5 ms·

> More recently, I read the argument that it’s so bad that Chrome running it’s Chromium engine ought not be allowed to exist on iPhones and iPads. The subtext

by lapcat 2y ago

> More recently, I read the argument that it’s so bad that Chrome running it’s Chromium engine ought not be allowed to exist on iPhones and iPads. The subtext is John Gruber's post 6 days ago, defending Apple's iOS lockdown: "Imagine — and this takes a lot of imagination — if Google actually shipped a version of Chrome for iOS, only for the EU, that used its own battery-eating rendering engine instead of using the energy-efficient system version of WebKit." https://daringfireball.net/2024/09/ios_continental_drift_fun_gap https://daringfireball.net/2024/09/ios_continental_drift_fun...

stavros 2y ago
I didn't realize John Gruber had reached "cult leader" levels of apologism.
- nordsieck 2y ago
  He's been that way for at least 10 years, from what I can tell.
  - stavros 2y ago
    I guess that explains why it's been about that long that I read something of his.
  - ksec 2y ago
    Things popularised or started by Gruber USB-C Invented by Apple. AirPod selling at cost. Apple invented big.LITTLE core. ( He later retract that ). Probably more than I could remember but those three were some of the worst because his reader would then go and spread the gospel.
    - kirb 2y ago
      The “USB-C invented by Apple” legend was even presented as fact on Wikipedia for a good while. Someone fixed it a few months ago. The source, of course, was Gruber and some “little birdies”. Ironically, the referenced 9to5mac article goes on to look at specs/press releases and conclude that there’s no evidence to his claim, in fact, the credit mostly goes to Intel and TI. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232511036&oldid=1232173013&title=USB-C https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232511036&oldid=1... https://9to5mac.com/2015/03/14/apple-invent-usb-type-c/ https://9to5mac.com/2015/03/14/apple-invent-usb-type-c/
      - nordsieck 2y ago
        Reminds me a bit of the "Citogenisis" XKCD https://xkcd.com/978/ https://xkcd.com/978/
- pjmlp 2y ago
  As to be expected by anyone on Apple platform since the glory old days, instead of the folks that only know Apple ecosystem as a Linux alternative for UNIX laptops.
- forrestthewoods 2y ago
  He's a total bootlicker shill. His takes are often dishonest and ignorant. He's not officially an Apple employee but he's effectively "second party". His access to insiders is predicated on his subservience. He doesn't get an annual WWDC stage interview with Craig Federighi without bending the knee. That said, I still read Daring Fireball every week. His takes may be super biased and wrong, but it's still useful to read things from that perspective.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    People talking themselves into violently agreeing that yes, being able to run Game Boy emulators and Firefox on their iPhones is unequivocally bad is something to behold and shows how far in space and time the RDF really reaches.
- akmarinov 2y ago
  He has a huge hard on for hating on the EU for daring to regulate Apple. It’s been endless hit pieces about how they suck at innovation and how having Apple Intelligence is better than having Fortnite and how users having the option to install what they want on their device is the worst thing to ever happen. Hypocritically being silent when China forces Apple to adopt RCS and has countless regulations on what they can do. It’s almost as if he’s trying to push Apple’s agenda of why they shouldn’t be regulated anywhere. A more cynical person might even consider that he’s compensated to do so. But then you look at his past pieces of remote work being the devil, even though he’s worked like that his whole life and the simplest explanation of him being on out of touch person seems to be the right one.
