4 ms·

"most would immediately jump" and why is that? because Safari is a subpar experience. You can try to justify it all you want because "Google Bad" (and not that

"most would immediately jump" and why is that? because Safari is a subpar experience. You can try to justify it all you want because "Google Bad" (and not that I disagree at least in spirit) but at the end of the day? Apple is giving users a worse experience as a method to lock them into the App Store and get their 30% cut.

Eggpants 3y ago
Cool story ad-tech bro. Apple not supporting “features” designed to track/steal data isn’t a subpar experience. No one is forced to buy an iPhone, just like no one is forced to buy an Xbox which also takes a 30% cut via its locked down online store. Don’t worry, the M$ CEO will bring back windows phone soon because he now realizes how it can be ad/spyware filled junk like windows 10/11/12 and Solitaire…
- wernercd 3y ago
  Safari, without hesitation doubt or debate, is subpar compared to the alternatives. You can claim "privacy" all you want but at the end of the day Safari is lackluster and neutered to "nudge" people into the Apple Store so Apple can get a 30% cut. Privacy? Riiiiiight. Apple isn't using it's market place to stifle competition and limit choice out of the kindness of their hearts. "M$ CEO" yeah... good thing you have IE 2024 installed on phones without the alternatives available that existed on Windows. Nope... you're stuck like a good slave who's $mart enough to not use M$ and instead you get the joy of being a good donator to Apples bottom line instead of Googles. At the end of the day... nothing in your response changes the fact that Apple limits choices and holds the industry back with Safari which is a shit option that couldn't compete against real options. "XBox" xbox is a gaming console not a phone. It's tied to a TV and not the center of your life. It also has competition in PS, Nintendo and gaming alternatives like Android and iPhone. XBox doesn't have shitty safari on it as a core app to force people into the XBox store. You can also load CDs/DVDs into it purchased outside of it. Can you resell iPhone games? No? didn't think so. tons of reasons why "derp xbox" is a bad comparison. I'm personally okay extending forcing alternative app stores onto XBox... but the scope is different and you know it - no matter that you try to deflect from how shitty Safari is. Your hate of "M$" doesn't make Apple any better.
close04 3y ago
> and why is that? because Safari is a subpar experience. I think that's an oversimplification and mostly wrong. People don't uniformly use one reason for things. Some are too lazy to change a default, are used to one browser, genuinely like it, use it reluctantly because the big company developer is doing its best to hobble the competition (hey, here's a challenge, guess which one I'm talking about), or simply think Google (Chrome) is the internet. Based on usage alone compared to Google Chrome every other browser offers a subpar experience right? I don't agree with that. To take the most obvious example, the fact that Firefox allows me full control over the adblocking experience is the single biggest quality of life improvement over Chrome in using the internet. > You can try to justify it all you want I didn't "justify" anything. What works for me doesn't have to work for you. Two things can be true at once. My personal data and privacy are a priority for me so Google cheating me out of them trumps any fuzzy argument that doesn't hold water even over a two line comment. Because... > Apple is giving users a worse experience Wait, let me try your argument for size. Apple is close to being the biggest phone manufacturer on the planet, as voted by people with their wallets, despite making the most expensive phones. And why is that? Because everyone else offers a subpar experience, right? I voted for Firefox and I'd rather use Safari than Chrome because we have different priorities and definitions of what makes for a good experience. Sibling comment had the right idea. The only fix for this is one that globally addresses via regulation the issues any company's dominant positions poses.
- wernercd 3y ago
  "mostly wrong" except it's not. Safari is under developed, restrictive and... bad. "Based on usage" Chrome is doing something right but that doesn't mean better options don't exist. JS exists and is massively popular but that doesn't make it the "best". Most popular also doesn't mean it's not horrible in its own right - like Safari (and JS, etc). "firefox" You use firefox because it's better... better than what? Safari for one. "let me try your argument for size" Just because people pay doesn't mean it's better and because it's popular doesn't mean it's better. People buy ripped up clothes at a massive markup because it's "better". You keep saying Firefox is better even though it's not "in" or cool. Nothing in your response addresses the fact that SAFARI is subpar amoungst its peers because Apple uses that to push people to the App store. Likewise, they "pair bond" stuff to phones so 2ndary markets can't fix their stuff. Not because safari is better... not because their parts are better... because they get 30% on the store and they get the fees for fixing stuff "properly". Same for their custom connectors (which are on the way out) Your focused on Safari vs Firefox. You're ignoring the forest for the tree. Apple as a whole can be a better product (arguably, the complete package is "better" because it's more consistent and "secure" and all that than say Android) while also having parts that are worse. Safari is a part that's worse (and as incentive, the 30% cut on app store $$$). "different priorities" I'm all for better regulation and some places are headed in the right direction (IE: USBC requirements, sideloading requirements, banning google from monopoly practices on their store, etc)... but that doesn't change the fact that safari is the IE of today - forced on customers, ignored by its creator and clearly worse as you admit in your stalwart defense of Firefox.

