4 ms·

Good, very long overdue. Blast them for forbidding competing browsers on iOS.

by shmerl 3y ago

kevingadd 3y ago
I really feel like the browser ban is one of their biggest unforced errors here. They could have utilized their discretion to ban Chrome[1] while allowing alternative browser engines like Firefox or classic Opera onto their store, which would have helped Mozilla compete against Google and slowed down their eventual takeover of the entire internet. Instead they decided to go it alone, making iOS a Safari-only territory, which helped establish Chrome's dominance due to their shared technical foundations and common nonstandard features. 1: There's a bunch of stuff the commercial Google Chrome does that they could easily ban through store policy. They could also just arbitrarily refuse to approve it.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  > which would have helped Mozilla compete against Google and slowed down their eventual takeover of the entire internet Why would one assume this when Chrome took over on non iOS and ipadOS machines? > Instead they decided to go it alone, making iOS a Safari-only territory, which helped establish Chrome's dominance due to their shared technical foundations and common nonstandard features. Logically, the fact that the only place Chrome did not dominate is iOS and ipadOS means making those Safari only is the only thing that stopped Chrome’s dominance.
  - kevingadd 3y ago
    The only browsers on iOS are webkit browsers, and when Chrome was new it was also webkit. Because of this, the ideal target for a web developer became webkit, including webkit-only features and workarounds for webkit bugs. This automatically pushed Firefox, Opera, Edge, IE out of the picture, because we basically had an emerging browser monoculture already. If the people who were already using Firefox could have kept using it on their new phone or tablet as well, syncing bookmarks and history, that would have probably slowed its defeat a little bit and perhaps slowed Chrome's growth. We eventually got a Firefox-branded wrapper around Safari's webviews but Apple's architecture guarantees that those webview frames will always be inferior to Safari. Safari being available on Windows might've helped too, but I understand why Apple chose not to do that.
    - philwelch 3y ago
      Safari was available on Windows.
    - windowsrookie 3y ago
      I disagree with this. When chrome was released the ideal target for a web developer was Internet explorer, because everyone who wasn't a technology enthusiast just used the built-in browser. Many business related websites still required internet explorer to function properly years after IE was discontinued. Additionally, this video shows FireFox's marketshare was still increasing, even two years after chrome was first released. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/internet-browser-market-share/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/internet-browser-market-sha... The reason google Chrome succeeded is because it was a better browser. It syncs all your favorites, passwords, and history with the google account you already have. It works on every platform. And Firefox had several years where it just wasn't very good. I was a Firefox user but around the time they killed legacy extensions I bailed. I remember helping many family members when their Internet Explorer was filled with spyware toolbars taking up 50% of their screen. I would just install chrome and log them into their gmail account and never have to fix it again. As others have mentioned, Safari was available on windows for many years.
- stjohnswarts 3y ago
  If they would have allowed alternate web engines and excluded google then google could have easily sued the crap out of them. As it stands they can viably say it's for OS integrity and security by forcing everyone to use the say "guts"
dataking 3y ago
> Blast them for forbidding competing browsers on iOS. They allow competing browsers but they have to use the OS-provided JavaScript engine. I guess one could make an argument that allowing third-party engines would encourage innovation in the browser space but at the same time, there is a strong security argument for very narrowly limiting the JIT-code execution entitlement.
- stjohnswarts 3y ago
  Not just javascript but also the rendering engine
- m463 3y ago
  can you block any site you want (without restrictions), or modify we pages on the fly? I don't think you can.
- ssbash 3y ago
  Orion is a browser on iOS that added support for Firefox and Chrome WebExtensions. It still uses WebKit. Android Firefox only added support for WebExtensions recently, like within the last few months. Safari on iOS has had support since 2020. I would argue that Firefox and Chrome are not being restricted in any ways that harm users. Firefox likely wouldn’t have added support for web extensions even with access to Gecko. Chrome wouldn’t ever add support for extensions since Google is actively trying to fight against ad blockers. The only outcome of opening up iOS to other browser engines, would be an increase in Chromium marketshare.
- shmerl 3y ago
  > They allow competing browsers but they have to use the OS-provided JavaScript engine Which is in essence forbidding competing browsers. If if quacks like a duck and etc. I.e. if it's using Apple's JavaScript engine, it's Apple's browser.