  - throw0101c 2y ago
    > Hypocritically being silent when China forces Apple to adopt RCS and has countless regulations on what they can do. He recognizes China forcing Apple's hand (not the EU) when it comes to RCS, and since China is a large market, and Apple is mostly/generally a hardware company, they want to sell hardware there: * https://daringfireball.net/2024/02/eu_rcs_imessage https://daringfireball.net/2024/02/eu_rcs_imessage Gruber is not a fan of RCS because it lacks E2E encryption: * https://daringfireball.net/2024/07/att_data_breach_rcs_ios https://daringfireball.net/2024/07/att_data_breach_rcs_ios When I read that post, I didn't necessarily disagree with Gruber on the encryption front, I just think having a better base for 'cross-platform' message that didn't involve third-party software (Signal, WhatsApp (and having to use their infra)) was still worth it—even if unencrypted. Gruber wants the features of RCS but also encryption: > Ihnatko is right, but only if you believe that carrier-based messaging should remain the baseline. I do not. And it’s also a U.S.-centric viewpoint. In most countries around the world, platforms like WhatsApp, Line, and Facebook Messenger serve that role, as the baseline “everyone has it” messaging platform — and those countries are better for it. I prefer iMessage, personally, for multiple reasons, but iMessage is fundamentally limited from serving that “everyone has it” baseline role by Apple’s decision not to ship an Android client. Eddy Cue doesn’t lose many arguments but he lost that one. All of the effort spent pushing Apple to support RCS would have been better spent pushing Apple to ship iMessage for Android. And without a supported iMessage client for Android, that role ought to go to WhatsApp, not RCS. WhatsApp is free, secure, and works equally well on all phones. > Meta knows this, and clearly smells the opportunity. Does Apple? * Ibid Google's E2E RCS is a proprietary extension, and I'm not sure how telcos can implement E2E given things like CALEA in the US, so E2E may be stuck in the realm of the non-telco (unlike SMS and RCS, which are telco-run).
ajross 2y ago
Yeah, there's lots of half-fact nonsense going around in this space. But really that's the real takeaway here: the reason that "everyone knows" something that was false[1], because no one actually cares about the facts. Modern laptops do extremely well with battery life, Macbooks best among them, and frankly no one is away from a charger for that kind of period in the modern world. You know the thing will always have power, so you never bother to notice or measure what might affect it. But you still want to argue anyway, if for no better reason than justifying the $3k you dropped on the device, so... "Chrome hurts battery life!" becomes a shibboleth denoting your membership in the right subculture. It doesn't have to be true to do its job. [1] And, yes, there is a direct analogy to be made here about the current US political debate about immigration. I won't elaborate but I'm sure people see it.
- lxgr 2y ago
  Half-fact is being too generous, in my view. Remember “Chrome is bad”? (As proven by the empirical method of “I deleted a bunch of Google named things and now not only does my laptop run cooler, my laundry uses less water as well!”)
- wmf 2y ago
  What if—I realize this is crazy but hear me out—Chrome actually consumed more power at some point in the past? Why would Google claim that they fixed Chrome if it was never broken?
  - ajross 2y ago
    Well... did it? Again there was a hypothesis, and a measurement that disproved it. It's not very good science to say "well, the hypothesis may still have been right on this older system that wasn't measured". What you're applying is essentially conspiracy logic: you can't validate an incorrect statement by pretending that it might have been true "at some point in the past".

