4 ms·

> But as a web-dev I dislike Apple/Safari. They have become MS/IE 2.0. This sentiment is inexact and incorrect. MS/IE was a problem once it achieved market dom

> But as a web-dev I dislike Apple/Safari. They have become MS/IE 2.0. This sentiment is inexact and incorrect. MS/IE was a problem once it achieved market dominance. Safari has never achieved such dominance. More accurate is a comparison using Netscape 1.x-4.x and MSIE =< 6. Allow me to explain. Prior to MSIE dominating with IE 6, MS was engaged in its campaign to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Netscape. This is similar to where Google Chrome is now. Google Chrome rolls in not-yet-ratified web "standards" before anyone, including Safari, has a chance to respond. Thereby, Google Chrome increasingly establishes its dominance. Safari is in the position of Netscape, with a codebase that is increasingly perceived as inadequate when compared to Google Chrome. Of course, such a comparison can only go so far. My main point is that Safari is not flouting or disregarding established W3C/WHATWG web standards but, rather, being very careful about how it implements ratified standards, something that takes time. Google Chrome, on the other hand, bakes in anything and everything to secure its advantage in the browser market, just as MS did with IE when Netscape was still around. Once Netscape died, MSIE 6 was the problem.

dgb23 6y ago
First of all thank you for relativising my one-sided comment. Let me clarify what I mean a bit. I agree with you on your arguments about Chrome. I don't support Chrome specific features. They even have broken things in the past. My perspective on this is that iOS locks out non-Safari browsers, so users are forced to use it and as a developer I'm forced to make workarounds for it. With IE11 I don't have this problem anymore. We're at a stage now where I can convince my clients of "This is a browser, which is losing official support soon. I can make this feature work/look better on IE11 if you really want, which costs me this much time". IE is being faded out just by the fact that more new stuff looks worse and works worse. With Safari this is not the case. There is no "Oh this website works better with Firefox, you should install it" which is likely the biggest factor for browser adoption and my gut feeling says that Apple knows and uses this. This particular statement seems questionable: > My main point is that Safari is not flouting or disregarding established W3C/WHATWG web standards but, rather, being very careful about how it implements those standards which takes time. In some cases their actions simply don't make sense, except if you look at it from a perspective of protecting their iOS App platform. For example breaking localStorage in the name of privacy (which is ridiculously paradox) and not supporting obvious, simple UX improvements like scroll-anchoring. Safari is in some cases stricter/more standards compliant than Firefox and especially Chrome. But in some cases like above the feature intersection of Firefox and Chrome is the one that makes the most sense for the web.
- mistersquid 6y ago
  > iOS locks out non-Safari browsers, so users are forced to use it and as a developer I'm forced to make workarounds for it. > In some cases their actions simply don't make sense, except if you look at it from a perspective of protecting their iOS App platform. Agreed 100%! My earlier comment was in the context of macOS and might have been very different had I also considered iOS/iPadOS. iOS and iPadOS are restrictive and mobile Safari somewhat slows innovation. Your objections regarding mobile Safari's deficiencies are worth considering. Thank you. I also agree Apple does this to protect the iOS App platform (I might just say "iOS platform"). Reasonable arguments exist about why Apple's lock on mobile Safari is good and why it is bad. (I personally think Apple could do better here, but I am not knowledgeable enough to comment further.)
SiVal 6y ago
Apple doesn't need dominance to hold back the shared web while driving forward its proprietary platform at full speed, it only needs veto power, which Safari-by-any-other-name on iOS gives it. I don't want Google to be able to just do whatever they want, either, but if Apple really cared about improving the web, they would be better known for making their own proposals for improvement than for mainly blocking others' proposals.
forgotmypw17 6y ago
What goes around, comes around. Before IE destroyed Netscape, Netscape did it to Mosaic. Do you remember where the name Mozilla came from?

dgb23 6y ago

First of all thank you for relativising my one-sided comment. Let me clarify what I mean a bit. I agree with you on your arguments about Chrome. I don't support Chrome specific features. They even have broken things in the past. My perspective on this is that iOS locks out non-Safari browsers, so users are forced to use it and as a developer I'm forced to make workarounds for it. With IE11 I don't have this problem anymore. We're at a stage now where I can convince my clients of "This is a browser, which is losing official support soon. I can make this feature work/look better on IE11 if you really want, which costs me this much time". IE is being faded out just by the fact that more new stuff looks worse and works worse. With Safari this is not the case. There is no "Oh this website works better with Firefox, you should install it" which is likely the biggest factor for browser adoption and my gut feeling says that Apple knows and uses this. This particular statement seems questionable: > My main point is that Safari is not flouting or disregarding established W3C/WHATWG web standards but, rather, being very careful about how it implements those standards which takes time. In some cases their actions simply don't make sense, except if you look at it from a perspective of protecting their iOS App platform. For example breaking localStorage in the name of privacy (which is ridiculously paradox) and not supporting obvious, simple UX improvements like scroll-anchoring. Safari is in some cases stricter/more standards compliant than Firefox and especially Chrome. But in some cases like above the feature intersection of Firefox and Chrome is the one that makes the most sense for the web.

mistersquid 6y ago
> iOS locks out non-Safari browsers, so users are forced to use it and as a developer I'm forced to make workarounds for it. > In some cases their actions simply don't make sense, except if you look at it from a perspective of protecting their iOS App platform. Agreed 100%! My earlier comment was in the context of macOS and might have been very different had I also considered iOS/iPadOS. iOS and iPadOS are restrictive and mobile Safari somewhat slows innovation. Your objections regarding mobile Safari's deficiencies are worth considering. Thank you. I also agree Apple does this to protect the iOS App platform (I might just say "iOS platform"). Reasonable arguments exist about why Apple's lock on mobile Safari is good and why it is bad. (I personally think Apple could do better here, but I am not knowledgeable enough to comment further.)

SiVal 6y ago

Apple doesn't need dominance to hold back the shared web while driving forward its proprietary platform at full speed, it only needs veto power, which Safari-by-any-other-name on iOS gives it. I don't want Google to be able to just do whatever they want, either, but if Apple really cared about improving the web, they would be better known for making their own proposals for improvement than for mainly blocking others' proposals.

forgotmypw17 6y ago

What goes around, comes around. Before IE destroyed Netscape, Netscape did it to Mosaic. Do you remember where the name Mozilla came from?