5 ms·

The Apple of today has a very conflicted relationship with webkit, the anticompetitive reasons they want to keep their platform "webkit only", simultaneously en

by tomxor 5y ago

The Apple of today has a very conflicted relationship with webkit, the anticompetitive reasons they want to keep their platform "webkit only", simultaneously encourages them to support and neglect webkit development. i.e on the one hand, webkit must be reliable and secure and compatible "enough" to provide a decent basic browsing experience. But should not improve so much as to make developing applications competitive with the apple store. The difference between the resources Google and Apple contribute to their respective open source browser engines is night and day, and as any web developer will know - it shows. In an ideal world two things would change at the same time: Apple is forced to allow other browsers, and webkit gets some genuine love and decent resources to make it a legitimate competitor again, instead of being used as a pawn in a game between Apple and Google.

defaultname 5y ago
"basic browsing experience" Google pushes out yet another half-baked, poorly considered new feature in Chrome and overnight has mobs chanting about Safari purportedly holding everyone back because of some close to irrelevant fringe thing. Safari might just be the fastest browser, and it supports a ridiculous, awe-inspiring array of features and standards. And the greatest indictment of the ridiculous anti-Safari smear is that no platform uses the browser more than iOS users do. iOS users always are over-represented in web usage compared to marketshare.
- mtomweb 5y ago
  You wouldn’t be calling Safari awe inspiring if you had to develop for it. It is hands down the worst browser, filled with application breaking bugs and supports the smallest number of features out of any browser. Arguably it’s a result of having no competition on iOS. From idb, webrtc, to scroll to viewheight, to performance issues Safari is the worst to deal with and this is reflected in all the developer surveys.
  - defaultname 5y ago
    "supports the smallest number of features out of any browser." This is a bit like saying India has the smallest number of people in countries named China or India. It's still an enormous number of features, and it is simply extraordinary what is capable in the browser. "this is reflected in all the developer surveys" Remember "Made for IE"? IE was dogshit, yet there were loads of devs who thought ActiveX was the bee's knees and having to deal with other browsers and platforms was just an annoyance in their lives. Developer surveys on this are worthless, and if we listened to developers as a group it would be an entirely Windows world.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > IE was dogshit, yet there were loads of devs who thought ActiveX was the bee's knees and having to deal with other browsers and platforms was just an annoyance in their lives. I don't think that's true. There were loads of devs that thought that ActiveX was the quickest route to the best experiences for the largest market segment and having to deal with other browsers and platforms was something the people signing paychecks cared less about, if at all.
      - defaultname 5y ago
        We seem to agree entirely. Many developers would prefer a single, universal browser. A single platform. A single input mechanism (a single development language, compiler, RDBMS, filesystem, cloud provider, backup system, etc). All for obvious, practical reasons, at least in the short term. That would be devastating for the future, but if it makes projects easier today, many developers are entirely onboard. That was very much a dominant position among developers in the IE days. Other browsers were a nuisance, and maybe they should just be cut out entirely. If Safari weren't such an important part of the market, Firefox would have been cut out long ago and we'd be awash in "Made For Chrome (and skinned Chrome)" badges. It is only the economic necessity of supporting iOS users that keeps cross browser development alive.
        tomxor 5y ago
        > That was very much a dominant position among developers in the IE days. Other browsers were a nuisance, and maybe they should just be cut out entirely. I don't usually resort to personalised dissection of post, but to be frank, you've taken a giant shit all over this subthread so I think it deserves it... this notion of yours seems to be the underlying theme of most all of your comments - that everyone here criticising webkit or Apple must be against browser diversity, be Google proponents, or not value stability, performance and privacy... We are not this caricature... It might be worth your while to take a second to reflect on that assumption and binary view of reality.
- tomxor 5y ago
