9 ms·

It's still gimped. No blocking requests. "Unlimited" storage (which is necessary for most non-trivial extensions) is actually limited to 10MB. You're stuck i

It's still gimped. No blocking requests. "Unlimited" storage (which is necessary for most non-trivial extensions) is actually limited to 10MB. You're stuck in Apple's app store which is equally as draconian as Chrome's and Firefox's but now you have to pay $99/year. No IndexedDB. The extensions aren't usable on mobile. I care little for Safari's users if I have to deal with all of this.

kickscondor 6y ago
I don't know. I mean, yes, I need 'blocked requests' and 'unlimited storage' for my extension (http://fraidyc.at/ http://fraidyc.at/). However, at least I can give Safari users a taste of it - which could either: * draw them into fuller platforms for using it. (or) * pressure safari to support more of the standard. Stepping stones.
- stephenr 6y ago
  I’d never heard of your extension before but IMO that is not at all what I think of as a “browser extension” - it seems to me that it’s more using the browser as an application runtime than actually providing more functionality for the current page.
  - kickscondor 6y ago
    Well - you could look at it as extending the browser (into a feed reader) rather than extending the current page.
- unityByFreedom 6y ago
  I love the concept of your extension. You're right, the 24/7 feeds from social media encourage spam, and the way out of it is to take control of the view with software like yours. Great work!
danShumway 6y ago
Agreed. This is a step in the right direction, but, "Firefox works on Mac", is still the easiest, most straightforward answer to anyone who's asking me, "how can I get a decent adblocker for the web?" Having a shared API matters for extensions primarily because it makes it easier for a developer to say, "well, I might as well throw that on the Apple store as well." But if Safari literally can't do the things your extension needs it to do, then the API is kind of a secondary concern.
- stephenr 6y ago
  “Install one of the dozens of content blockers that work across macOS and iOS” seems like a better answer than “install a different browser”.
  - danShumway 6y ago
    None of those content blockers work as well as uBlock Origin. Maybe they work well enough for you, and that's fine. But if somebody asks me what the current state of adblocking is and how they can get it, I'm not going to pretend that Safari offers it.
    - stephenr 6y ago
      Thanks so much for going into detail and not just “mine is bettererer” like so many do..... Oh wait.
    - ribosometronome 6y ago
      For the lay user, what's wrong with AdGuard's free edition?
      - ADent 6y ago
        I was getting several sites not working properly with AdGuard. Yeah you can add whitelists and such, but it’s annoying. Some of was it Safari not working. In the end I just use a browser with built in blocking (AdBlockBrowser or now Brave) and leave Safari alone.
Jaxkr 6y ago
Nobody really uses Safari except for on iPhones, and I suspect I will drop dramatically as they’re adding support for choosing your own browser in iOS 14. Even among non-technical people I know, nearly everyone replaces Safari with Chrome or FF. Even my grandfather uses Chrome on his Mac and iPhone.
- kitsunesoba 6y ago
  Third party browsers for iOS wrap the same WKWebView that Safari uses. Safari isn't going away any time soon, even with the ability to change default browser.
- kjakm 6y ago
  >> Nobody really uses Safari except for on iPhones Have you got _anything_ to back this up? I’m willing to bet the majority of Mac users use Safari (given it’s the default browser). I use it and it’s a lot less clunky than Chrome and Firefox. I also repeatedly run into an attitude of “if my users don’t user Chrome then I don’t care about their experience” and find it very off putting.
  - MintelIE 6y ago
    I bet they don't. All the Mac Safari users I know also run Firefox because Safari's ad blocking sucks. I only know of a few Mac users of Chrome.
    - jeromegv 6y ago
      2020 and people still rely on random anecdotes heavily influenced by their techie friends instead of actually looking at the data. Fascinating.
      - MintelIE 6y ago
        What data? Show me the data.
        6y ago
smnthermes 6y ago
> No blocking requests Probably will happen in Firefox too, since Google controls W3C: http://browserext.github.io/ http://browserext.github.io/
- drenvuk 6y ago
  I still don't understand why you're linking that. Can you be more specific?
  - abrowne 6y ago
    Probably Chrome extension manifest version 3. See, eg https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338
- thayne 6y ago
  I hope not. there's no reason Firefox can't continue to support it, even if it isn't standardized.
  - paulryanrogers 6y ago
    I also hope not. My extension relies on intercepting and blocking, though not for ads.
notatoad 6y ago
>but now you have to pay $99/year. to maintain an apple developer account you also need a mac or iDevice with secure enclave, so even if these were actually compatible with webextensions, you couldn't publish your webextension for safari unless you were an apple user.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Is there an actual requirement that you must own one of those devices to maintain an account?
  - notatoad 6y ago
    there isn't literally a rule that says you must own an idevice. but there is a rule that says you must have your developer account linked to an idevice, and use it to log in.
CharlesW 6y ago
FWIW… > You're stuck in Apple's app store which is equally as draconian as Chrome's and Firefox's but now you have to pay $99/year. Safari extensions do have to be notarized (so $99/year), but notarized extensions don't have to be distributed via the Mac App Store. > No IndexedDB. Safari appears to support IndexedDB, with native support for IndexedDB 2.0 in Safari 10.1+. https://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb https://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb > The extensions aren't usable on mobile. Safari for iOS does support extensions, so I'd assume they'll use the same framework. https://www.idropnews.com/apps/11-best-safari-extensions-iphone-ios-11/53437/14/ https://www.idropnews.com/apps/11-best-safari-extensions-iph...
- drenvuk 6y ago
  >don't have to be distributed via the Mac App Store. I didn't know this. Thanks. >Safari appears to support IndexedDB This is also news to me and makes me pretty happy. >Safari for iOS does support extensions This really makes me wonder how they handle the UI. I'll check it out.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    It'll likely require user interaction every time you want to run the extension.
- vimy 6y ago
  Web Extensions api is only for macOS.
  - CharlesW 6y ago
    Thanks! I've since watched the session, you're right — they announced specifically for macOS. The door's still open, though… "All the demos revolved around Safari web extensions available on the Mac, though the talk makes a point of not targeting user agent strings (information a browser reports about its own version and what system it’s running on), but rather asking about features that might be present. Given that other types of Safari extensions are available on iOS/iPadOS (namely content blockers), might web extensions eventually make their way to Apple’s mobile platforms as well? One can hope."[1] [1] https://sixcolors.com/post/2020/06/wwdc-2020-tuesday-session-impressions-part-2/ https://sixcolors.com/post/2020/06/wwdc-2020-tuesday-session...
neximo64 6y ago
To block move to the dns level. Apple has no control there.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Apple can and does prevent VPN apps from being on the store that do things like this. (If you're relying on DNS resolution, then yes, there's not much they could do…unless they at some point hardcode some DNS servers.)
  - AlphaSite 6y ago
    I think this after 5e Facebook VPN debacle, right?

