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

331–340 of 593 posts

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

#331

Post by beautifulfreak »

m-p-3 wrote: post #119
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, this denies me from using an actual Mozilla Firefox web browser on iOS. Imposing an artificial limit on iOS isn't how the web will move forward. > Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. I don't see Apple making any effort to diversify the browser ecosystem by making their browser available on other operating systems, so their inaction on other fro…

>I don't see Apple making any effort to diversify the browser ecosystem by making their browser available on other operating systems...

What about Webkit?

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

#333

Post by Dig1t »

I'd argue that there are legitimately decent reasons that Apple is doing this, besides the selfish, monopoly-protecting, reasons that are also nicely aligned with it as well. Besides the security thing mentioned elsewhere, I think performance and battery life are a huge concern as well. A big reason that Apple products (usually) work so well is that the vertical integration of both hardware and software can lead to compounding gains WRT performance and battery life. i.e. iPhones have excellent battery life and are pretty snappy for most of their life. A web browser is such a core (frequently used) experience for a smartphone that any tradeoffs made in the browser engine in favor of faster performance at the cost of power efficiency can have a big overall effect on the battery of the device.

The vast majority of users don't know or understand why they see decreased battery life when they do, they just see that their phone doesn't last as long. Google has such a complete monopoly in the browser market that one can argue that there's a pretty good incentive for Google to make tradeoffs in Chrome that decrease battery life on the iPhone to hurt the iPhone's battery life, and most people would not realize or understand that its not the iPhone's fault but Chrome.

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

#334

Post by twism »

dmitriid wrote: post #301
gernb wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of webpages don't work in Safari because Safari doesn't ship the APIs that other browsers have been shipping for years.

Safari is my primary browser day in day out. The only pages that don't work in it are developed by people who believe that Chrome-only APIs are standard.

web workers is an example of a standard api that only got implemented (partly) recently. they are more examples like ths

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

#335

Post by agust »

frumper wrote: post #259
agust wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If you're taking the approach that iOS browsers are just re-skinned safari, then Edge doesn't count as it's own browser on desktop.

Yes it does, that's a totally different situation. Edge chose to use Chromium as its engine, Microsoft takes part in its development, they are free to remove or add any component from it, and if ever they wanted to they would be free to fork it and drop it for another engine at any time. None of that is true for WebKit skins on iOS.

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

#336

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#337

Post by amelius »

lucasyvas wrote: post #95
MBCook wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The chips will fall as they will and we will all be left to deal with the aftermath The aftermath could be the complete death of the open web. Unwinding that may be nearly impossible. There needs to be a plan in place before Pandora’s box is opened.

The death of the open web as we currently know it could lead to an even better successor over time though. We just can't know if the current hill is worth dying on - it may be for future generations to solve. Short term, it's decidedly not good, but long term? How can we know? If the approach is so inherently flawed that this result is an inevitability, maybe it deserves to die and be replaced by something else.

> The death of the open web as we currently know it could lead to an even better successor over time though.

I predict the App/Play Store duopoly will take over the web.

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

#338

Post by snowwrestler »

niko001 wrote: post #150
nicce wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Safari is the new IE, there is a difference between a monopoly while still being able to use a competing product (like chrome in other platfroms), and forcing Safari(WebKit) while hindering the web because of Apples interests.(2-3) Ehm. Chrome is the new IE. Apple is using anti-competitive methods but its far far away from market domination. Microsoft is doing even more, by pushing so much Edge-only stuff. On iOS A…

It might not matter to users in the sense that they ask themselves what rendering engine Chrome on iOS is using under the hood, but the effects do matter. I get a lot of support requests saying "Your [web] app is broken on my iPhone!", "Right, Safari doesn't support feature XYZ", "I'm not using Safari, I'm using Chrome", "..."

Just wait until Google has Chrome running natively on iOS and introduces nonstandard behaviors to break Safari rendering intentionally.

Then at least you’ll be able to tell all your customers that you recommend switching to Chrome for all browsing. What a great victory for browser diversity and the open web!

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

#339

Post by amelius »

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.…

> The fundamental fight is not about browsers, it is about defining the platform

The fundamental fight is always about eyeballs. Apple is holding the better cards because control over hardware gives you control over software which gives you control over eyeballs.

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

#340

Post by IX-103 »

JCWasmx86 wrote: post #78
spideymans wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. And why would we assume that these companies would follow the "most natural implementation"? The very predictable response of the industry to the EU directive was to make the cookie banners as annoying as invasive as possible, such that users would consent…

> I don't know how I'd go about codifying that into law though. Simply make the DNT-Header a legally binding thing. If the user sends it, it means that only technically necessary cookies can be used. This would require no UX from the side of the website, thus defeating all dark patterns at once

"only technically necessary cookies" That doesn't really help preserve privacy. There are so many techniques for tracking, detectable and undetectable.
Post reply on HN