4 ms·

MacBook has 100wh battery, iPhone has 12wh. Chrome is notoriously inefficient, easy 2x more battery drain over Safari.

by graftak 3y ago

albert180 3y ago
[flagged]
mpweiher 3y ago
Running an inefficient app is the user's choice, not Apple's.
- Terretta 3y ago
  There's no legitimate choice without education. The consumer would switch their PWA default engine in one of the half dozen "you have to agree to continue" buttons when Edge and Chrome install themselves and demand every privacy and security toggle be turned off (as Microsoft Teams demands when you try to run it in Safari*), and then all PWAs would be insecure and monitored by the adtech engines. This weird idea to force Apple to have OS viewports use a foreign engine would not be 99.9% of users' real choice at all, just like the users who installed Avast anti-virus didn't choose to have all their browsing sold to adtech, or the users who chose "Private Browsing" in Chrome didn't choose to have Google recording that activity to the user's profile. * Note: Because Teams is actually "just" a skin on many different services and the Apple+CloudFlare private browsing confuse the coupling.
  - seszett 3y ago
    > The consumer would switch their PWA default engine in one of the half dozen "you have to agree to continue" buttons when Edge and Chrome install themselves and demand every privacy and security toggle be turned off (as Microsoft Teams demands when you try to run it in Safari), and then all PWAs would be insecure and monitored by the adtech engines.* I suggest Apple takes inspiration from Android then, since that doesn't happen on Android. Maybe Android's security model is better.
  - bevekspldnw 3y ago
    This is solely about Apple getting a cut of App Store sales. They’ve been in cahoots with Google for years, as evidenced by the recent DoJ monopoly trial - “privacy” and “security” are marketing terms at Apple. Nothing more.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    > This weird idea to force Apple to have OS viewports use a foreign engine That is not what people are saying. Nobody cares that MacOS renders half its content using WebKit on Mac. Same goes for iOS - people do care that they can't use a PWA in their browser of choice. It's anticompetitive blockage that will be inevitably brought-up when the compliance deadline rolls around. > would not be 99.9% of users' real choice at all No reasonable person can claim that. Alternative browser engines aren't even allowed yet, you don't know that. > just like the users who installed Avast anti-virus didn't choose to have all their browsing sold to adtech, or the users who chose "Private Browsing" in Chrome didn't choose to have Google recording that activity to the user's profile. Or the people who left notifications on and got their iPhone information slurped up by the NSA. Pobody's nerfect, right? Get the strawmen out of here before they start a fire.
    - Terretta 3y ago
      > Nobody cares that MacOS renders half its content using WebKit on Mac. Same goes for iOS - people do care that they can't use a PWA in their browser of choice. What does it mean to "use a PWA in their browser"? That's the opposite of what the PWA experience is supposed to be. You're not supposed to be aware you're in a browser -- and "people" defined as normals, not HN users, do are not. The "reasonability" of my view about what consumers care about is informed by building both enterprise and mass market web, and later app, products since the 90s, helping countless clients study their users' actual preferences in depth. Our, and well known, studies show the "man on the street" has zero comprehension of what a browser engine is much less how a PWA or even Electron works. In general, their priority is everything just working and tech being out of their way. HN is among the least representative forums for recognizing "normal" user interests I've seen, almost to the point of parody. > Get the strawmen out of here Avast and Google debacles are first party software provider exploitations of user trust, not targeted surveillance or dragnet by a government. Lockdown mode shows the length to which Apple takes this class of problem seriously as well.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        > What does it mean to "use a PWA in their browser"? That's the opposite of what the PWA experience is supposed to be. What does it mean to use a PWA without a browser? It's impossible to operate without an HTML engine and accompanying logic. Even playing by your logic, there should be an equal and fair opportunity for third-parties to make the same experience. That's what the DMA and DSA are all about, when you boil them down. If Apple has a button that lets you open PWAs in their engine, others should get the same opportunity. Web apps are portable, this is the design of the web as a whole. Apple can make it a problem in their browser or a problem in their OS, but it remains a problem all the same. > Our, and well known, studies show the "man on the street" has zero comprehension of what a browser engine is much less how a PWA or even Electron works. > HN is among the least representative forums for recognizing "normal" user interests I've seen, almost to the point of parody. Then why bring up the users at all? Let's discuss these solutions on their technical merit, since we're on a technical forum. Apple's defense is paper-thin here, and your "runtime" rationalization doesn't work for any other platform, let alone the open web. > Avast and Google debacles are first party software provider exploitations of user trust So... your defense of Apple's failure is that they provide Lockdown mode? Shit, I might as well cite GDPR and Google Takeout if I had any interest in defending the sycophants. Apple's debacles are an example of first-party exploitation of trust. If their definition of local security and individual privacy is subject to third-party demands, then they are fundamentally compromised. You're utterly detached if you think Apple's got a humanitarian heart for the Chinese citizens they help implicate. Lockdown Mode won't save them.

