4 ms·

In this regard, Apple reminds me of a cult leader brainwashing their followers into believing the cult's way is the best way. Makes me a little sick actually.

In this regard, Apple reminds me of a cult leader brainwashing their followers into believing the cult's way is the best way. Makes me a little sick actually. Are you sure you aren’t the one being brainwashed? Why should anyone trust Google, since they make virtually all of their revenue from ad tech, which means tracking users across the web, even when they don't want to be. Advertisers are Google's customers, not the users of their browsers or operating systems. And since Apple makes virtually all of their revenue from selling devices and services, who's more credible on the issue of privacy? If we are to believe Apple cares about its users, then it makes perfect sense why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS. "But shouldn't this be up to the user?" some will say ask. Yes, but to a point. There are already so many ways on the web to shoot yourself in the foot. Apple is making it clear that if you want a platform where there are no safeguards, then this isn't the platform for you. There are certainly a tiny, vocal minority of iOS users who complain a lot about wanting the ability to shoot themselves in the foot if they so choose. But Apple knows those aren't their core users and their revenue show that. They need to stop doing this, or they will hurt themselves in the long run. People have been saying this for many years and now they're valued at over $1.5 trillion during an economic collapse and global pandemic. Please tell me when the lack of web APIs that would make it easier for their users to be tracked on the web is going to have any material effect on them.

tapoxi 6y ago
> If we are to believe Apple cares about its users, then it makes perfect sense why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS. Caring would mean giving people a choice. The real reason is they're pivoting into services and other forms of recurring revenue. They don't want people building platform-independent apps that don't need Apple approval and can bill outside of their 30% cut.
vially 6y ago
> [...] why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS Do you have a source that shows how chromium/edge/firefox/etc are inferior to safari in this regard?
- waon 6y ago
  Mozilla's arewefastyet.com used to show daily benchmark results for all major browser engines. Sadly, it ceased to include Safari after they scrapped the system in favor of a new one. https://github.com/mozilla/arewefastyet https://github.com/mozilla/arewefastyet
- alwillis 6y ago
  For pure speed of the web + Javascript engines: "Introducing the JetStream 2 Benchmark Suite": https://webkit.org/blog/8685/introducing-the-jetstream-2-benchmark-suite/ https://webkit.org/blog/8685/introducing-the-jetstream-2-ben... Anyone with a MacBook or MacBook Pro can attest to the fact their battery last significantly longer using Safari vs Firefox or Chrome. Apple has numbers on the Safari page: https://www.apple.com/safari/ https://www.apple.com/safari/ You can run EFF’s Panopticlick test for what browsers block (or don't block) regarding fingerprinting. Safari blocks or disguises several features that are used for fingerprinting; Chrome blocks nothing: https://panopticlick.eff.org/ https://panopticlick.eff.org/
osrec 6y ago
Oh man, not sure where to begin with responding to this. I'm not saying Google is incredible (my opinion is quite the contrary actually). However, I am saying Apple is holding the web back, in a fairly annoying way, for developers. The fact that they are a rich corporate does not mean they always will be, or that they're conducting their business in the best way possible. There are plenty of examples of rich tech businesses that lost their market share very quickly. We don't even need to look that far into the past for an example: BlackBerry sticks out in my mind. I believe their stubbornness and resistance to change caused their downfall. I feel it may be a similar fate for Apple, and for similar reasons, unless they change their attitude towards the web.
- dmitriid 6y ago
  > I'm not saying Google is incredible (my opinion is quite the contrary actually). However, I am saying Apple is holding the web back, in a fairly annoying way, for developers. Right. Because Google, who dominates the entire web standards spectrum, is known for creating well thought-out, well-designed APIs that take into consideration concerns and criticism, and thinking long-term of the web as a whole. Oh wait, they don't. Up to and including the point where both Mozilla and Safari are saying they won't implement certain functionality because of glaring holes in the design, and Chrome not only shipping the features, but making them GA. Oh, and yes. Most of the "Safari is holding back web developers" talk is bullshit, of course. It actually should read "Chrome releases APIs at neck breaking speed with zero concerns for the future of the web." See web API counts in major browsers: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
  - osrec 6y ago
    Why, then, did it take safari so long to implement ServiceWorkers? I believe they were the last of major browsers to implement it. And they landed the feature more than 2 years after Firefox! Also, why was Safari's IndexedDB feature released nearly 4 years after the other major browsers? And when released it, why was it full of bugs that simple test cases would have caught? I don't want to fuel conspiracies, but the pattern is fairly obvious. Apple appears to resist progress in Web APIs.
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> Why should anyone trust Google, since they make virtually all of their revenue from ad tech, which means tracking users across the web, even when they don't want to be. Advertisers are Google's customers, not the users of their browsers or operating systems. We don't need this whataboutism to evaluate Apple. You're making the argument for PureOS or Debian, not iOS. > If we are to believe Apple cares about its users, then it makes perfect sense why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS. No it doesn't. They could make a better browser and, if it was actually better in every way, nobody would have any reason to use anything else. The fact that people would given the choice implies that something about choosing differently makes them better off enough to switch from the default. > Apple is making it clear that if you want a platform where there are no safeguards, then this isn't the platform for you. Safeguards mean warning someone adequately when they're about to do something suspect. Outright prohibiting the user from making an informed choice isn't a safeguard, it's a cage. > People have been saying this for many years and now they're valued at over $1.5 trillion Exxon was at one point the most valuable company on the exchange as well. What does that tell you about the ethics of how they got there, or what their future prospects look like?
kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago
Where did privacy come in this discussion? If you are going to be fear-mongering based on vague assertions and appeals to business models, it would be wise to mention the 30% fee on all digital transactions that Apple extorts from all its apps. It is very clear that Apple doesn't want to lose that control (and revenue) to the Web, which despite the attempts of all corporations (including at times Google), still manages to be a little more open than our corporate overlords would like.
- osrec 6y ago
  Some people are happy to buy the Apple speil re privacy to knock web apps, all while using apps like Tiktok that'll probably violate their privacy much more than a PWA ever could. The privacy argument is without basis, imo. Google is terrible on privacy too, and somewhat evil, and its browser is terrible at managing memory (I say this to prove I'm not a Google fanboy!) but at least it's not stifling innovation on the web.
  - tannhaeuser 6y ago
    There are people who don't want Google's "innovations" as they turn browsers into monstrosities that nobody except Google can maintain, and already have turned the web into the pile of shit of content marketing (with like 500 trackers on every site), service lock-in, cesspool of polarizing clickbait and propaganda, hopeless web app crap, and place where content creators get screwed that it is today. Saying this as someone with a very heavy time investment into web tech. Compare this with the useful web we used to have 10 years ago. Apple is no saint, but there's a difference between resistance to social-engineer open standards into a monopolistic enslavement machine and race to the bottom vs "stifling innovation".
Abishek_Muthian 6y ago
>If we are to believe Apple cares about its users, then it makes perfect sense why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS. Woah![1] > "But shouldn't this be up to the user?" some will say ask. Yes, but to a point. There are already so many ways on the web to shoot yourself in the foot. That sounds exactly like what a dictator would say when asked why the citizens are not allowed to vote. [1]https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/10/365-days-later-finding-and-exploiting.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/10/365-days-late...