kickscondor 6y ago

I don't know. I mean, yes, I need 'blocked requests' and 'unlimited storage' for my extension (http://fraidyc.at/ http://fraidyc.at/). However, at least I can give Safari users a taste of it - which could either: * draw them into fuller platforms for using it. (or) * pressure safari to support more of the standard. Stepping stones.

stephenr 6y ago
I’d never heard of your extension before but IMO that is not at all what I think of as a “browser extension” - it seems to me that it’s more using the browser as an application runtime than actually providing more functionality for the current page.
- kickscondor 6y ago
  Well - you could look at it as extending the browser (into a feed reader) rather than extending the current page.
unityByFreedom 6y ago
I love the concept of your extension. You're right, the 24/7 feeds from social media encourage spam, and the way out of it is to take control of the view with software like yours. Great work!

danShumway 6y ago

Agreed. This is a step in the right direction, but, "Firefox works on Mac", is still the easiest, most straightforward answer to anyone who's asking me, "how can I get a decent adblocker for the web?" Having a shared API matters for extensions primarily because it makes it easier for a developer to say, "well, I might as well throw that on the Apple store as well." But if Safari literally can't do the things your extension needs it to do, then the API is kind of a secondary concern.

stephenr 6y ago
“Install one of the dozens of content blockers that work across macOS and iOS” seems like a better answer than “install a different browser”.
- danShumway 6y ago
  None of those content blockers work as well as uBlock Origin. Maybe they work well enough for you, and that's fine. But if somebody asks me what the current state of adblocking is and how they can get it, I'm not going to pretend that Safari offers it.
  - stephenr 6y ago
    Thanks so much for going into detail and not just “mine is bettererer” like so many do..... Oh wait.
  - ribosometronome 6y ago
    For the lay user, what's wrong with AdGuard's free edition?
    - ADent 6y ago
      I was getting several sites not working properly with AdGuard. Yeah you can add whitelists and such, but it’s annoying. Some of was it Safari not working. In the end I just use a browser with built in blocking (AdBlockBrowser or now Brave) and leave Safari alone.