MacBook has 100wh battery, iPhone has 12wh. Chrome is notoriously inefficient, easy 2x more battery drain over Safari.

albert180 3y ago

[flagged]

mpweiher 3y ago

Running an inefficient app is the user's choice, not Apple's.

Terretta 3y ago
There's no legitimate choice without education. The consumer would switch their PWA default engine in one of the half dozen "you have to agree to continue" buttons when Edge and Chrome install themselves and demand every privacy and security toggle be turned off (as Microsoft Teams demands when you try to run it in Safari*), and then all PWAs would be insecure and monitored by the adtech engines. This weird idea to force Apple to have OS viewports use a foreign engine would not be 99.9% of users' real choice at all, just like the users who installed Avast anti-virus didn't choose to have all their browsing sold to adtech, or the users who chose "Private Browsing" in Chrome didn't choose to have Google recording that activity to the user's profile. * Note: Because Teams is actually "just" a skin on many different services and the Apple+CloudFlare private browsing confuse the coupling.
- seszett 3y ago
  > The consumer would switch their PWA default engine in one of the half dozen "you have to agree to continue" buttons when Edge and Chrome install themselves and demand every privacy and security toggle be turned off (as Microsoft Teams demands when you try to run it in Safari), and then all PWAs would be insecure and monitored by the adtech engines.* I suggest Apple takes inspiration from Android then, since that doesn't happen on Android. Maybe Android's security model is better.
- bevekspldnw 3y ago
  This is solely about Apple getting a cut of App Store sales. They’ve been in cahoots with Google for years, as evidenced by the recent DoJ monopoly trial - “privacy” and “security” are marketing terms at Apple. Nothing more.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > This weird idea to force Apple to have OS viewports use a foreign engine That is not what people are saying. Nobody cares that MacOS renders half its content using WebKit on Mac. Same goes for iOS - people do care that they can't use a PWA in their browser of choice. It's anticompetitive blockage that will be inevitably brought-up when the compliance deadline rolls around. > would not be 99.9% of users' real choice at all No reasonable person can claim that. Alternative browser engines aren't even allowed yet, you don't know that. > just like the users who installed Avast anti-virus didn't choose to have all their browsing sold to adtech, or the users who chose "Private Browsing" in Chrome didn't choose to have Google recording that activity to the user's profile. Or the people who left notifications on and got their iPhone information slurped up by the NSA. Pobody's nerfect, right? Get the strawmen out of here before they start a fire.
  - Terretta 3y ago
    > Nobody cares that MacOS renders half its content using WebKit on Mac. Same goes for iOS - people do care that they can't use a PWA in their browser of choice. What does it mean to "use a PWA in their browser"? That's the opposite of what the PWA experience is supposed to be. You're not supposed to be aware you're in a browser -- and "people" defined as normals, not HN users, do are not. The "reasonability" of my view about what consumers care about is informed by building both enterprise and mass market web, and later app, products since the 90s, helping countless clients study their users' actual preferences in depth. Our, and well known, studies show the "man on the street" has zero comprehension of what a browser engine is much less how a PWA or even Electron works. In general, their priority is everything just working and tech being out of their way. HN is among the least representative forums for recognizing "normal" user interests I've seen, almost to the point of parody. > Get the strawmen out of here Avast and Google debacles are first party software provider exploitations of user trust, not targeted surveillance or dragnet by a government. Lockdown mode shows the length to which Apple takes this class of problem seriously as well.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      > What does it mean to "use a PWA in their browser"? That's the opposite of what the PWA experience is supposed to be. What does it mean to use a PWA without a browser? It's impossible to operate without an HTML engine and accompanying logic. Even playing by your logic, there should be an equal and fair opportunity for third-parties to make the same experience. That's what the DMA and DSA are all about, when you boil them down. If Apple has a button that lets you open PWAs in their engine, others should get the same opportunity. Web apps are portable, this is the design of the web as a whole. Apple can make it a problem in their browser or a problem in their OS, but it remains a problem all the same. > Our, and well known, studies show the "man on the street" has zero comprehension of what a browser engine is much less how a PWA or even Electron works. > HN is among the least representative forums for recognizing "normal" user interests I've seen, almost to the point of parody. Then why bring up the users at all? Let's discuss these solutions on their technical merit, since we're on a technical forum. Apple's defense is paper-thin here, and your "runtime" rationalization doesn't work for any other platform, let alone the open web. > Avast and Google debacles are first party software provider exploitations of user trust So... your defense of Apple's failure is that they provide Lockdown mode? Shit, I might as well cite GDPR and Google Takeout if I had any interest in defending the sycophants. Apple's debacles are an example of first-party exploitation of trust. If their definition of local security and individual privacy is subject to third-party demands, then they are fundamentally compromised. You're utterly detached if you think Apple's got a humanitarian heart for the Chinese citizens they help implicate. Lockdown Mode won't save them.