3 ms·

Safari is the real alternative keeping web open. Firefox does not serve that role anymore.

wongarsu 5y ago
Safari is only available on one platform (that internationally has a small market share) and isn't all that great about implementing web standards in a timely manner. To me, Firefox is the far better alternative. But really, why should there be only one?
- historyloop 5y ago
  > isn't all that great about implementing web standards in a timely manner. It's not good at implementing standards in timely manner which Chrome implements before they're even standards (and then become standards when Google pushes them to become so). Interesting isn't it. That literally goes back to what I said. Without Firefox and Safari, Google can declare anything it wants a standard and implement it LITERALLY yesterday. Among standards Safari is slow to implement in "timely manner" is web pages connecting to USB devices, Bluetooth and a plethora of other nonsense which Google keeps pushing through because they want the web to be the application OS for everyone, and then slap ads on it.
- vbezhenar 5y ago
  Safari is used by rich people who can afford iPhones and Macs. Those people are valuable visitors for many websites. And Safari marketshare (with iOS) is not tiny. So plenty of websites do care about Safari compatibility.
- forgotpwd16 5y ago
  Safari is available on one platform but its engine is cross-platform and used by few browsers (Epiphany, Luakit, Nyxt, Vimb, ...).
- astrange 5y ago
  "Implementing web standards" is Chrome's strategy for becoming a browser monopoly. They just constantly make up things like USB in web browsers faster than anyone else could implement it. Just because they standardize it doesn't mean anyone should be forced to keep up with them.
deregulateMed 5y ago
A closed browser with limited features made by a unethical company is keeping the web open? I'll take FOSS chromium variants before I give my data to Apple(and by proxy, the US and Chinese government).
- rvz 5y ago
  > made by a unethical company is keeping the web open? There are no angels with the known contenders of "keeping the web open" unless you want to use SerenityOS's web browser that they made themselves. Unless you are using a very exotic OS that has a browser, I'm not sure how you can begin to defend a chromium variant still derived by an unethical company (Because you have to update that fork) and then attack another unethical company for giving your data to them.
- historyloop 5y ago
  > unethical company Unless there's a mathematical definition of "ethical" that we can rely on for objective assessment, that's basically everyone and no one based on how you feel any particular day.

Safari is only available on one platform (that internationally has a small market share) and isn't all that great about implementing web standards in a timely manner. To me, Firefox is the far better alternative. But really, why should there be only one?

historyloop 5y ago
> isn't all that great about implementing web standards in a timely manner. It's not good at implementing standards in timely manner which Chrome implements before they're even standards (and then become standards when Google pushes them to become so). Interesting isn't it. That literally goes back to what I said. Without Firefox and Safari, Google can declare anything it wants a standard and implement it LITERALLY yesterday. Among standards Safari is slow to implement in "timely manner" is web pages connecting to USB devices, Bluetooth and a plethora of other nonsense which Google keeps pushing through because they want the web to be the application OS for everyone, and then slap ads on it.
vbezhenar 5y ago
Safari is used by rich people who can afford iPhones and Macs. Those people are valuable visitors for many websites. And Safari marketshare (with iOS) is not tiny. So plenty of websites do care about Safari compatibility.
forgotpwd16 5y ago
Safari is available on one platform but its engine is cross-platform and used by few browsers (Epiphany, Luakit, Nyxt, Vimb, ...).
astrange 5y ago
"Implementing web standards" is Chrome's strategy for becoming a browser monopoly. They just constantly make up things like USB in web browsers faster than anyone else could implement it. Just because they standardize it doesn't mean anyone should be forced to keep up with them.

deregulateMed 5y ago

A closed browser with limited features made by a unethical company is keeping the web open? I'll take FOSS chromium variants before I give my data to Apple(and by proxy, the US and Chinese government).

rvz 5y ago
> made by a unethical company is keeping the web open? There are no angels with the known contenders of "keeping the web open" unless you want to use SerenityOS's web browser that they made themselves. Unless you are using a very exotic OS that has a browser, I'm not sure how you can begin to defend a chromium variant still derived by an unethical company (Because you have to update that fork) and then attack another unethical company for giving your data to them.
historyloop 5y ago
> unethical company Unless there's a mathematical definition of "ethical" that we can rely on for objective assessment, that's basically everyone and no one based on how you feel any particular day.