4 ms·

You've got be joking right? ok so lets go through some stats: 1. Safari, performs worst on wpt.fyi by a VERY wide margin 2. In State of CSS last year had the

You've got be joking right? ok so lets go through some stats: 1. Safari, performs worst on wpt.fyi by a VERY wide margin 2. In State of CSS last year had the most number of complaints in relation to bugs. 360 related to Safari, compared to 30 for chrome and 10 for firefox. 3. In the MDN developer Survey developers ranked Safari as the second biggest problem after IE. A browser that's no longer supported. 3. Doesn't really support Web Apps, no user findable method of install (install prompts), no push notifications. 4. Huge numbers of bugs (some of which haven't been fixed in over 7 years) 5. and the devtools are still far behind chromes. 6. and missing all of these: Notifications / Push API No AppStore Support App Store Support for Web Apps Fullscreen API Badging Deep Links Screen Orientation Lock Bluetooth NFC Web Share Target Screen Wakelock Keyboard Lock and Keyboard Layout APIs getInstalledRelatedApps() Background Fetch API Background Sync API WebGPU WebXR Offscreen Canvas Declarative Shadow DOM SQL SIMD WASM Threads Shared Array Buffers AV1/AVIF and VP8/VP9/WebP (Open Media Codecs) Compression Streams Scoped Custom Element Registry ElementInternals

dmitriid 4y ago
> Bluetooth NFC Chrome-only non-standards that both Firefox and Safari are against. > Declarative Shadow DOM Actually proposed by Safari, and stalled for multiple reasons. Moreover, at the start of the whole web component brouhaha Safari wanted to have declarative ways of specifying Web Components, but Chrome said "no, we want to move fast and break things" > WebGPU Proposed by Safari --- Can't be bothered to check others, but off the top of my head, but most of other standards that you just dumped without understanding fall under the following categories: - Chrome-only non-standards with multiple issues that have multiple objections from both Safari and Firefox - Originally proposed by Safari - Have specific technical objections from Safari, and specific reasons for not implementing - (very small minority of specs) No idea why they haven't implemented these yet
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mtomweb 4y ago
  Would you point me to Apple's alternative implementation for access bluetooth / nfc? That's right it doesn't exist. Instead they offer for you to install a native app which once granted bluetooth access can continuously scan and connect to any bluetooth device they want. - Install Prompts 7 Years behind. Many thousands of requests. - Notifications 7 years behind. - Fullscreen API 11 years behind. - Badging 5 years behind. - Deep Links 7 years behind. - Screen Orientation Lock 10 years behind. and what's your excuse going to be the myriad of bugs/stability issues?
  - mtomweb 4y ago
    Again. People who ACTUALLY build apps in Safari are the ones that run into these issues. The only people that attempt to defend it are the ones who don't even build apps for it.
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    > Would you point me to Apple's alternative implementation for access bluetooth / nfc? 1. This is clearly moving goalposts 2. Why would Apple or Firefox provide you with an "alternative implementation for access bluetooth / nfc"? > Instead they offer for you to install No. Instead both they and Mozilla consider these non-standrads harmful and have no intention of implementing them. Or are you going to pretend that Mozilla is in Apple's pocket and does this to enrich Apple? I'm not going to react to yet another mindless list of things that you have little knowledge of.
    - mtomweb 4y ago
      1. If you're going to say you don't like spec because of issues, you should explicitly describe what those issues are OR offer up an alternative spec. Simply not engaging on the spec doesn't present as engineers trying to solve a problem. 2. Neither Apple or Mozilla have described in detail what they think the harms are and why the specs do not cover those harms. But Mozilla is not a gatekeeper and doesn't ban the competition from 50% of mobile devices, so IMO they should be free to decide to do whatever they want even if I disagree with their decision. Apple on the other hand not only doesn't describe the security issues in ANY detail, or outline why the specs don't cover them, it bans the competition from bringing any solution to the problem while at the same time providing a significantly insecure solution on native which is widely used to track and surveil users and for 9 years didn't even require a permission prompt. As for resorting to insults about mindless list of things, have you even attempted to build a web app for iOS? In every single case of the most ardent Safari defenders the answer is no. Unsurprisingly the people that care about the issues in Safari are the ones with the most knowledge that have to work with it daily.
isodev 4y ago
I'm not joking. You can see other replies for details lists of functionalities and capabilities often pioneered and supported by Safari long before other browsers (even Firefox). Some loud voices from the community have very selective memory, and they momentarily forget all the evilness pumped into Chrome regularly. (remember FLoCs? Advertising API? AMP?) All that hate for Safari can be much more productive if channeled as constructive feedback on browsers' bug trackers and governance discussions, improving the ecosystem as a whole (which is what you want if you care for the web). Such conversations can even lead to the natural evolution of standards and implementations towards more refined engine customizations on each platform. Today, iOS allows for open browser choice on iOS, so any technical requirements for the implementation are of no meaningful consequence to iOS users. Everyone can get the look, feel, and service integration with their preferred vendor's ecosystem. Consumers and developers also get a consistent experience throughout the entire operating system - a piece of content will appear the same in any context. Simple, efficient, and reliable. All this will be lost the moment someone decides to prop a "To view this website, download browser XYZ." Imagine you are faced with this in a stressful situation when you need your phone to work the most.
- agust 4y ago
  - isodev 4y ago
    I wish :-). I'm just a dev on the other side of the world.
  - simonh 4y ago
    I happen to largely agree with your position on that, but do not post comments like this here. Seriously, please do not do it.
- mtomweb 4y ago
  iOS does not allow for any meaningful choice, it’s all basically Safari. Says who? Mozilla, Google, Microsoft, EFF, the uk regulator, the Japanese regulator, the EU and most importantly the group of people who actually build web software on iOS.

