5 ms·

hot take: the safari monopoly on ios is better than a chromium monopoly on all platforms

AlexandrB 5y ago
Sadly, I agree. Allowing alternate browsers on iOS just means more market share for Chrom(ium).
FridgeSeal 5y ago
Strong agree. “Look at all these alternative browsers you can use” > points to Chromium variants. Chromium variants are not an alternative, and I’m happy to perpetuate Safari on iOS if it means Apple keeps shafting ad-tech companies in service of my privacy.
- Jensson 5y ago
  Apple is an ad-tech company, they are expanding that sector massively lately. Ads might be less revenue, but ads are almost pure profits so each ad dollar is worth much more to them than each phone dollar, and there is no reason they can't do both. > Analysts project Apple will make $5B off ads this year and $20B per year by 2024 https://thehustle.co/10202021-apple-advertising/ https://thehustle.co/10202021-apple-advertising/
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    You can't call something "an ad tech company" if the entire ad revenue is less than 3% of the company's revenue. On the other hand 80% of Google's revenue comes from online ads.
izacus 5y ago
Safari is crippled when it comes to building web apps that aren't beholden to the Apple tax and control. How the fsck is that better than having a single web engine that makes web apps equals among native apps and avoids monopolistic american megacorp from telling you what you're allowed to create? Do you really wish corporate control so much? Do you want to go through Apple review for your websites as well? It's incredible how brand fanboyism clouds your minds - this isn't about engine competition, it's about making free web an equal player to golden cages of app stores.
- FridgeSeal 5y ago
  > How the fsck is that better than having a single web engine that makes web apps equals among native apps and avoids monopolistic american megacorp from telling you what you're allowed to create? You mean, like Chrome? Developed by the monopolistic American megacorp called Google? Also, if PWA’s and Electron apps are your version of “equal to native” I’m going to have to strongly disagree.
  - izacus 5y ago
    Yes, I prefer strong Chrome market share with possibility of competition from Apple, Mozilla and others. I strongly believe Apple is capable of building a better browser even if they don't get to cripple their competition with monopolistic practices. Instead, you're defending Apple monopoly where they ban all competition, stagnate web development and make PWAs and other web-apps a non-viable possibility on their devices. All because... you don't like Chrome? Although you'd still have a full option of using Firefox, Safari or others? Why? Because someone else might DARE to use a product THEY prefer?
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      > make PWAs and other web-apps a non-viable possibility on their devices It's such a blatant lie about PWAs. And thank god Safari and Mozilla don't implement dozens of Chrome-only non-standards.
  - astromd 5y ago
    Agreed. I want more native apps, not less. I cringe when I see web apps that are slow, don’t take advantage of native API’s, and have a completely different look and feel from the OS. No thanks.
    - mtomweb 5y ago
      There’s nothing inherently special to native about painting to the screen 60 times a second. Web Apps if allowed could provide equivalent (and sometimes much better) experiences than native. But it’s a chicken and egg problem, and it’s mainly Apple holding it back.
Klonoar 5y ago
This shouldn't be a hot take, but moreso a sobering reality. That said I'm glad more people are starting to acknowledge this and bring it up in these discussions. Firefox is not really a counter to Chrome's dominance and WebKit only really still is due to Apple being too big to push around. If I'm stuck choosing between those two evils, I'd sooner take Apple... then try to figure out what a better solution is than just "make Apple change because I don't like Safari".
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
spankalee 5y ago
Are you arguing that Safari is so bad that all of its users would use another browser given a choice? That would seem to be a pretty strong argument _for_ browser choice in my opinion.
- petmon 5y ago
  Chrome achieved desktop dominance in part by Google paying for it to be bundled with Flash, graphics drivers, and other popular software. It also got banners on google.com, gmail, etc. It's not some pure organic "user choice" growth story and Google would presumably re-use those same tactics given the opportunity.
- dimensi0nal 5y ago
  most users are idiots and will click the “install chrome” button if google tells them to
- dmitriid 5y ago
  No. Google will employ a plethora of dark patterns to make users "chose" Chrome. Even now on iOS Google's apps constantly "forget" my choice of browsers and try to push me to use Chrome for external links.

