6 ms·

This is very misleading, compare implementation timelines between browsers and you'll see that Safari has implemented many of these things year(s) after chromiu

This is very misleading, compare implementation timelines between browsers and you'll see that Safari has implemented many of these things year(s) after chromium, firefox and even opera. This of course was because they have tried as much as possible to push people to closed source/walled garden apps.

Aloisius 2y ago
I'd argue calling non-standard chrome/firefox/opera features "standards" is misleading.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- burnerthrow008 2y ago
  +1, and I'd argue that calling non-standard chrome features "standards" is what makes it the new IE.
- fenomas 2y ago
  This is plain bad faith. If you know anything about web standards, you already know the W3C process requires candidate implementations and interoperability before a standard reaches its later stages. Other browsers implemented the standards earlier because they participated in that process; calling those implementations "non-standard chrome/etc features" is absurd.
  - Aloisius 2y ago
    Later stages? These features often get implemented at the working draft stage - a stage where major changes can still happen, it has no consensus or even wide review. Google implementing a draft they themselves authored with minimal review doesn't make it standard just because w3c publishes the draft.
    - fenomas 2y ago
      When chrome/firefox/opera all implement a working draft and demonstrate interoperability, they are participating in the standards process. Trying to make it sound like they're doing something non-standard when they do that is simply dishonest.
aalimov_ 2y ago
I still don’t understand what you’re trying to say about Safari. After reading the response (outlining draft vs support dates) to your initial comment it seems like the reality is that your primary complaints dont make much sense. Maybe there are some other features that they were late to start supporting. Seems more like other browsers jumped on new features before they were standardized, and maybe that is at the heart of your original complaint? Safari taking “too long” to support things that dont have a standard?
- spartanatreyu 2y ago
  It *is* misleading because Apple saying that Safari supports a feature doesn't actually mean that the feature in question actually works. Rather than go through every single point (because I don't have all day), I'll just pick one: > IndexedDB API > W3C recommended standard in 2015. Supported in Safari in 2014. No. It didn't work in 2014, it wasn't working until 2016. (see: https://gist.github.com/nolanlawson/08eb857c6b17a30c1b26 https://gist.github.com/nolanlawson/08eb857c6b17a30c1b26) So what? It was recommended in 2015 and was working in 2016, what's the big deal? The big deal is that if you tried to see if you could use it at all, you would get false information: ```js function indexedDBOk() { return "indexedDB" in window; } ``` This returned true on Safari, all of the functions did, and a bunch of them looked like they worked too, until they completely bugged out. So we couldn't use them until it was fixed, *and* because you can't reliably use features until the last two major versions of a browser support those feature and because Safari releases updates locked to OS updates, that means that it wasn't what most would consider "supported" until nearly 2018. That feature that every other browser had working since 2012 wasn't "working" until almost 2018, for Safari, and worse than that 6 year difference, they lied about it working. So you could spend 6 months working on a project, release your product, then get inundated with bad reviews because it didn't work for half the population with iPhones. And instead of improving your project, you have to either try to retrofit the base storage layer of your app, or build a new product based on a different tech. That's assuming you were lucky enough to have the runway to continue and not just have your project fail. They weren't just late, they lied and those lies harmed developers.
  - 2y ago
j16sdiz 2y ago
Safari use open sourced webkit, just like Chrome use open sourced chromium.

Aloisius 2y ago

I'd argue calling non-standard chrome/firefox/opera features "standards" is misleading.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
burnerthrow008 2y ago
+1, and I'd argue that calling non-standard chrome features "standards" is what makes it the new IE.
fenomas 2y ago
This is plain bad faith. If you know anything about web standards, you already know the W3C process requires candidate implementations and interoperability before a standard reaches its later stages. Other browsers implemented the standards earlier because they participated in that process; calling those implementations "non-standard chrome/etc features" is absurd.
- Aloisius 2y ago
  Later stages? These features often get implemented at the working draft stage - a stage where major changes can still happen, it has no consensus or even wide review. Google implementing a draft they themselves authored with minimal review doesn't make it standard just because w3c publishes the draft.
  - fenomas 2y ago
    When chrome/firefox/opera all implement a working draft and demonstrate interoperability, they are participating in the standards process. Trying to make it sound like they're doing something non-standard when they do that is simply dishonest.

aalimov_ 2y ago

I still don’t understand what you’re trying to say about Safari. After reading the response (outlining draft vs support dates) to your initial comment it seems like the reality is that your primary complaints dont make much sense. Maybe there are some other features that they were late to start supporting. Seems more like other browsers jumped on new features before they were standardized, and maybe that is at the heart of your original complaint? Safari taking “too long” to support things that dont have a standard?

spartanatreyu 2y ago
It *is* misleading because Apple saying that Safari supports a feature doesn't actually mean that the feature in question actually works. Rather than go through every single point (because I don't have all day), I'll just pick one: > IndexedDB API > W3C recommended standard in 2015. Supported in Safari in 2014. No. It didn't work in 2014, it wasn't working until 2016. (see: https://gist.github.com/nolanlawson/08eb857c6b17a30c1b26 https://gist.github.com/nolanlawson/08eb857c6b17a30c1b26) So what? It was recommended in 2015 and was working in 2016, what's the big deal? The big deal is that if you tried to see if you could use it at all, you would get false information: ```js function indexedDBOk() { return "indexedDB" in window; } ``` This returned true on Safari, all of the functions did, and a bunch of them looked like they worked too, until they completely bugged out. So we couldn't use them until it was fixed, *and* because you can't reliably use features until the last two major versions of a browser support those feature and because Safari releases updates locked to OS updates, that means that it wasn't what most would consider "supported" until nearly 2018. That feature that every other browser had working since 2012 wasn't "working" until almost 2018, for Safari, and worse than that 6 year difference, they lied about it working. So you could spend 6 months working on a project, release your product, then get inundated with bad reviews because it didn't work for half the population with iPhones. And instead of improving your project, you have to either try to retrofit the base storage layer of your app, or build a new product based on a different tech. That's assuming you were lucky enough to have the runway to continue and not just have your project fail. They weren't just late, they lied and those lies harmed developers.
- 2y ago

j16sdiz 2y ago

Safari use open sourced webkit, just like Chrome use open sourced chromium.