5 ms·

> How is Apple allowed to disallow any other web browsers on their mobile devices? They now allow it by the way. I don't know why. I am using Firefox on iOS an

> How is Apple allowed to disallow any other web browsers on their mobile devices? They now allow it by the way. I don't know why. I am using Firefox on iOS and it was supported for at least half a year AFAIK. Your point still stands obviously.

kwyjobojoe 6y ago
It's not really Firefox. They have to use the same engine as the Apple browser.
capableweb 6y ago
I should have been more clear. I'm not talking about the "browser shell" (the UI for tabs, settings and so on) but about the "rendering engine" which in the case of Firefox is Gecko on PC, but since Apple has this arbitrary restriction, is Webkit on iOS, which is the same engine everyone on iOS is forced to use, no matter what. So yes, you're using Firefox, but you're still using the same rendering engine for your browser, as any other browser on iOS. Effectively limiting how powerful browsers can be on iOS, as Apple has full control over Webkit and doesn't allow anything else, literally anti-competitive behavior.
- twobitshifter 6y ago
  On Desktop, how many rendering engines are there out there today? 3? Most browser creators cannot afford to create their own rendering engine, so we get Gecko, WebKit, or Blink. With this in mind, when you’re asking for alternative rendering engines, you’re really asking for Google to be able to get their hooks into iOS. It would be nice if Mozilla were free to develop their own engine but that’s not without downside and the most likely outcome is an iOS dominated by Chrome and ad-tracking.
  - spideymans 6y ago
    > It would be nice if Mozilla were free to develop their own engine but that’s not without downside and the most likely outcome is an iOS dominated by Chrome and ad-tracking The impacts go beyond iOS. The reality is that Safari is the only thing standing in the way of Google having IE-style dominance of browser usage share. As of now, Chromium has just under 80% usage share. If Chromium were as dominant as iOS as it is on desktop, it’s usage share would likely exceed 90% Alternate engines are a fine idea in principle, but we need to consider whether a Chromium monopoly on the web is indeed an improvement from the status quo.
  - aww_dang 6y ago
    It would be nice if developers could debug Safari specific issues without jumping through Apple imposed hoops.
pojntfx 6y ago
You're not using Firefox, you're using Safari with another skin. Browser engines other than Apple-approved Safari/WebKit are illegal on Apple platforms, effectively rendering it the biggest blocker for the web right now (no PWAs, no push notifications, no offline support, no support for free audio codecs, extensions ... and the list goes on!)
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
  I wouldn't bury your flag on this argument. Many users don't care about that stuff, and Apple is winning the privacy war through decisions like these.
  - capableweb 6y ago
    Doesn't matter what users care about, what matters is: "Is Apple abusing their position in the market?" One could claim since Apple IS the iOS market, for them to disallow competitors in certain app categories but not others, they are indeed abusing their position as a market owner, especially since they are the only one allowed (by them) to develop a browser engine.
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
      That claim is moot if you can't prove articulable harm that is in excess of the articulable benefits.
  - pojntfx 6y ago
    Well, the alternative to PWAs is publishing through proprietary app stores - the users might not care to much, but it's incredibly important for us as devs. Also, one really can't trust a proprietary browser like Safari with their personal data - while one might be able to switch from Chrome due to FLOC on Android, Linux, Windows etc., Safari would _force_ the change on their users, with them being unable to switch to anything but the "officially approved" browser.
    - deleted 6y ago

kwyjobojoe 6y ago

It's not really Firefox. They have to use the same engine as the Apple browser.

capableweb 6y ago

I should have been more clear. I'm not talking about the "browser shell" (the UI for tabs, settings and so on) but about the "rendering engine" which in the case of Firefox is Gecko on PC, but since Apple has this arbitrary restriction, is Webkit on iOS, which is the same engine everyone on iOS is forced to use, no matter what. So yes, you're using Firefox, but you're still using the same rendering engine for your browser, as any other browser on iOS. Effectively limiting how powerful browsers can be on iOS, as Apple has full control over Webkit and doesn't allow anything else, literally anti-competitive behavior.

twobitshifter 6y ago
On Desktop, how many rendering engines are there out there today? 3? Most browser creators cannot afford to create their own rendering engine, so we get Gecko, WebKit, or Blink. With this in mind, when you’re asking for alternative rendering engines, you’re really asking for Google to be able to get their hooks into iOS. It would be nice if Mozilla were free to develop their own engine but that’s not without downside and the most likely outcome is an iOS dominated by Chrome and ad-tracking.
- spideymans 6y ago
  > It would be nice if Mozilla were free to develop their own engine but that’s not without downside and the most likely outcome is an iOS dominated by Chrome and ad-tracking The impacts go beyond iOS. The reality is that Safari is the only thing standing in the way of Google having IE-style dominance of browser usage share. As of now, Chromium has just under 80% usage share. If Chromium were as dominant as iOS as it is on desktop, it’s usage share would likely exceed 90% Alternate engines are a fine idea in principle, but we need to consider whether a Chromium monopoly on the web is indeed an improvement from the status quo.
- aww_dang 6y ago
  It would be nice if developers could debug Safari specific issues without jumping through Apple imposed hoops.

pojntfx 6y ago

You're not using Firefox, you're using Safari with another skin. Browser engines other than Apple-approved Safari/WebKit are illegal on Apple platforms, effectively rendering it the biggest blocker for the web right now (no PWAs, no push notifications, no offline support, no support for free audio codecs, extensions ... and the list goes on!)

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
I wouldn't bury your flag on this argument. Many users don't care about that stuff, and Apple is winning the privacy war through decisions like these.
- capableweb 6y ago
  Doesn't matter what users care about, what matters is: "Is Apple abusing their position in the market?" One could claim since Apple IS the iOS market, for them to disallow competitors in certain app categories but not others, they are indeed abusing their position as a market owner, especially since they are the only one allowed (by them) to develop a browser engine.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
    That claim is moot if you can't prove articulable harm that is in excess of the articulable benefits.
- pojntfx 6y ago
  Well, the alternative to PWAs is publishing through proprietary app stores - the users might not care to much, but it's incredibly important for us as devs. Also, one really can't trust a proprietary browser like Safari with their personal data - while one might be able to switch from Chrome due to FLOC on Android, Linux, Windows etc., Safari would _force_ the change on their users, with them being unable to switch to anything but the "officially approved" browser.
  - deleted 6y ago