Sadly, I agree. Allowing alternate browsers on iOS just means more market share for Chrom(ium).

Strong agree. “Look at all these alternative browsers you can use” > points to Chromium variants. Chromium variants are not an alternative, and I’m happy to perpetuate Safari on iOS if it means Apple keeps shafting ad-tech companies in service of my privacy.

Jensson 5y ago
Apple is an ad-tech company, they are expanding that sector massively lately. Ads might be less revenue, but ads are almost pure profits so each ad dollar is worth much more to them than each phone dollar, and there is no reason they can't do both. > Analysts project Apple will make $5B off ads this year and $20B per year by 2024 https://thehustle.co/10202021-apple-advertising/ https://thehustle.co/10202021-apple-advertising/
- dmitriid 5y ago
  You can't call something "an ad tech company" if the entire ad revenue is less than 3% of the company's revenue. On the other hand 80% of Google's revenue comes from online ads.

izacus 5y ago

Safari is crippled when it comes to building web apps that aren't beholden to the Apple tax and control. How the fsck is that better than having a single web engine that makes web apps equals among native apps and avoids monopolistic american megacorp from telling you what you're allowed to create? Do you really wish corporate control so much? Do you want to go through Apple review for your websites as well? It's incredible how brand fanboyism clouds your minds - this isn't about engine competition, it's about making free web an equal player to golden cages of app stores.

FridgeSeal 5y ago
> How the fsck is that better than having a single web engine that makes web apps equals among native apps and avoids monopolistic american megacorp from telling you what you're allowed to create? You mean, like Chrome? Developed by the monopolistic American megacorp called Google? Also, if PWA’s and Electron apps are your version of “equal to native” I’m going to have to strongly disagree.
- izacus 5y ago
  Yes, I prefer strong Chrome market share with possibility of competition from Apple, Mozilla and others. I strongly believe Apple is capable of building a better browser even if they don't get to cripple their competition with monopolistic practices. Instead, you're defending Apple monopoly where they ban all competition, stagnate web development and make PWAs and other web-apps a non-viable possibility on their devices. All because... you don't like Chrome? Although you'd still have a full option of using Firefox, Safari or others? Why? Because someone else might DARE to use a product THEY prefer?
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > make PWAs and other web-apps a non-viable possibility on their devices It's such a blatant lie about PWAs. And thank god Safari and Mozilla don't implement dozens of Chrome-only non-standards.
- astromd 5y ago
  Agreed. I want more native apps, not less. I cringe when I see web apps that are slow, don’t take advantage of native API’s, and have a completely different look and feel from the OS. No thanks.
  - mtomweb 5y ago
    There’s nothing inherently special to native about painting to the screen 60 times a second. Web Apps if allowed could provide equivalent (and sometimes much better) experiences than native. But it’s a chicken and egg problem, and it’s mainly Apple holding it back.

Klonoar 5y ago

This shouldn't be a hot take, but moreso a sobering reality. That said I'm glad more people are starting to acknowledge this and bring it up in these discussions. Firefox is not really a counter to Chrome's dominance and WebKit only really still is due to Apple being too big to push around. If I'm stuck choosing between those two evils, I'd sooner take Apple... then try to figure out what a better solution is than just "make Apple change because I don't like Safari".

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

spankalee 5y ago

Are you arguing that Safari is so bad that all of its users would use another browser given a choice? That would seem to be a pretty strong argument _for_ browser choice in my opinion.

petmon 5y ago
Chrome achieved desktop dominance in part by Google paying for it to be bundled with Flash, graphics drivers, and other popular software. It also got banners on google.com, gmail, etc. It's not some pure organic "user choice" growth story and Google would presumably re-use those same tactics given the opportunity.
dimensi0nal 5y ago
most users are idiots and will click the “install chrome” button if google tells them to
dmitriid 5y ago
No. Google will employ a plethora of dark patterns to make users "chose" Chrome. Even now on iOS Google's apps constantly "forget" my choice of browsers and try to push me to use Chrome for external links.