by lapcat 2y ago

stavros 2y ago

I didn't realize John Gruber had reached "cult leader" levels of apologism.

nordsieck 2y ago
He's been that way for at least 10 years, from what I can tell.
- stavros 2y ago
  I guess that explains why it's been about that long that I read something of his.
- ksec 2y ago
  Things popularised or started by Gruber USB-C Invented by Apple. AirPod selling at cost. Apple invented big.LITTLE core. ( He later retract that ). Probably more than I could remember but those three were some of the worst because his reader would then go and spread the gospel.
  - kirb 2y ago
    The “USB-C invented by Apple” legend was even presented as fact on Wikipedia for a good while. Someone fixed it a few months ago. The source, of course, was Gruber and some “little birdies”. Ironically, the referenced 9to5mac article goes on to look at specs/press releases and conclude that there’s no evidence to his claim, in fact, the credit mostly goes to Intel and TI. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232511036&oldid=1232173013&title=USB-C https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232511036&oldid=1... https://9to5mac.com/2015/03/14/apple-invent-usb-type-c/ https://9to5mac.com/2015/03/14/apple-invent-usb-type-c/
    - nordsieck 2y ago
      Reminds me a bit of the "Citogenisis" XKCD https://xkcd.com/978/ https://xkcd.com/978/
pjmlp 2y ago
As to be expected by anyone on Apple platform since the glory old days, instead of the folks that only know Apple ecosystem as a Linux alternative for UNIX laptops.
forrestthewoods 2y ago
He's a total bootlicker shill. His takes are often dishonest and ignorant. He's not officially an Apple employee but he's effectively "second party". His access to insiders is predicated on his subservience. He doesn't get an annual WWDC stage interview with Craig Federighi without bending the knee. That said, I still read Daring Fireball every week. His takes may be super biased and wrong, but it's still useful to read things from that perspective.
- lxgr 2y ago
  People talking themselves into violently agreeing that yes, being able to run Game Boy emulators and Firefox on their iPhones is unequivocally bad is something to behold and shows how far in space and time the RDF really reaches.
akmarinov 2y ago
He has a huge hard on for hating on the EU for daring to regulate Apple. It’s been endless hit pieces about how they suck at innovation and how having Apple Intelligence is better than having Fortnite and how users having the option to install what they want on their device is the worst thing to ever happen. Hypocritically being silent when China forces Apple to adopt RCS and has countless regulations on what they can do. It’s almost as if he’s trying to push Apple’s agenda of why they shouldn’t be regulated anywhere. A more cynical person might even consider that he’s compensated to do so. But then you look at his past pieces of remote work being the devil, even though he’s worked like that his whole life and the simplest explanation of him being on out of touch person seems to be the right one.
- throw0101c 2y ago
  > Hypocritically being silent when China forces Apple to adopt RCS and has countless regulations on what they can do. He recognizes China forcing Apple's hand (not the EU) when it comes to RCS, and since China is a large market, and Apple is mostly/generally a hardware company, they want to sell hardware there: * https://daringfireball.net/2024/02/eu_rcs_imessage https://daringfireball.net/2024/02/eu_rcs_imessage Gruber is not a fan of RCS because it lacks E2E encryption: * https://daringfireball.net/2024/07/att_data_breach_rcs_ios https://daringfireball.net/2024/07/att_data_breach_rcs_ios When I read that post, I didn't necessarily disagree with Gruber on the encryption front, I just think having a better base for 'cross-platform' message that didn't involve third-party software (Signal, WhatsApp (and having to use their infra)) was still worth it—even if unencrypted. Gruber wants the features of RCS but also encryption: > Ihnatko is right, but only if you believe that carrier-based messaging should remain the baseline. I do not. And it’s also a U.S.-centric viewpoint. In most countries around the world, platforms like WhatsApp, Line, and Facebook Messenger serve that role, as the baseline “everyone has it” messaging platform — and those countries are better for it. I prefer iMessage, personally, for multiple reasons, but iMessage is fundamentally limited from serving that “everyone has it” baseline role by Apple’s decision not to ship an Android client. Eddy Cue doesn’t lose many arguments but he lost that one. All of the effort spent pushing Apple to support RCS would have been better spent pushing Apple to ship iMessage for Android. And without a supported iMessage client for Android, that role ought to go to WhatsApp, not RCS. WhatsApp is free, secure, and works equally well on all phones. > Meta knows this, and clearly smells the opportunity. Does Apple? * Ibid Google's E2E RCS is a proprietary extension, and I'm not sure how telcos can implement E2E given things like CALEA in the US, so E2E may be stuck in the realm of the non-telco (unlike SMS and RCS, which are telco-run).

ajross 2y ago

Yeah, there's lots of half-fact nonsense going around in this space. But really that's the real takeaway here: the reason that "everyone knows" something that was false[1], because no one actually cares about the facts. Modern laptops do extremely well with battery life, Macbooks best among them, and frankly no one is away from a charger for that kind of period in the modern world. You know the thing will always have power, so you never bother to notice or measure what might affect it. But you still want to argue anyway, if for no better reason than justifying the $3k you dropped on the device, so... "Chrome hurts battery life!" becomes a shibboleth denoting your membership in the right subculture. It doesn't have to be true to do its job. [1] And, yes, there is a direct analogy to be made here about the current US political debate about immigration. I won't elaborate but I'm sure people see it.

lxgr 2y ago
Half-fact is being too generous, in my view. Remember “Chrome is bad”? (As proven by the empirical method of “I deleted a bunch of Google named things and now not only does my laptop run cooler, my laundry uses less water as well!”)
wmf 2y ago
What if—I realize this is crazy but hear me out—Chrome actually consumed more power at some point in the past? Why would Google claim that they fixed Chrome if it was never broken?
- ajross 2y ago
  Well... did it? Again there was a hypothesis, and a measurement that disproved it. It's not very good science to say "well, the hypothesis may still have been right on this older system that wasn't measured". What you're applying is essentially conspiracy logic: you can't validate an incorrect statement by pretending that it might have been true "at some point in the past".