  This is a misrepresentation, before even getting into lack of modern feature support, webkit introduce a lot of long lived regressions on each release and Apple have changed various behaviours in non-standard ways in Safari over the years then left them broken and unpatched on old devices (looking at you autoheight iframes). This has nothing to do with adopting standards and everything to do with a lack of resources, stagnant release cycle and lack of care and support from Apple. It's not necessary to talk about chromiums bleeding edge non-standard features, webkit easily has the least support for unopinionated standards released over the last decade and adopted by the other two. > no platform uses the browser more than iOS users do. iOS users always are over-represented in web usage compared to marketshare. What point are you trying to make here? iOS users have no choice but to use Safari. If you install firefox or chrome or anything that is a "browser" on an iOS device, it's forced to use Safari webengine underneath, so it's essentially safari with different UI, and this is apparent in the useragent string so any decent stats will show that essentially every iOS user == Safari user.
  - defaultname 5y ago
    Lack of modern feature support? This is beyond parody. "What point are you trying to make here? iOS users have no choice but to use Safari." Android users use the browser on their device -- any browser -- less than iOS users use their browser(s). Read the Google corporate propaganda repeated on here, and other platforms provide a web bliss of PWAs, freed from app subservience. Only, not at all.
    - tomxor 5y ago
      Please keep the hyperbole to a minimum, without technical argument it just encourages flamewars.
      - Hidios 5y ago
        How does HN maintain such a great community?
        5y ago
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- handrous 5y ago
  Last I checked, iOS users use their phones way more than Android users period, including the browser. That plus (probably relatedly, though other factors are also in play) spending habits are why so many apps choose to go iOS-first, or to prioritize iOS Safari compatibility over Android for web sites or web apps.
NoGravitas 5y ago
On the other hand, a lot of the stuff Google adds to Blink and tries to push as a standard is often outright bad (e.g. FLoC, WebUSB).
- tomxor 5y ago
  This is true, but not a defence of Apple's behaviour. To be clear I don't think chromium is a panacea either, but Apple has not exactly been webkit's friend and is only keeping a 3rd player barely alive as a side-effect. They are both bad in opposite ways. If webkit was liberated from Apple I think it would ultimately benefit chromium as well.
- andrewnicolalde 5y ago
  > WebUSB Wat
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    WebUSB, Web Bluetooth, Web HID are chrome-only features they rammed through standards bodies. Both Firefox and Safari consider them harmful in their current state and will not implement them.
    - detaro 5y ago
      > they rammed through standards bodies. They have not been declared standards by any standards body.
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        Indeed they haven't. They are, at most, drafts or even "draft community reports". And yet, Chrome goes through a superficial standards-track-like process: - implements them behind a feature flag - publishes a draft of the standard - asks other browser vendors for their position on "emerging standard". Example, https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459 - ignores feedback, and enables by default (see link above) - advertises as fait accompli (example, https://web.dev/hid-examples/ https://web.dev/hid-examples/) - includes these APIs in standard web API counts https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence - proceeds to gaslight other browser vendors as being too slow, holding back the web, holding back innovation etc. through dozens of talking heads with outsized influence (Alex Russel, Justin Fagnani, ... to many to list)
isodev 5y ago
The Safari/WebKit team has made a great deal of improvements over the last couple of versions. I think "compatible enough" has turned into a good "basically the same as Firefox" when it comes to web standards with the release of Safari 15 and 15.1. I also support the stance that certain features should remain focused where they belong e.g. natively installed apps. But who can decide what should be a web standard and what shouldn't... it's hard to say. I think having a healthy governance and enforcement body is a prerequisite before we look at technical specifics.
- ksec 5y ago
  Exactly. Not much of an Apple or Safari supporter but credit where credit's due Safari 13-15 has made more improvement each version than previous Safari. If they keep up the pace Safari 16 should be very close to current Chrome and Firefox. https://developer.apple.com/safari/technology-preview/release-notes/ https://developer.apple.com/safari/technology-preview/releas...
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    Safari and Firefox have always been close: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence The vocal minority is a very tiny percentage of web developers who believe that whatever Chrome spits out is the bees knees, the modern standard, and all browsers must immediately have that.
fault1 5y ago
there are also other companies working on webkit, e.g, sony. Apple's investment in safari/webkit goes up and down. They've actually made a lot of investments since 2019 or so. Probably less so for the previous 6 years before that. But again, webkit was very innovative in the early 2010s

