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

121–130 of 593 posts

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

#121

Post by MBCook »

agust wrote: post #82
nemothekid wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Open Web Advocacy has been very clear that they want competition on iOS, not Chrome specifically. The reason being that the absence of competition is currently allowing Apple to deteriorate the web experience on iOS, preventing the web and web apps from competing with native apps. Their objective is to lift these artificial limitations imposed by Apple and free the web. OWA members have actually been actively reporti…

Competition on iOS without real competition on the desktop already existing could quickly mean unbreakable Chrome hegemony.

That’s why I originally commented. If you focus on just one of those I believe there will be terrible unintentional consequences.

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

#122

Post by agust »

MBCook wrote: post #84
mtomweb wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP here. That's actually incorrect. We started OWA with a group of primarily Safari first developers, in that iOS Safari is our primary target platform. We've had over a decade of major issues from rendering bugs, to lack of functionality to our apps breaking for months at a time waiting for a patch. The severe underfunding of Safari/webkit coupled with a ban on competition meant that it was never going to be viable…

> The answer is competition There is no competition . There is only Chrome. This is what I was talking about. There will only be one result to opening iOS and it scares me. FF/Opera are too small. Edge is small and really just Chrome anyway. If we had a healthy browser market I’d be fine. But we don’t. Apple is, for the wrong reason, the only thing keeping us from total Chrome dominance. I want one of these “just ope…

Chrome is competition, and no, it's not alone: on the desktop market, where competition is not rigged as much as on mobile, Edge has 10% market share, and Firefox 7.5%. It's not insignificant.

> I want one of these “just open iOS” calls to include the consequences of what they’re calling for and how they plan to deal with it.

OWA has taken into account anti-competitive practices used by Google to gain browser market share, and made recommendation to mitigate or prevent them. In there submission to the japanese regulator [1], they include:

- 3.1.7: No Chrome Preferencing: > Google should not use their control over the operating system to provide unfair preference to their own browser, Chrome, either through the operating system or agreements with partners.

- 3.1.8: Website Transparency Obligations: > OWA suggests that where a Gatekeeper’s website does not support a browser which has above a 2% market share, they be compelled to publish a document containing detailed reasoning that prevents support of certain engines.

[1]: https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20HDMC%20(Japan)...

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

#123

Post by mtomweb »

JCWasmx86 wrote: post #96
mtomweb wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP here. That's actually incorrect. We started OWA with a group of primarily Safari first developers, in that iOS Safari is our primary target platform. We've had over a decade of major issues from rendering bugs, to lack of functionality to our apps breaking for months at a time waiting for a patch. The severe underfunding of Safari/webkit coupled with a ban on competition meant that it was never going to be viable…

While I admire your stance on the internet being open I disagree. Yes, opening browser engines would be good for the competition. But you missed one point: You assume all players will play fair in the competition. If all browser engines would be allowed over night, what would happen: Google will probably play really unfair. E.g. sadly the layout of Google will be messed up in Safari, youtube videos stutter/have lower…

Anti-Competitive Behaviour from google should also be addressed by regulators.

Our suggestions were covered in sections: 3.1.7 No Chrome Prefrencing 3.1.8 Website Transparency Obligations

https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20HDMC%20(Japan)...

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

#124

Post by canuckintime »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #101
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 reminds me of what Apple did with iBooks: they weren't trying to do the right thing, they did it the wrong way, but if they had been successful, it would have been better for the market as a whole. The DoJ correctly went after Apple and eventually won, but they also should have looked at Amazon for using what were basically dumping-level prices to secure the market for themselves. Apple is in the wrong to tie Safa…

> It reminds me of what Apple did with iBooks: they weren't trying to do the right thing, they did it the wrong way, but if they had been successful, it would have been better for the market as a whole... Amazon for using what were basically dumping-level prices

Apple was successful in that regard though; the contracts they made with Big 5 remained intact and Apple didn't have to compete with Amazon on price. Apple's strategy was not better for the market as a whole because Apple never cared about the market as a whole. Due to Apple's anti-competitive behaviour we are still stuck with a Publishing industry decades behind on digital

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

#125

Post by theturtletalks »

AlexandrB wrote: post #79
lucasyvas wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> That's the way it has to be. What? Why? I assure you that's not how Google thought of it when they were facing off against Firefox and IE. They were putting Chrome installers in every SourceForge download and telling you to install Chrome when you searched Google. Why should their competitors lie down and let Chrome roll over them?

For one, people still had the decision to download Chrome even if it was advertised heavily. Apple forces Safari on all their iOS users since all the browsers have to use WebKit.

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

#126

Post by MBCook »

JamesSwift wrote: post #100
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.

Using that logic of Edge being counted as Chrome, why dont we consider 100% of the iOS browser market to be Safari?

Chrome was forked from WebKit but had been it’s own engine for a very long time at this point. They share ancestry but are pretty different.

Edge is literally built off a relatively recent version of Chromium. It’s not a separate engine.

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

#127

Post by AlexandrB »

freedomben wrote: post #67
jpgvm wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

This would have been fine if Windows wasn't 95+% of desktop computer market share at the time. The regulatory argument was that Microsoft was abusing their desktop OS monopoly to give themselves an unfair advantage in another market (browsers).

By contrast iOS is ~50% of mobile OS market share (in the US, I think it's less elsewhere). Hardly a monopoly. If using a different mobile browser is important to you, there's a competing, popular mobile OS that can provide that.

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

#129

Post by m-p-3 »

cptskippy wrote: post #111
cowtools wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Quoted post unavailable.

I hate to break it to you, but Safari isn't going to stop that from happening.

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

#130

Post by criddell »

bad_good_guy wrote: post #50
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…

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

Actually, yes. With Apple not having user choice, those of use who want a choice can choose Android. Lack of diversity in one ecosystem supports diversity in a broader context.

It's like prohibitions against importing some aggressive plant or animal species. It's a way of protecting local diversity.

Post reply on HN