Jaxkr 6y ago

Nobody really uses Safari except for on iPhones, and I suspect I will drop dramatically as they’re adding support for choosing your own browser in iOS 14. Even among non-technical people I know, nearly everyone replaces Safari with Chrome or FF. Even my grandfather uses Chrome on his Mac and iPhone.

kitsunesoba 6y ago
Third party browsers for iOS wrap the same WKWebView that Safari uses. Safari isn't going away any time soon, even with the ability to change default browser.
kjakm 6y ago
>> Nobody really uses Safari except for on iPhones Have you got _anything_ to back this up? I’m willing to bet the majority of Mac users use Safari (given it’s the default browser). I use it and it’s a lot less clunky than Chrome and Firefox. I also repeatedly run into an attitude of “if my users don’t user Chrome then I don’t care about their experience” and find it very off putting.
- MintelIE 6y ago
  I bet they don't. All the Mac Safari users I know also run Firefox because Safari's ad blocking sucks. I only know of a few Mac users of Chrome.
  - jeromegv 6y ago
    2020 and people still rely on random anecdotes heavily influenced by their techie friends instead of actually looking at the data. Fascinating.
    - MintelIE 6y ago
      What data? Show me the data.
      - 6y ago

smnthermes 6y ago

> No blocking requests Probably will happen in Firefox too, since Google controls W3C: http://browserext.github.io/ http://browserext.github.io/

drenvuk 6y ago
I still don't understand why you're linking that. Can you be more specific?
- abrowne 6y ago
  Probably Chrome extension manifest version 3. See, eg https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338 https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/338
thayne 6y ago
I hope not. there's no reason Firefox can't continue to support it, even if it isn't standardized.
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  I also hope not. My extension relies on intercepting and blocking, though not for ads.

notatoad 6y ago

>but now you have to pay $99/year. to maintain an apple developer account you also need a mac or iDevice with secure enclave, so even if these were actually compatible with webextensions, you couldn't publish your webextension for safari unless you were an apple user.

saagarjha 6y ago
Is there an actual requirement that you must own one of those devices to maintain an account?
- notatoad 6y ago
  there isn't literally a rule that says you must own an idevice. but there is a rule that says you must have your developer account linked to an idevice, and use it to log in.

CharlesW 6y ago

FWIW… > You're stuck in Apple's app store which is equally as draconian as Chrome's and Firefox's but now you have to pay $99/year. Safari extensions do have to be notarized (so $99/year), but notarized extensions don't have to be distributed via the Mac App Store. > No IndexedDB. Safari appears to support IndexedDB, with native support for IndexedDB 2.0 in Safari 10.1+. https://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb https://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb > The extensions aren't usable on mobile. Safari for iOS does support extensions, so I'd assume they'll use the same framework. https://www.idropnews.com/apps/11-best-safari-extensions-iphone-ios-11/53437/14/ https://www.idropnews.com/apps/11-best-safari-extensions-iph...

drenvuk 6y ago
>don't have to be distributed via the Mac App Store. I didn't know this. Thanks. >Safari appears to support IndexedDB This is also news to me and makes me pretty happy. >Safari for iOS does support extensions This really makes me wonder how they handle the UI. I'll check it out.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  It'll likely require user interaction every time you want to run the extension.
vimy 6y ago
Web Extensions api is only for macOS.
- CharlesW 6y ago
  Thanks! I've since watched the session, you're right — they announced specifically for macOS. The door's still open, though… "All the demos revolved around Safari web extensions available on the Mac, though the talk makes a point of not targeting user agent strings (information a browser reports about its own version and what system it’s running on), but rather asking about features that might be present. Given that other types of Safari extensions are available on iOS/iPadOS (namely content blockers), might web extensions eventually make their way to Apple’s mobile platforms as well? One can hope."[1] [1] https://sixcolors.com/post/2020/06/wwdc-2020-tuesday-session-impressions-part-2/ https://sixcolors.com/post/2020/06/wwdc-2020-tuesday-session...

neximo64 6y ago

To block move to the dns level. Apple has no control there.

saagarjha 6y ago
Apple can and does prevent VPN apps from being on the store that do things like this. (If you're relying on DNS resolution, then yes, there's not much they could do…unless they at some point hardcode some DNS servers.)
- AlphaSite 6y ago
  I think this after 5e Facebook VPN debacle, right?