by tomxor 5y ago

defaultname 5y ago

"basic browsing experience" Google pushes out yet another half-baked, poorly considered new feature in Chrome and overnight has mobs chanting about Safari purportedly holding everyone back because of some close to irrelevant fringe thing. Safari might just be the fastest browser, and it supports a ridiculous, awe-inspiring array of features and standards. And the greatest indictment of the ridiculous anti-Safari smear is that no platform uses the browser more than iOS users do. iOS users always are over-represented in web usage compared to marketshare.

mtomweb 5y ago
You wouldn’t be calling Safari awe inspiring if you had to develop for it. It is hands down the worst browser, filled with application breaking bugs and supports the smallest number of features out of any browser. Arguably it’s a result of having no competition on iOS. From idb, webrtc, to scroll to viewheight, to performance issues Safari is the worst to deal with and this is reflected in all the developer surveys.
- defaultname 5y ago
  "supports the smallest number of features out of any browser." This is a bit like saying India has the smallest number of people in countries named China or India. It's still an enormous number of features, and it is simply extraordinary what is capable in the browser. "this is reflected in all the developer surveys" Remember "Made for IE"? IE was dogshit, yet there were loads of devs who thought ActiveX was the bee's knees and having to deal with other browsers and platforms was just an annoyance in their lives. Developer surveys on this are worthless, and if we listened to developers as a group it would be an entirely Windows world.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > IE was dogshit, yet there were loads of devs who thought ActiveX was the bee's knees and having to deal with other browsers and platforms was just an annoyance in their lives. I don't think that's true. There were loads of devs that thought that ActiveX was the quickest route to the best experiences for the largest market segment and having to deal with other browsers and platforms was something the people signing paychecks cared less about, if at all.
    - defaultname 5y ago
      We seem to agree entirely. Many developers would prefer a single, universal browser. A single platform. A single input mechanism (a single development language, compiler, RDBMS, filesystem, cloud provider, backup system, etc). All for obvious, practical reasons, at least in the short term. That would be devastating for the future, but if it makes projects easier today, many developers are entirely onboard. That was very much a dominant position among developers in the IE days. Other browsers were a nuisance, and maybe they should just be cut out entirely. If Safari weren't such an important part of the market, Firefox would have been cut out long ago and we'd be awash in "Made For Chrome (and skinned Chrome)" badges. It is only the economic necessity of supporting iOS users that keeps cross browser development alive.
      - tomxor 5y ago
        > That was very much a dominant position among developers in the IE days. Other browsers were a nuisance, and maybe they should just be cut out entirely. I don't usually resort to personalised dissection of post, but to be frank, you've taken a giant shit all over this subthread so I think it deserves it... this notion of yours seems to be the underlying theme of most all of your comments - that everyone here criticising webkit or Apple must be against browser diversity, be Google proponents, or not value stability, performance and privacy... We are not this caricature... It might be worth your while to take a second to reflect on that assumption and binary view of reality.
tomxor 5y ago
This is a misrepresentation, before even getting into lack of modern feature support, webkit introduce a lot of long lived regressions on each release and Apple have changed various behaviours in non-standard ways in Safari over the years then left them broken and unpatched on old devices (looking at you autoheight iframes). This has nothing to do with adopting standards and everything to do with a lack of resources, stagnant release cycle and lack of care and support from Apple. It's not necessary to talk about chromiums bleeding edge non-standard features, webkit easily has the least support for unopinionated standards released over the last decade and adopted by the other two. > no platform uses the browser more than iOS users do. iOS users always are over-represented in web usage compared to marketshare. What point are you trying to make here? iOS users have no choice but to use Safari. If you install firefox or chrome or anything that is a "browser" on an iOS device, it's forced to use Safari webengine underneath, so it's essentially safari with different UI, and this is apparent in the useragent string so any decent stats will show that essentially every iOS user == Safari user.
- defaultname 5y ago
  Lack of modern feature support? This is beyond parody. "What point are you trying to make here? iOS users have no choice but to use Safari." Android users use the browser on their device -- any browser -- less than iOS users use their browser(s). Read the Google corporate propaganda repeated on here, and other platforms provide a web bliss of PWAs, freed from app subservience. Only, not at all.
  - tomxor 5y ago
    Please keep the hyperbole to a minimum, without technical argument it just encourages flamewars.
    - Hidios 5y ago
      How does HN maintain such a great community?
      - 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
handrous 5y ago
Last I checked, iOS users use their phones way more than Android users period, including the browser. That plus (probably relatedly, though other factors are also in play) spending habits are why so many apps choose to go iOS-first, or to prioritize iOS Safari compatibility over Android for web sites or web apps.