Eggpants 3y ago

Cool story ad-tech bro. Apple not supporting “features” designed to track/steal data isn’t a subpar experience. No one is forced to buy an iPhone, just like no one is forced to buy an Xbox which also takes a 30% cut via its locked down online store. Don’t worry, the M$ CEO will bring back windows phone soon because he now realizes how it can be ad/spyware filled junk like windows 10/11/12 and Solitaire…

wernercd 3y ago
Safari, without hesitation doubt or debate, is subpar compared to the alternatives. You can claim "privacy" all you want but at the end of the day Safari is lackluster and neutered to "nudge" people into the Apple Store so Apple can get a 30% cut. Privacy? Riiiiiight. Apple isn't using it's market place to stifle competition and limit choice out of the kindness of their hearts. "M$ CEO" yeah... good thing you have IE 2024 installed on phones without the alternatives available that existed on Windows. Nope... you're stuck like a good slave who's $mart enough to not use M$ and instead you get the joy of being a good donator to Apples bottom line instead of Googles. At the end of the day... nothing in your response changes the fact that Apple limits choices and holds the industry back with Safari which is a shit option that couldn't compete against real options. "XBox" xbox is a gaming console not a phone. It's tied to a TV and not the center of your life. It also has competition in PS, Nintendo and gaming alternatives like Android and iPhone. XBox doesn't have shitty safari on it as a core app to force people into the XBox store. You can also load CDs/DVDs into it purchased outside of it. Can you resell iPhone games? No? didn't think so. tons of reasons why "derp xbox" is a bad comparison. I'm personally okay extending forcing alternative app stores onto XBox... but the scope is different and you know it - no matter that you try to deflect from how shitty Safari is. Your hate of "M$" doesn't make Apple any better.

close04 3y ago

> and why is that? because Safari is a subpar experience. I think that's an oversimplification and mostly wrong. People don't uniformly use one reason for things. Some are too lazy to change a default, are used to one browser, genuinely like it, use it reluctantly because the big company developer is doing its best to hobble the competition (hey, here's a challenge, guess which one I'm talking about), or simply think Google (Chrome) is the internet. Based on usage alone compared to Google Chrome every other browser offers a subpar experience right? I don't agree with that. To take the most obvious example, the fact that Firefox allows me full control over the adblocking experience is the single biggest quality of life improvement over Chrome in using the internet. > You can try to justify it all you want I didn't "justify" anything. What works for me doesn't have to work for you. Two things can be true at once. My personal data and privacy are a priority for me so Google cheating me out of them trumps any fuzzy argument that doesn't hold water even over a two line comment. Because... > Apple is giving users a worse experience Wait, let me try your argument for size. Apple is close to being the biggest phone manufacturer on the planet, as voted by people with their wallets, despite making the most expensive phones. And why is that? Because everyone else offers a subpar experience, right? I voted for Firefox and I'd rather use Safari than Chrome because we have different priorities and definitions of what makes for a good experience. Sibling comment had the right idea. The only fix for this is one that globally addresses via regulation the issues any company's dominant positions poses.

wernercd 3y ago
"mostly wrong" except it's not. Safari is under developed, restrictive and... bad. "Based on usage" Chrome is doing something right but that doesn't mean better options don't exist. JS exists and is massively popular but that doesn't make it the "best". Most popular also doesn't mean it's not horrible in its own right - like Safari (and JS, etc). "firefox" You use firefox because it's better... better than what? Safari for one. "let me try your argument for size" Just because people pay doesn't mean it's better and because it's popular doesn't mean it's better. People buy ripped up clothes at a massive markup because it's "better". You keep saying Firefox is better even though it's not "in" or cool. Nothing in your response addresses the fact that SAFARI is subpar amoungst its peers because Apple uses that to push people to the App store. Likewise, they "pair bond" stuff to phones so 2ndary markets can't fix their stuff. Not because safari is better... not because their parts are better... because they get 30% on the store and they get the fees for fixing stuff "properly". Same for their custom connectors (which are on the way out) Your focused on Safari vs Firefox. You're ignoring the forest for the tree. Apple as a whole can be a better product (arguably, the complete package is "better" because it's more consistent and "secure" and all that than say Android) while also having parts that are worse. Safari is a part that's worse (and as incentive, the 30% cut on app store $$$). "different priorities" I'm all for better regulation and some places are headed in the right direction (IE: USBC requirements, sideloading requirements, banning google from monopoly practices on their store, etc)... but that doesn't change the fact that safari is the IE of today - forced on customers, ignored by its creator and clearly worse as you admit in your stalwart defense of Firefox.