Yeah, that's my question. Other commenters are suggesting that Apple's intent is to keep Chrome and other third-party apps from matching Safari's energy effici

Yeah, that's my question. Other commenters are suggesting that Apple's intent is to keep Chrome and other third-party apps from matching Safari's energy efficiency. But as you say, I'm not sure that makes strategic sense. If that is true, Apple is essentially crippling most Mac use cases just to benefit Safari. That really would not seem to be in Apple's best interests. I am a developer, but not a iOS/MacOS developer. So I have followed this sort of thing only very loosely over the years. But whenever I have heard about grumblings about private Apple-only APIs being used by blessed first-party Apple apps on iOS, it seems to me that the explanation was always that the private APIs either: 1. posed some sort of security issue 2. were simply not yet stable enough to expose to third-party apps As every developer knows, publicly exposing any API represents a maintenance burden: you're committing to support that API and keep it stable for X number of years. In general you see this kind of pattern a lot: a platform developer dogfoods APIs internally for some period of time before they're stable enough to expose publicly.