5 ms·

If Firefox had 40+% of the browser market share, I would agree. But I think a chrome monopoly is the worst thing that could happen to the web. iOS safari is bas

If Firefox had 40+% of the browser market share, I would agree. But I think a chrome monopoly is the worst thing that could happen to the web. iOS safari is basically the only thing standing between us and a chrome monopoly. Let’s break that monopoly on all other platforms and then talk about opening iOS up.

izacus 5y ago
Can you explain why? Chrome has much better support for web standards, wider API capability and allows you to build better web applications than Safari. How is that bad for the web? Especially when your alternative comes from a company that has vested interest to make web a bad option to funnel profits into their monopolistic app store? Remember, Firefox is not allowed to exist on Apple devices either.
- bentlegen 5y ago
  Google automatically signs you into Chrome (e.g. Chrome profiles) if you sign into any of Google’s web properties, including Youtube, GSuite, etc. [1] You don’t need tracking pixels for your ad products when you know who every user is operating the browser. This conflict of interest - browser privacy vs. Google’s ad business - is the single reason I now use Firefox [on desktop]. [1] https://www.alphr.com/chrome-auto-sign-in/ https://www.alphr.com/chrome-auto-sign-in/
  - spankalee 5y ago
    It would be great if you could use Firefox on iOS then, wouldn't it?
    - bentlegen 5y ago
      Sure, it would, but I was addressing the issue of "can you explain why [a Chrome monopoly would be bad]".
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > Chrome has much better support for web standards, wider API capability Many of those "standards" and APIs are emphatically not standards despite what Chrome's vast propaganda machine tells you.
smoldesu 5y ago
If Apple wants to make a case for a natural browser duopoly, they should do so by investing some of their $200 billion dollars in cash to make a competitive browser experience, not by forcing their users into a position where they can't choose.
koshergweilo 5y ago
Couldn't you say the same for IE7?

izacus 5y ago

Can you explain why? Chrome has much better support for web standards, wider API capability and allows you to build better web applications than Safari. How is that bad for the web? Especially when your alternative comes from a company that has vested interest to make web a bad option to funnel profits into their monopolistic app store? Remember, Firefox is not allowed to exist on Apple devices either.

bentlegen 5y ago
Google automatically signs you into Chrome (e.g. Chrome profiles) if you sign into any of Google’s web properties, including Youtube, GSuite, etc. [1] You don’t need tracking pixels for your ad products when you know who every user is operating the browser. This conflict of interest - browser privacy vs. Google’s ad business - is the single reason I now use Firefox [on desktop]. [1] https://www.alphr.com/chrome-auto-sign-in/ https://www.alphr.com/chrome-auto-sign-in/
- spankalee 5y ago
  It would be great if you could use Firefox on iOS then, wouldn't it?
  - bentlegen 5y ago
    Sure, it would, but I was addressing the issue of "can you explain why [a Chrome monopoly would be bad]".
dmitriid 5y ago
> Chrome has much better support for web standards, wider API capability Many of those "standards" and APIs are emphatically not standards despite what Chrome's vast propaganda machine tells you.

smoldesu 5y ago

If Apple wants to make a case for a natural browser duopoly, they should do so by investing some of their $200 billion dollars in cash to make a competitive browser experience, not by forcing their users into a position where they can't choose.

koshergweilo 5y ago

Couldn't you say the same for IE7?