tapoxi 6y ago

> If we are to believe Apple cares about its users, then it makes perfect sense why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS. Caring would mean giving people a choice. The real reason is they're pivoting into services and other forms of recurring revenue. They don't want people building platform-independent apps that don't need Apple approval and can bill outside of their 30% cut.

vially 6y ago

> [...] why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS Do you have a source that shows how chromium/edge/firefox/etc are inferior to safari in this regard?

waon 6y ago
Mozilla's arewefastyet.com used to show daily benchmark results for all major browser engines. Sadly, it ceased to include Safari after they scrapped the system in favor of a new one. https://github.com/mozilla/arewefastyet https://github.com/mozilla/arewefastyet
alwillis 6y ago
For pure speed of the web + Javascript engines: "Introducing the JetStream 2 Benchmark Suite": https://webkit.org/blog/8685/introducing-the-jetstream-2-benchmark-suite/ https://webkit.org/blog/8685/introducing-the-jetstream-2-ben... Anyone with a MacBook or MacBook Pro can attest to the fact their battery last significantly longer using Safari vs Firefox or Chrome. Apple has numbers on the Safari page: https://www.apple.com/safari/ https://www.apple.com/safari/ You can run EFF’s Panopticlick test for what browsers block (or don't block) regarding fingerprinting. Safari blocks or disguises several features that are used for fingerprinting; Chrome blocks nothing: https://panopticlick.eff.org/ https://panopticlick.eff.org/

osrec 6y ago

Oh man, not sure where to begin with responding to this. I'm not saying Google is incredible (my opinion is quite the contrary actually). However, I am saying Apple is holding the web back, in a fairly annoying way, for developers. The fact that they are a rich corporate does not mean they always will be, or that they're conducting their business in the best way possible. There are plenty of examples of rich tech businesses that lost their market share very quickly. We don't even need to look that far into the past for an example: BlackBerry sticks out in my mind. I believe their stubbornness and resistance to change caused their downfall. I feel it may be a similar fate for Apple, and for similar reasons, unless they change their attitude towards the web.