dmitriid 4y ago

> Bluetooth NFC Chrome-only non-standards that both Firefox and Safari are against. > Declarative Shadow DOM Actually proposed by Safari, and stalled for multiple reasons. Moreover, at the start of the whole web component brouhaha Safari wanted to have declarative ways of specifying Web Components, but Chrome said "no, we want to move fast and break things" > WebGPU Proposed by Safari --- Can't be bothered to check others, but off the top of my head, but most of other standards that you just dumped without understanding fall under the following categories: - Chrome-only non-standards with multiple issues that have multiple objections from both Safari and Firefox - Originally proposed by Safari - Have specific technical objections from Safari, and specific reasons for not implementing - (very small minority of specs) No idea why they haven't implemented these yet

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mtomweb 4y ago
Would you point me to Apple's alternative implementation for access bluetooth / nfc? That's right it doesn't exist. Instead they offer for you to install a native app which once granted bluetooth access can continuously scan and connect to any bluetooth device they want. - Install Prompts 7 Years behind. Many thousands of requests. - Notifications 7 years behind. - Fullscreen API 11 years behind. - Badging 5 years behind. - Deep Links 7 years behind. - Screen Orientation Lock 10 years behind. and what's your excuse going to be the myriad of bugs/stability issues?
- mtomweb 4y ago
  Again. People who ACTUALLY build apps in Safari are the ones that run into these issues. The only people that attempt to defend it are the ones who don't even build apps for it.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > Would you point me to Apple's alternative implementation for access bluetooth / nfc? 1. This is clearly moving goalposts 2. Why would Apple or Firefox provide you with an "alternative implementation for access bluetooth / nfc"? > Instead they offer for you to install No. Instead both they and Mozilla consider these non-standrads harmful and have no intention of implementing them. Or are you going to pretend that Mozilla is in Apple's pocket and does this to enrich Apple? I'm not going to react to yet another mindless list of things that you have little knowledge of.
  - mtomweb 4y ago
    1. If you're going to say you don't like spec because of issues, you should explicitly describe what those issues are OR offer up an alternative spec. Simply not engaging on the spec doesn't present as engineers trying to solve a problem. 2. Neither Apple or Mozilla have described in detail what they think the harms are and why the specs do not cover those harms. But Mozilla is not a gatekeeper and doesn't ban the competition from 50% of mobile devices, so IMO they should be free to decide to do whatever they want even if I disagree with their decision. Apple on the other hand not only doesn't describe the security issues in ANY detail, or outline why the specs don't cover them, it bans the competition from bringing any solution to the problem while at the same time providing a significantly insecure solution on native which is widely used to track and surveil users and for 9 years didn't even require a permission prompt. As for resorting to insults about mindless list of things, have you even attempted to build a web app for iOS? In every single case of the most ardent Safari defenders the answer is no. Unsurprisingly the people that care about the issues in Safari are the ones with the most knowledge that have to work with it daily.

isodev 4y ago

I'm not joking. You can see other replies for details lists of functionalities and capabilities often pioneered and supported by Safari long before other browsers (even Firefox). Some loud voices from the community have very selective memory, and they momentarily forget all the evilness pumped into Chrome regularly. (remember FLoCs? Advertising API? AMP?) All that hate for Safari can be much more productive if channeled as constructive feedback on browsers' bug trackers and governance discussions, improving the ecosystem as a whole (which is what you want if you care for the web). Such conversations can even lead to the natural evolution of standards and implementations towards more refined engine customizations on each platform. Today, iOS allows for open browser choice on iOS, so any technical requirements for the implementation are of no meaningful consequence to iOS users. Everyone can get the look, feel, and service integration with their preferred vendor's ecosystem. Consumers and developers also get a consistent experience throughout the entire operating system - a piece of content will appear the same in any context. Simple, efficient, and reliable. All this will be lost the moment someone decides to prop a "To view this website, download browser XYZ." Imagine you are faced with this in a stressful situation when you need your phone to work the most.

agust 4y ago
- isodev 4y ago
  I wish :-). I'm just a dev on the other side of the world.
- simonh 4y ago
  I happen to largely agree with your position on that, but do not post comments like this here. Seriously, please do not do it.
mtomweb 4y ago
iOS does not allow for any meaningful choice, it’s all basically Safari. Says who? Mozilla, Google, Microsoft, EFF, the uk regulator, the Japanese regulator, the EU and most importantly the group of people who actually build web software on iOS.