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

361–370 of 593 posts

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

#361

Post by worik »

echelon wrote: post #205
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.

> most desktop computer users are able to use Firefox Desktop-using software engineers can write software for desktop users in a ton of different ways. There's so much freedom and there exist multiple mechanisms and platforms to deploy your code. Desktop-using software engineers are not free to choose how to deploy software to mobile audiences. They've got to go through Apple to reach 50+% of the US market. Apple set…

Apple/iOS is not the only mobile platform.

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

#362

Post by anonymousab »

judge2020 wrote: post #223
giancarlostoro wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're on about regular Firefox, not iOS Firefox which is just a UI wrapped around a WebKit component.

All of those features are possible on iOS via webkit. Regarding mobile browsers specifically, their advantage over Safari here is blocking cryptominer scripts and autoplay videos: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/browsers/mobile/compar...

iOS as blocking isn't anywhere near as powerful as Firefox extensions, not what it will eventually need to be.

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

#363

Post by the_gipsy »

Dig1t wrote: post #333

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 c…

> iPhones have excellent battery life and are pretty snappy for most of their life

Not really. Maybe in the early days they had an edge with ObjC when hardware was primitive and java slow, but nowadays it's the same or buried behind synthetic slowdown animations. The battery life isn't especially good in my personal experience.

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

#364

Post by ocdtrekkie »

tambourine_man wrote: post #273

A few random thoughts: • There's a place for closed platforms if open ones are a reasonable choice. A closed platform must not be the only choice available to the customer, but it should be allowed to exist given a healthy market. It's hard to argue that iOS is a monopoly, and if so, than a browser engine and JS interpreter with access to the open web is a very powerful thing that the owner of the platform may deem t…

Clarification: Chrome is NOT open source. Chromium is, but it has a nonexistent market share. Google loves this model: Android isn't open source either, and it forces a bunch of proprietary apps as requirements for it's distribution, but they claim they're open source because they throw basically nonfunctional AOSP code over the wall.

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

#365

Post by snowwrestler »

mtomweb wrote: post #74
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.

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…

Lots of people want to explain why the government should force Apple to let native Chrome onto iOS.

I don't see anyone explaining what will force Google to continue supporting Safari once they have Chrome on iOS.

The reality is that they probably won't. Safari will break for Google services and pixels, and the only answer will be "switch to Chrome, things don't break there." Bye bye competition.

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

#366

Post by adamius »

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…

Why does Apple get to choose how its competitor gets to compete?

We give microsoft plenty of flak for anti-competitive behavior. It deserves it too. Its not hard to see why.

But so does Apple.

Now why can't I install my silly joke app? Oh that's right Apple won't let me install my joke app on my devices or friends for more than a week or so for reasons. Even though it can be easily tracked to me, its signed etc.

Why is that? Control.

Why can't I have a linux vm chugging away on ipados? Apple says no. Why? Control.

If Apple wants to exert this much control then it really needs to accept liability. So those security defects? Where's the service level agreement to time limit those glaring holes?

Its therefore unacceptable for Apple to be slow to fix an issue when its competitor could have already fixed it. Oh wait, there are no competitors on ios since no one is allowed to compete. You must use webkit. How is that not anti-competitive?

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

#367

Post by est31 »

dcow wrote: post #325
nemothekid wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Safari and Chromium and Chromium. I'm not sure who the one here is deceiving themselves.

Chromium != Chrome. We're talking about some world where Google Chrome takes over everything not where Chromium derivatives compete with Google Chrome for browser market share based on features and merits. That latter outcome defeats the "chrome hegemony" which is what the person I initially responded to is complaining about.

A 95% chromium world is the same as a 95% chrome world in many regards.

Following Chromium upstream is an extremely hard effort if you have done any kind of non trivial changes to it. There are constant refactors and changes. This means that your chromium using browser can't be anything more than just a reskin of Chrome, which means that you don't have the agency to support some feature that Chrome chose to not support, and the features you do support are likely going to be implemented 100% the same due to using the same code, including the bugs. This leads to the same "code assuming the bug" issues that if everyone used Chrome.

Furthermore, Google has a monopoly on Chromium developers, with only few people contributing from the outside. Your Chrome reskin team will likely be very skilled in maintaining a Chrome reskin but if Google ever decided to stop the Chromium project in favour of a closed source Chrome, there would be nobody who knows how to properly maintain the fork going forward, neither at your company, or available for hire.

You are 100% at the mercy of Google if you do a Chrome reskin.

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

#368

Post by labcomputer »

mtomweb wrote: post #265
briandear wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple sets unreasonable rules. How? As a user I’m able to do the things I want with reasonable guarantees of privacy and security. Most developers that release iOS software seem to be doing ok with those “unreasonable” rules. And the user benefits. If I wanted Android, I would have bought Android. I bought Apple specifically because I see value as a user to those unreasonable rules.

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...

> As a user the harms are invisible to you.

Why would you post a document refuting your own point?

I explicitly do. not. want. my web browser to have access to the bluetooth and NFC APIs. Nor the screen orientation lock and full screen APIs. I absolutely do not want website notifications.

I don't know how to be more explicit. Those are things developers want. Those are not things users want. And no amount of gaslighting about invisible harms is going to convince us that what you want is what we want.

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

#369

Post by lkramer »

googlryas wrote: post #240
cute_boi wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome is installed by default in android. The choice won't be preferred choice if website starts to put message like "Works best with Google Chrome".

No it isn't - that is a choice made by phone vendors to include it, but they are perfectly free to ship their phones with firefox, or opera, or no browser at all. The android OS has no knowledge of chrome and it doesn't get any special handling or abilities like iOS/Safari.

I am unable to uninstall Chrome from my Android phone. That seems pretty special.

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

#370

Post by afiori »

tshaddox wrote: post #173
m-p-3 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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.

Also since Firefox for android removed one of its distinctive features a few years ago; once you could set it to ask how to open a link (send to another device, share, copy to clipboard, open normally) when an app tried to start a browser; now you can no longer do that.

I use different browsers for different things so I want to chose how to open external app links.

I would install a shim browser that does just that if I knew of one.

Post reply on HN