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

Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 593 posts

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#61

Post by spideymans »

mtomweb wrote: post #45
MBCook wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be 60% on MacOS but that’s a very tiny market. Overall Chrome is quite dominant. Numbers I found say on desktop Chrome is at 70%. Include the 7.75% for Edge (because it’s basically Chrome) and that’s almost 80%. FF at least exists and is similar to Safari. On mobile it’s at 65%. Safari is the only other browser above 5%. Chrome is dangerously close to total monopoly.

MacOS is the only market Safari actually competes in and has the same advantage by being the default. I would actually expect the most likely outcome is Apple would fight hard to build a better browser to stem any losses to other browsers. They'll have at least 2 years to do it, so they can catch up in that time with enough investment.

Recall how Google gimped Windows Phone support on the web, presumably to advantage their own platform and web services. My fear is that they'd do the same to Safari on iOS. They could break support on iOS, to force users to Chrome, where they can better track and monetize their users.

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#62

Post by mvid »

Narretz wrote: post #60
MBCook wrote: post #14

I’m going to ignore the security angle and post my big fear. Chrome has dominance similar to IE at the height of its popularity. Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. (Note: not why they’re doing it, just a side effect) People keep arguing Apple is being anti-competitive. But no one seems to recon with the possible consequences of what they’re asking for. And I fea…

On the other hand, actual browser choice for iOS will force Apple into improving Safari at a faster rate. This is good competition.

If quality of competition truly mattered, then IE wouldn't have had to be stopped with legislation

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#63

Post by toyg »

thayne wrote: post #22
MBCook wrote: post #14

I’m going to ignore the security angle and post my big fear. Chrome has dominance similar to IE at the height of its popularity. Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. (Note: not why they’re doing it, just a side effect) People keep arguing Apple is being anti-competitive. But no one seems to recon with the possible consequences of what they’re asking for. And I fea…

Well, if chrome did have 90%+ market share maybe we would finally see some antitrust regulation against Google's monopoly (ideally splitting chrome off from Google). Although there is no guarantee that would happen.

This. If Chrome reaches certifiable monopoly levels, it becomes easier to use anti-monopolistic instruments to force them to unbundle browser-making from other activities - which is really how things should be.

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#64

Post by simiones »

spideymans wrote: post #54
MBCook wrote: post #14

I’m going to ignore the security angle and post my big fear. Chrome has dominance similar to IE at the height of its popularity. Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. (Note: not why they’re doing it, just a side effect) People keep arguing Apple is being anti-competitive. But no one seems to recon with the possible consequences of what they’re asking for. And I fea…

Often times idealic and well-intentioned measure have negative consequences. Just look at how the EU's cookie banners have eroded the UX of the open web as an example.

It's not the "EU's cookie banners", it is the advertisers' cookie banners. The EU doesn't mandate cookie banners at all. It's the website's choice whether to pester users about having them accept targetting cookies.

The most natural implementation of the EU directive would be to have a place in User Settings where users can go and enable targeted advertising if they want it.

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#65

Post by idle_zealot »

nemothekid wrote: post #56
bad_good_guy wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you are happy to have Apple provide no user choice, because you fear a future where there is no user choice?

No; my problem is when people are using the "open web" as a bludgeon to get Apple to allow Chrome on iOS. If you want Chrome on iOS, just say that. To pretend that there is open future of browser diversity once Chrome is allowed on iOS is underhanded.

I want Firefox on iOS.

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#66

Post by jacooper »

MBCook wrote: post #14

I’m going to ignore the security angle and post my big fear. Chrome has dominance similar to IE at the height of its popularity. Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. (Note: not why they’re doing it, just a side effect) People keep arguing Apple is being anti-competitive. But no one seems to recon with the possible consequences of what they’re asking for. And I fea…

Meh, at best Safari is the New IE it doesnt support many feature in purpise to serve Apple priorties and hinder the web.

https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/23/opinion_column/

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#67

Post by freedomben »

jpgvm wrote: post #37
MBCook wrote: post #14

I’m going to ignore the security angle and post my big fear. Chrome has dominance similar to IE at the height of its popularity. Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. (Note: not why they’re doing it, just a side effect) People keep arguing Apple is being anti-competitive. But no one seems to recon with the possible consequences of what they’re asking for. And I fea…

I don't think the IE comparison is apt. IE shipped on (almost) every machine, had a ton of lock in features like ActiveX, etc. MS actively abused their monopoly position to make it so preventing default installation of Netscape by OEMs, incentivising ISVs to ensure web based enterprise products shipped with "Works best in Internet Explorer" etc. Netscape lost market share to IE not because it lost users but because w…

Indeed. can you imagine if Microsoft had made it so that IE was the only browser you were allowed to install on Windows so you couldn't install Netscape even if you wanted to?

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#68

Post by idle_zealot »

mvid wrote: post #62
Narretz wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, actual browser choice for iOS will force Apple into improving Safari at a faster rate. This is good competition.

If quality of competition truly mattered, then IE wouldn't have had to be stopped with legislation

IE wasn’t stopped with legislation. It continued to be bundled with Windows. It was eventually dethroned by Chrome.

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#69

Post by lucasyvas »

MBCook wrote: post #14

I’m going to ignore the security angle and post my big fear. Chrome has dominance similar to IE at the height of its popularity. Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. (Note: not why they’re doing it, just a side effect) People keep arguing Apple is being anti-competitive. But no one seems to recon with the possible consequences of what they’re asking for. And I fea…

It's not Apple's choice to make on whether or not Chrome becomes a browser monopoly - fighting anti-competitiveness with anti-competitiveness is not a solution. The chips will fall as they will and we will all be left to deal with the aftermath. That's the way it has to be.

Re: Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security

#70

Post by cowtools »

nemothekid wrote: post #56
bad_good_guy wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you are happy to have Apple provide no user choice, because you fear a future where there is no user choice?

No; my problem is when people are using the "open web" as a bludgeon to get Apple to allow Chrome on iOS. If you want Chrome on iOS, just say that. To pretend that there is open future of browser diversity once Chrome is allowed on iOS is underhanded.

I want Firefox on iOS, and I want Tor Browser on iOS, and I want Lynx on iOS, and I want wget on iOS, and I want youtube-dl on iOS, and I want to run whatever the hell I damn well please on iOS.

Underhanded? It's pretty clear that your stated goals don't align with your real goals here.

Edit: I have a hard time putting into words why your arguments seem so deceptive to me. It is like whataboutism: the arguments you are making are technically functional but they just completely fall apart with any reasonable weighing of the pros/cons because it betrays the "intrinsic" goals (choice, browser competition, functionality, security) for "extrinsic" goals (browser diversity, but mostly the success of safari). This makes me think that you're secretly misaligned and that you actually hold those "extrinsic" goals as your intrinsic goals.

Post reply on HN