Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#61

Post by scarface74 » Fri, Jan 26, 2018, 2:44 PM UTC

robterrell wrote: post #17

trynumber9 wrote: post #3

for those who don't like to visit Facebook https://hackernoon.com/its-time-to-bringappletojustice-cf12c...

Hard to take the article seriously with this breathless and inaccurate lead: “Take the “BatteryGate” for example. Apple secretly and deliberately reduces the performance of old phones in order to boost new phone sales in the name of extending the battery life. The company only revealed this after being caught red-handed.”

And it couldn't be they reduce performance to keep the phone from shutting down prematurely when you have a bad battery- a known issue that people were having?

If they wanted to encourage people to buy new phones wouldn't it just be easier to not support older phones with new iOS updates? Why base the slow down on battery life instead of just slowing the phone down after two years?

There are much easier ways to encourage people to buy new phones if they wanted to be underhanded than the Rube Goldberg conspiracy that you are suggesting.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#62

Post by candiodari » Fri, Jan 26, 2018, 3:35 PM UTC

tapoxi wrote: post #55

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sort of.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/application-managem...

So it's similar to Google's Android, although with the caveat that it's much easier for companies to have sideloaded company apps.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#63

Post by scarface74 » Fri, Jan 26, 2018, 5:58 PM UTC

touringcomplete wrote: post #44

melloclello wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite sincerely, they should just look into running WebKit server-side. That said, in my experience if Apple has secretly decided they don't like you, they tend to move the goalposts on you in subsequent reviews, so migrating their systems to WebKit may not be time well spent.

Server-side??? Apple requires apps use the Apple WebKit framework only for web content, which runs only on the client-side. The point of Puffin is to run Flash and other desktop crapware websites that don’t work on Mobile Safari (Apple WebKit) properly. Puffin isn’t a native or local web browser; it’s an optimized, virtual, remote browser viewer. If they sell it as a “Citrix for the web,” they might have a shot.

Opera Mini does the same thing as Puffin. Puffin wasn't denied access because it rendered on a server.

Re: Apple rejects Puffin Browser on iOS

#64

Post by hungerstrike » Fri, Jan 26, 2018, 6:00 PM UTC

martin_bech wrote: post #51

hungerstrike wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You said "and therefor visually could/is rendering differently than safari/webkit"

You didn't say anything about security, but there is no security problem either.

The client side wouldn't be evaluating JavaScript outside of Apple's JS engine so there is no security risk whatsoever.