dmitriid 6y ago
> I'm not saying Google is incredible (my opinion is quite the contrary actually). However, I am saying Apple is holding the web back, in a fairly annoying way, for developers. Right. Because Google, who dominates the entire web standards spectrum, is known for creating well thought-out, well-designed APIs that take into consideration concerns and criticism, and thinking long-term of the web as a whole. Oh wait, they don't. Up to and including the point where both Mozilla and Safari are saying they won't implement certain functionality because of glaring holes in the design, and Chrome not only shipping the features, but making them GA. Oh, and yes. Most of the "Safari is holding back web developers" talk is bullshit, of course. It actually should read "Chrome releases APIs at neck breaking speed with zero concerns for the future of the web." See web API counts in major browsers: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
- osrec 6y ago
  Why, then, did it take safari so long to implement ServiceWorkers? I believe they were the last of major browsers to implement it. And they landed the feature more than 2 years after Firefox! Also, why was Safari's IndexedDB feature released nearly 4 years after the other major browsers? And when released it, why was it full of bugs that simple test cases would have caught? I don't want to fuel conspiracies, but the pattern is fairly obvious. Apple appears to resist progress in Web APIs.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

> Why should anyone trust Google, since they make virtually all of their revenue from ad tech, which means tracking users across the web, even when they don't want to be. Advertisers are Google's customers, not the users of their browsers or operating systems. We don't need this whataboutism to evaluate Apple. You're making the argument for PureOS or Debian, not iOS. > If we are to believe Apple cares about its users, then it makes perfect sense why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS. No it doesn't. They could make a better browser and, if it was actually better in every way, nobody would have any reason to use anything else. The fact that people would given the choice implies that something about choosing differently makes them better off enough to switch from the default. > Apple is making it clear that if you want a platform where there are no safeguards, then this isn't the platform for you. Safeguards mean warning someone adequately when they're about to do something suspect. Outright prohibiting the user from making an informed choice isn't a safeguard, it's a cage. > People have been saying this for many years and now they're valued at over $1.5 trillion Exxon was at one point the most valuable company on the exchange as well. What does that tell you about the ethics of how they got there, or what their future prospects look like?

kinkrtyavimoodh 6y ago

Where did privacy come in this discussion? If you are going to be fear-mongering based on vague assertions and appeals to business models, it would be wise to mention the 30% fee on all digital transactions that Apple extorts from all its apps. It is very clear that Apple doesn't want to lose that control (and revenue) to the Web, which despite the attempts of all corporations (including at times Google), still manages to be a little more open than our corporate overlords would like.

osrec 6y ago
Some people are happy to buy the Apple speil re privacy to knock web apps, all while using apps like Tiktok that'll probably violate their privacy much more than a PWA ever could. The privacy argument is without basis, imo. Google is terrible on privacy too, and somewhat evil, and its browser is terrible at managing memory (I say this to prove I'm not a Google fanboy!) but at least it's not stifling innovation on the web.
- tannhaeuser 6y ago
  There are people who don't want Google's "innovations" as they turn browsers into monstrosities that nobody except Google can maintain, and already have turned the web into the pile of shit of content marketing (with like 500 trackers on every site), service lock-in, cesspool of polarizing clickbait and propaganda, hopeless web app crap, and place where content creators get screwed that it is today. Saying this as someone with a very heavy time investment into web tech. Compare this with the useful web we used to have 10 years ago. Apple is no saint, but there's a difference between resistance to social-engineer open standards into a monopolistic enslavement machine and race to the bottom vs "stifling innovation".

Abishek_Muthian 6y ago

>If we are to believe Apple cares about its users, then it makes perfect sense why they don't allow slower, less power efficient, less secure and less private web engines available on iOS. Woah![1] > "But shouldn't this be up to the user?" some will say ask. Yes, but to a point. There are already so many ways on the web to shoot yourself in the foot. That sounds exactly like what a dictator would say when asked why the citizens are not allowed to vote. [1]https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/10/365-days-later-finding-and-exploiting.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/10/365-days-late...