NoGravitas 5y ago

On the other hand, a lot of the stuff Google adds to Blink and tries to push as a standard is often outright bad (e.g. FLoC, WebUSB).

tomxor 5y ago
This is true, but not a defence of Apple's behaviour. To be clear I don't think chromium is a panacea either, but Apple has not exactly been webkit's friend and is only keeping a 3rd player barely alive as a side-effect. They are both bad in opposite ways. If webkit was liberated from Apple I think it would ultimately benefit chromium as well.
andrewnicolalde 5y ago
> WebUSB Wat
- dmitriid 5y ago
  WebUSB, Web Bluetooth, Web HID are chrome-only features they rammed through standards bodies. Both Firefox and Safari consider them harmful in their current state and will not implement them.
  - detaro 5y ago
    > they rammed through standards bodies. They have not been declared standards by any standards body.
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      Indeed they haven't. They are, at most, drafts or even "draft community reports". And yet, Chrome goes through a superficial standards-track-like process: - implements them behind a feature flag - publishes a draft of the standard - asks other browser vendors for their position on "emerging standard". Example, https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459 - ignores feedback, and enables by default (see link above) - advertises as fait accompli (example, https://web.dev/hid-examples/ https://web.dev/hid-examples/) - includes these APIs in standard web API counts https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence - proceeds to gaslight other browser vendors as being too slow, holding back the web, holding back innovation etc. through dozens of talking heads with outsized influence (Alex Russel, Justin Fagnani, ... to many to list)

isodev 5y ago

The Safari/WebKit team has made a great deal of improvements over the last couple of versions. I think "compatible enough" has turned into a good "basically the same as Firefox" when it comes to web standards with the release of Safari 15 and 15.1. I also support the stance that certain features should remain focused where they belong e.g. natively installed apps. But who can decide what should be a web standard and what shouldn't... it's hard to say. I think having a healthy governance and enforcement body is a prerequisite before we look at technical specifics.

ksec 5y ago
Exactly. Not much of an Apple or Safari supporter but credit where credit's due Safari 13-15 has made more improvement each version than previous Safari. If they keep up the pace Safari 16 should be very close to current Chrome and Firefox. https://developer.apple.com/safari/technology-preview/release-notes/ https://developer.apple.com/safari/technology-preview/releas...
- dmitriid 5y ago
  Safari and Firefox have always been close: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence The vocal minority is a very tiny percentage of web developers who believe that whatever Chrome spits out is the bees knees, the modern standard, and all browsers must immediately have that.

fault1 5y ago

there are also other companies working on webkit, e.g, sony. Apple's investment in safari/webkit goes up and down. They've actually made a lot of investments since 2019 or so. Probably less so for the previous 6 years before that. But again, webkit was very innovative in the early 2010s