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

311–320 of 593 posts

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

#311

Post by Mikeb85 »

silvestrov wrote: post #139
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…

Also: It was bad for Microsoft if browsers became too good as the Windows OS then could too easily be replaced by cheaper platforms. So Microsoft wanted to keep browsers back as much as possible. It's good for Google when Chrome is good. So Google has a great incitament to improve Chrome. The only drawbacks would be proprietary functionality others can't use.

> The only drawbacks would be proprietary functionality others can't use.

And what proprietary functionality is that? Chromium exists and does all the same things.

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

#312

Post by swat535 »

lucasyvas wrote: post #69
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.

> The chips will fall as they will

This is how we end up with the death of uBlock origin (in a few months from now) on January 2023.

Firefox has resisted this thus far but I am pretty sure Google will eventually twist their arms enough to either kill it, or at the very least _severely_ handicap it.

Google is a threat to the open web, it needs to be heavily regulated and punished for all its despicable behaviors: from harvesting user data without consent to tracking our every move and selling it to anyone who wants it for pittance.

I am very well aware of the fact that many of the HNers are partaking in this and am not going to pretend that I wouldn't be tempted had I been in their shoes but I think it's time to for the smoke and mirrors to clear: Google is nothing more than a giant spyware and an adware company because their core business model _literally_ requires it. This is why they keep fighting against privacy regulations, lobby the governments, punish Adblock extensions and come up with clever ways to circumvent your privacy protections.

So no, I for one am glad that at least Apple exists to thwart this. They may not be doing this because of their "ethics" but given the choice, I'd rather side with Apple on this one.

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

#313

Post by liveoneggs »

snowwrestler wrote: post #283
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…

People do not seem to understand how important it is to Google they they achieve full control of the browser end of the WWW. The blog post at the top of this thread talks about CVEs and other measures of resistance to 3rd party bad actors. It does not engage with the concept of Google themselves as a bad actor. With full control of the rendering engine on all platforms, Google can stop engaging with standards bodies.…

Yeah I have a really hard time believing https://open-web-advocacy.org/ is not actually google but it is certainly aiming towards Google's benefit and, ironically, the end of any chance of an "open" web

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

#314

Post by mtomweb »

anonymousab wrote: post #276
slenk wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, supporting Firefox is good for the whole...how do you not understand that?

If you do something that benefits Firefox, but has an outsized benefit for Firefox' competitors (or rather, anti-Firefox hegemony) and the net effect is overall worse for Firefox, then that thing that benefited Firefox was not good.

It's likely cost Firefox 100's of millions per year. That's net worse for firefox.

Also Mozilla is fighting this as well, they wouldn't unless they thought it was in their interest.

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

#315

Post by dmitriid »

joshuamorton wrote: post #110
JCWasmx86 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> There was even a precedent for something similar: [1] No there wasn't, unless you mean killing a 10 year old version of Internet explorer with a banner to a newer version of Internet explorer is somehow playing unfair.

Yes, there was. See this thread from Mozilla's former Vice President: https://archive.ph/2019.04.15-165942/https://twitter.com/joh... (or directly on Twitter: https://twitter.com/johnath/status/1116871231792455686)

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

#316

Post by mtomweb »

elashri wrote: post #309
mtomweb wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a user the harms are invisible to you. If you'd like to find out how it harms consumers, businesses, developers and the web, please read our regulatory submission "Bringing Competition to Walled Gardens": https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20Bringing%20Com...

Isn't the main argument is the user choice? if I as a user chose what the comment you are replying said, then what is the problem?

Yes users should be free to choose whatever browser they want and the gatekeeper shouldn't be allowed to interfere with that.

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

#317

Post by acdha »

jakub_g wrote: post #184
tshaddox wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, this denies me from using an actual Mozilla Firefox web browser on iOS. At the same time, most desktop computer users are able to use Firefox and we can see how often they choose to do so.

According to stats from GitHub, 12% of their traffic is from Firefox. 3x more than Safari. https://github.blog/2022-06-10-how-we-think-about-browsers/ Of course this is just part of the story. In every country it's different. In some EU countries Firefox is up to 20%. In UK it's almost non-existent. Local markets shape the browser support. If a few major websites are too lazy to support a browser properly, users will…

It's more traffic than Safari, but Firefox also runs on platforms like Windows or Linux and has disproportionately large mindshare among open source developers. Give how much higher that number was 10 years ago, I think this counts in support of the original point: Google has poured a ton of effort into promoting Chrome and “accidentally”[1] offering a worse experience for other browsers in their site and nobody other than Apple seems to have been successful at resisting this.

1. Whether this is an overt policy or simply choosing to skimp on testing, it's a choice.

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

#318

Post by LMYahooTFY »

mccr8 wrote: post #10

Comparing CVE counts is a bit nonsensical. For instance, Chrome and Firefox don't individually assign CVEs for internally reported vulnerabilities. For instance, in these patch notes Chrome lists "Various fixes from internal audits, fuzzing and other initiatives" and doesn't even look to have a CVE: https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2022/05/stable-channel... Or for Firefox, there's a dozen or so bundled together…

I seem to remember the CVE database search utility on Mitre's web site stating something along the lines of "comparing the number of CVEs by platform shouldn't be used to draw conclusions".

Possibly a CYA-esque liability statement, but the principle seemed sound.

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

#319

Post by elashri »

mtomweb wrote: post #316
elashri wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the main argument is the user choice? if I as a user chose what the comment you are replying said, then what is the problem?

Yes users should be free to choose whatever browser they want and the gatekeeper shouldn't be allowed to interfere with that.

That is not my point. I mean the point is that many people who chose to own IOS did that because of privacy and security it provides as the current apple ecosystem. It is like choosing a private school with a restrict rules and code of conduct over another private school with more open rules (options) since you pay for your phone anyway.

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

#320

Post by dcow »

zuhsetaqi wrote: post #270
gunapologist99 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is using anti-competitive methods but its far far away from market domination. Apple Safari has, literally, 100% marketshare across the entire iPhone market. Its App Store also has 100% marketshare and enforces the Safari marketshare. I have an iPhone 13 Pro Max. I love the hardware, but I'd love to install other browsers; why can't I? I'd also love to run real PWA's or run WebRTC without major issues. Why sh…

> Apple Safari has, literally, 100% marketshare across the entire iPhone market. Its App Store also has 100% marketshare and enforces the Safari marketshare. And that’s the big difference between Safari dominance and IE at the time. Safari is only on iOS/iPadOS dominant not in the entire market like IE was

There was no mobile at the time.
Post reply on HN