Good, very long overdue. Blast them for forbidding competing browsers on iOS.

by shmerl 3y ago

Good, very long overdue. Blast them for forbidding competing browsers on iOS.

I really feel like the browser ban is one of their biggest unforced errors here. They could have utilized their discretion to ban Chrome[1] while allowing alternative browser engines like Firefox or classic Opera onto their store, which would have helped Mozilla compete against Google and slowed down their eventual takeover of the entire internet. Instead they decided to go it alone, making iOS a Safari-only territory, which helped establish Chrome's dominance due to their shared technical foundations and common nonstandard features. 1: There's a bunch of stuff the commercial Google Chrome does that they could easily ban through store policy. They could also just arbitrarily refuse to approve it.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
> which would have helped Mozilla compete against Google and slowed down their eventual takeover of the entire internet Why would one assume this when Chrome took over on non iOS and ipadOS machines? > Instead they decided to go it alone, making iOS a Safari-only territory, which helped establish Chrome's dominance due to their shared technical foundations and common nonstandard features. Logically, the fact that the only place Chrome did not dominate is iOS and ipadOS means making those Safari only is the only thing that stopped Chrome’s dominance.
- kevingadd 3y ago
  The only browsers on iOS are webkit browsers, and when Chrome was new it was also webkit. Because of this, the ideal target for a web developer became webkit, including webkit-only features and workarounds for webkit bugs. This automatically pushed Firefox, Opera, Edge, IE out of the picture, because we basically had an emerging browser monoculture already. If the people who were already using Firefox could have kept using it on their new phone or tablet as well, syncing bookmarks and history, that would have probably slowed its defeat a little bit and perhaps slowed Chrome's growth. We eventually got a Firefox-branded wrapper around Safari's webviews but Apple's architecture guarantees that those webview frames will always be inferior to Safari. Safari being available on Windows might've helped too, but I understand why Apple chose not to do that.
  - philwelch 3y ago
    Safari was available on Windows.
  - windowsrookie 3y ago
    I disagree with this. When chrome was released the ideal target for a web developer was Internet explorer, because everyone who wasn't a technology enthusiast just used the built-in browser. Many business related websites still required internet explorer to function properly years after IE was discontinued. Additionally, this video shows FireFox's marketshare was still increasing, even two years after chrome was first released. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/internet-browser-market-share/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/internet-browser-market-sha... The reason google Chrome succeeded is because it was a better browser. It syncs all your favorites, passwords, and history with the google account you already have. It works on every platform. And Firefox had several years where it just wasn't very good. I was a Firefox user but around the time they killed legacy extensions I bailed. I remember helping many family members when their Internet Explorer was filled with spyware toolbars taking up 50% of their screen. I would just install chrome and log them into their gmail account and never have to fix it again. As others have mentioned, Safari was available on windows for many years.
stjohnswarts 3y ago
If they would have allowed alternate web engines and excluded google then google could have easily sued the crap out of them. As it stands they can viably say it's for OS integrity and security by forcing everyone to use the say "guts"

dataking 3y ago

> Blast them for forbidding competing browsers on iOS. They allow competing browsers but they have to use the OS-provided JavaScript engine. I guess one could make an argument that allowing third-party engines would encourage innovation in the browser space but at the same time, there is a strong security argument for very narrowly limiting the JIT-code execution entitlement.

stjohnswarts 3y ago
Not just javascript but also the rendering engine
m463 3y ago
can you block any site you want (without restrictions), or modify we pages on the fly? I don't think you can.
ssbash 3y ago
Orion is a browser on iOS that added support for Firefox and Chrome WebExtensions. It still uses WebKit. Android Firefox only added support for WebExtensions recently, like within the last few months. Safari on iOS has had support since 2020. I would argue that Firefox and Chrome are not being restricted in any ways that harm users. Firefox likely wouldn’t have added support for web extensions even with access to Gecko. Chrome wouldn’t ever add support for extensions since Google is actively trying to fight against ad blockers. The only outcome of opening up iOS to other browser engines, would be an increase in Chromium marketshare.
shmerl 3y ago
> They allow competing browsers but they have to use the OS-provided JavaScript engine Which is in essence forbidding competing browsers. If if quacks like a duck and etc. I.e. if it's using Apple's JavaScript engine, it's Apple's browser.