3 ms·

Sibling comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31907602 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31907602

ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
That one doesn't really have a substantive response either. Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps? if so, do you think they should be n-class citizens, where n is the same class as native ios apps? if you do not, then I can see why you do not personally want the things that come with it, like your other conversation partner said
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps? Does this have anything to do with anything I said in my thread? No. So, this question is not in good faith, so why should I engage with it? > if so, do you think Do you think that ascribing thoughts and words to your opponent that your opponent never thought or said is a good argument? It doesn't matter what I think or what I don't think when my argument literally began with finding incorrect arguments made in actual bad faith with no research in the "paper" made by OWA. Both you and OP couldn't care less, and you both try to deflect with "do you believe blah blah blah". I could go with a not-so-fine-comb through the document and point out every misrepresentation, incorrect assumption and outright lies. I picked two. What followed is now open for the world to see.
  - ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
    >Does this have anything to do with anything I said in my thread? No. So, this question is not in good faith, so why should I engage with it? You clearly don't understand what "good faith" is, and certainly are not an unbiased judge of it, being 1 of the 2 people involved in the accusation. It means asking because you are legitimately interested in the answer. It does not mean "I, as self-appointed judge of this discussion, unilaterally deem your question irrelevant". Indeed, if the question and answer are actually irrelevant, you can trust the smart posters here to be the judge of that, so you need not fear answering truthfully and candidly. In any case, _I_ am legitimately interested in the answer, but even without my admission, you are supposed to assume good faith on this forum (HN), versus your current, combative, antagonistic, almost litigious (OBJECTION, RELEVANCE! SUSTAINED, I RULE IN MY OWN FAVOR!) attitude towards your fellow posters.
  - mtomweb 4y ago
    1. Safari is full of bugs https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20Bringing%20Competition%20to%20Walled%20Gardens%20-%20v1.2.pdf https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20Bringing%20Com... (Section 5.6 and 5.8) 2. Safari is missing core functionality and significantly lags behind Firefox and Chrome / Edge. Sections 5.3 5.4 If you want to focus on specific functionality, then the ability to install a web app (Section 5.4.3.1 and Section 5.4.5 go into that in detail). For evidence that Safari is significantly behind Firefox and Chrome/Edge see 5.4.1.

That one doesn't really have a substantive response either. Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps? if so, do you think they should be n-class citizens, where n is the same class as native ios apps? if you do not, then I can see why you do not personally want the things that come with it, like your other conversation partner said

dmitriid 4y ago
> Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps? Does this have anything to do with anything I said in my thread? No. So, this question is not in good faith, so why should I engage with it? > if so, do you think Do you think that ascribing thoughts and words to your opponent that your opponent never thought or said is a good argument? It doesn't matter what I think or what I don't think when my argument literally began with finding incorrect arguments made in actual bad faith with no research in the "paper" made by OWA. Both you and OP couldn't care less, and you both try to deflect with "do you believe blah blah blah". I could go with a not-so-fine-comb through the document and point out every misrepresentation, incorrect assumption and outright lies. I picked two. What followed is now open for the world to see.
- ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
  >Does this have anything to do with anything I said in my thread? No. So, this question is not in good faith, so why should I engage with it? You clearly don't understand what "good faith" is, and certainly are not an unbiased judge of it, being 1 of the 2 people involved in the accusation. It means asking because you are legitimately interested in the answer. It does not mean "I, as self-appointed judge of this discussion, unilaterally deem your question irrelevant". Indeed, if the question and answer are actually irrelevant, you can trust the smart posters here to be the judge of that, so you need not fear answering truthfully and candidly. In any case, _I_ am legitimately interested in the answer, but even without my admission, you are supposed to assume good faith on this forum (HN), versus your current, combative, antagonistic, almost litigious (OBJECTION, RELEVANCE! SUSTAINED, I RULE IN MY OWN FAVOR!) attitude towards your fellow posters.
- mtomweb 4y ago
  1. Safari is full of bugs https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20Bringing%20Competition%20to%20Walled%20Gardens%20-%20v1.2.pdf https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20Bringing%20Com... (Section 5.6 and 5.8) 2. Safari is missing core functionality and significantly lags behind Firefox and Chrome / Edge. Sections 5.3 5.4 If you want to focus on specific functionality, then the ability to install a web app (Section 5.4.3.1 and Section 5.4.5 go into that in detail). For evidence that Safari is significantly behind Firefox and Chrome/Edge see 5.4.1.