrome/Firefox are only popular now because they use private APIs. Your own article says that Firefox only recently started using them.

darklion 7y ago

Which Apple may keep private for any number of reasons, none of which have to do with hobbling competitors, nor is it proven that Safari uses these particular APIs to gain a performance advantage for itself in any way whatsoever. So you’re basically just talking out your ass, saying that Apple should open up APIs that have always been private for the sole purpose of helping a competitor who knowingly adopted them in violation of platform rules. “Yes, officer, I broke the law. But I think, now that I’ve broken it, you should just abolish the particular laws that I broke because some people think I’m a big deal.”