Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 64 posts

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#51

Post by martin_bech »

hungerstrike wrote: post #46
martin_bech wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isnt that its serverside, its thats a different renderingengine, and therefor visually could/is rendering differently than safari/webkit.

Who cares? There are tons of games in the App Store with custom user interfaces that don’t match anything from Apple.

Thats not the issue, the issue is that cnn or whatever.com might render differently or not at all if viewed in one browser, instead of the other. I dont know the internals of puffin, but security and js attack vector, might be different as well.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#52

Post by Dim0N »

From their Facebook page:

>Not seeing any documentation on https and puffin. If I log in using puffin, can your servers see my password?

Their answer:

>Yes. Puffin server will see your password even for HTTPS. The browser is physically running on the server. The closest analogy to Puffin is RDP (remote desktop).

Am I reading this right? Who in their right mind would use this shit?

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#53

Post by piva00 »

Dim0N wrote: post #52

From their Facebook page: >Not seeing any documentation on https and puffin. If I log in using puffin, can your servers see my password? Their answer: >Yes. Puffin server will see your password even for HTTPS. The browser is physically running on the server. The closest analogy to Puffin is RDP (remote desktop). Am I reading this right? Who in their right mind would use this shit?

This by itself is a good enough reason for Apple to reject the app on grounds of protecting customer privacy.

Liking it or not, of the major tech companies Apple has had a track record of caring about its users' privacy. I remember Tim Cook mentioning that as a basic value for him personally.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#54

Post by ac29 »

pingyen wrote: post #42
joshuaturner wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially when you read their privacy policy, realize they're a Chinese company, and see this: "However, be aware of the possibility of surveillance by intelligence agencies in your home country and our home country."

Puffin is not a Chinese company.

They are based in Taiwan based on their job postings [0]. Whether or not Taiwan is technically part of China is up for debate, but the two are defintiely linked.

[0] https://www.cloudmosa.com/jobs/

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#55

Post by tapoxi »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #45
candiodari wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing I miss most about Microsoft's dominance though : no walled garden. Now apple has a heavy handed walled garden, and Google has a heavy-handed one (chrome/chromeos) and a "light" one, in android. All ... well, suck.

If Microsoft thought they could get away with a walled garden then they would do it in a flash.

They're trying that with Windows 10 S.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#56

Post by pier25 »

kitsunesoba wrote: post #29
pier25 wrote: post #4

I’ve never understood why Apple doesn’t allow other browser engines on iOS. It seems a really ridiculous policy that doesn’t really benefit anyone.

Locking out other engines does a few things: - Ensures a minimum level of battery performance for users browsing the web. Chrome and Firefox for macOS are notoriously hard on your battery and iOS versions would likely have the same issue. - Reduces the number of vulnerabilities present on the platform. - In the event that a bad vuln does crop up, Apple can and will scramble out a WebKit patch to fix it, quickly prote…

1) Users have the choice in other types of apps such as PDF renderers and game engines in matters of performance and battery life. Why not browsers?

2) Game engines are very low level and Apple doesn't have a problem with UE or Unity. Maybe the problem is the iOS sandbox would not work with JS engines?

3) I don't buy the security argument. Google and Mozilla are very diligent with updates, even more so than the Webkit team. It could be argued that the Android approach of unbundling components from the OS is actually better in terms of security.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#57

Post by scarface74 »

Let's look at the statement on its merits.

1. If Apple was so concerned about protecting its search ad revenue from Google, why would it offer a method to install third party content blockers?

2. Puffin offers "extreme virus protection"? Apple banned "virus protection" programs in the App Store a year or two ago because they were all scams.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#58

Post by scarface74 »

FussyZeus wrote: post #33
lern_too_spel wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the Medium post: Puffin releases were rejected citing app review guideline 2.5.6: “Apps that browse the web must use the appropriate WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript.” Our server-side web browser is based on Chromium instead of Apple’s WebKit, therefore, Puffin is rejected. We disputed and escalated but Apple insisted it has jurisdiction over our server-side technology.

Apple has always, since time immemorial, blocked apps that duplicated functionality of the core OS. Yes they make exceptions, but building a "better" web browser for iOS was a bad business choice, regardless of how long or well you skirted the rules. You made your bed. Sleep in it.

Apple has not blocked apps that duplicate core functionality for years.

There are plenty of alternatives apps for:

1. Podcasts

2. music

3. Mail

4. Maps

5. Movie

6. Ebook reading

7. Notes

8. Calendar

9. Messaging

10. Photos

11. Cloud storage.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#59

Post by scarface74 »

fny wrote: post #9
pier25 wrote: post #4

I’ve never understood why Apple doesn’t allow other browser engines on iOS. It seems a really ridiculous policy that doesn’t really benefit anyone.

In the Medium article, the CEO claims the issue stems from them rendering pages on their servers using Chromium rather than WebKit. On the face of it, this seems bizarre but I could definitely see how Apple has an interest in having their User Agent stamped on outgoing requests.

They weren't telling the truth about "superior virus protection" or Apple trying to protect Google ad revenue (Apple has supported third party content blockers in Safari for years), why should we believe they are telling the truth here?

Besides, Opera Mini does the same thing - Server side rendering - and has been on the Apple Store for years.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#60

Post by scarface74 »

Bitcoin_McPonzi wrote: post #35
pier25 wrote: post #4

I’ve never understood why Apple doesn’t allow other browser engines on iOS. It seems a really ridiculous policy that doesn’t really benefit anyone.

But this isn't really another browser engine. They do server side rendering. They're just displaying images on your phone.

As does Opera Mini and its on the App Store. I don't take Puffin's statement at face value.
Post reply on HN