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

551–560 of 593 posts

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

#551

Post by irae »

gunapologist99 wrote: post #503
irae wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For all your criticisms against Safari you still bought the most expensive phone on their lineup. So I guess they got so many other things right so you apparently still believe they ship the best phone out there. I used to wish for Firefox on my iPhone too. But after a while I got skeptical this would benefit me or other users. Apple was the one to make the hard decision to kill Flash, and Firefox is known to have do…

Well, I actually don't consider it the best phone to buy; I consider it among the best hardware. I think a Google Pixel is a much nicer and more comfortable phone, although the iPhone has a far better screen and is a lot prettier, although its shape is uncomfortable to hold, even with a nice Otterbox. I'm running GrapheneOS on the Pixel. It is perhaps ironic that the best phone to de-Google is actually a Google, and…

Yours is not the only comment I see here that eventually comes down to the OS discussion.

We are supposedly talking about Safari, yet Safari is tied to iOS not to the hardware. People can install Brave or Firefox on Android. But they are not ever satisfied. I don't have the numbers, but I suspect the sum of GrapheneOS and other de-Googled Android distributions might be bigger than the sum of Firefox and Brave on regular Android.

In the end, maybe Apple should just allow you to download some software that voids your warranty and roots the iPhone, while removing iOS. People can then reverse engineer and do whatever they want. But Apple's drivers and some of the chips are proprietary, and that I don't see a way people would convince regulators to enforce them to open-source those.

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

#552

Post by nneonneo »

acdha wrote: post #317
jakub_g wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 othe…

Ran into a fun Google bug today: on the default macOS Safari install, Google Drive refused to download a folder once it had more than about a dozen files. It would go through the entire “zipping the files up” step and then mysteriously fail at the end, blaming cookies (?).

The workarounds are to use Chrome, download files in tiny batches (much fun with 500 photos in the folder), or work out through trial and error that Google wanted the Safari tracking prevention disabled before it would download a file.

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

#553

Post by lenkite »

dmitriid wrote: post #532
lenkite wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ability to install a browser of your choice on the platform of your choice is not the same as giving the web completely over Google. Let's not make a strawman argument.

I wish it were a strawman argument. Chrome is ~80% market share of browsers. Google search is dominant, and pushes Chrome heavily. Google's own apps and platforms push Chrome, and on mobile they ignore user choice and offer to open links in Chrome by default. Google is known to have repeatedly sabotaged Firefox [1] Google fully dominates web standards committees. Google already barrells through with their proposals w…

Again, this is irrelevant. Regulation should be left to government and not to private companies who want to protect their turf of native app development by taking away consumer choice. Consumer choice of browser on a marketplace is the argument here. Google is already facing multi-billion dollar fines for anti-trust in the EU.

Why can't Apple make an exception for Firefox and non-Chrome browsers ? Disallow Google Chrome, but allow the use of OSS browsers (with their native rendering engines).

Hint: They will not, because they are not afraid of Chrome as much as much as they are afraid that their complete stranglehold over native app development gets threatened.

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

#554

Post by lenkite »

lamontcg wrote: post #305
Jcowell wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One would say it would be disastrous to open a platform first and then take on Chrome because 1) Firefox cannot compete against Google endless resources m. Google will win, not a matter of it but will. 2) The time it takes to decouple chrome from google will be too long. It may just kill Firefox before any action can really be done.

Yeah I don't see why this math is so hard. If you force Apple to open up iOS then Chrome just takes it over and Safari will take such a hit that Apple will probably have to kill it. Then Google will own 99% of the portal to the web. I think I'm arguing with a bunch of Libertarians though who think that an unregulated market is some kind of magic sauce that will conjure up a Chrome competitor out of thin air, and not…

Let Apple permit the use of OSS browsers with their native rendering engines - problem solved. Will they do this ? I guess not because it means their native app development is threatened.

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

#555

Post by irae »

fuu_dev wrote: post #396

The iphone is over a decade old and safari should have been established as the default choice for users by now. Still the majority of comments points out that a open platform will lead to users switching away from safari. I think its not a legit concern if a product fails to meet the users requirements in that time period.

Very few said people would use Chrome because it is better. The reason Chrome would take over would be market pressure and advertisement.

And after they have like 50%, they won, as they will inexpensively make their market dominant products (search, meet, etc) worst on Safari, by just neglecting to fix issues due to higher cost of making it work on two browsers. We've seen that before. I am posting this from Brave because many sites in Brazil neglect Safari on desktop, so I got used to alternatives.

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

#556

Post by jpgvm »

dmitriid wrote: post #549
jpgvm wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a big difference between engine monopoly vs browser monopoly, however that does depend on how well governance works for the Chromium project (I really don't know enough to assert anything concrete). Namely an engine isn't a product and most value-add is in the porcelain of the browser, implementation of web standards -shouldn't- be a competitive advantage because doing leads the the sort of fragmenta…

Current theoretical way of web standards is: a standard can only become a standard if there are two independent implementations of it. This somewhat prevents browsers from implementing fully proprietary tech that canät be replicated by anyone else. It does lead to problems like WebSQL being scrapped (the idea was to basically run sqlite in the browser, Mozilla said they donät want to reverse-engineer sqlite behaviour…

Yeah I think it's a difference in philosophy somewhat. PostgreSQL and Linux aren't standards, they are just shared infrastructure.

If Chromium was to become the same thing we could have just had WebSQL assuming maintainers agreed it was worth landing and maintaining.

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

#557

Post by stale2002 »

simondotau wrote: post #533
stale2002 wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The user will be free to decide? Really? Yes, they can choose to not install whatever app store or browser that they want. > or disinterested in the nuances of privacy and tracking It sounds like you just don't like the user's choice. You could have just said that you disagree with what the user will do, and want to take away their choice to install whatever browser or app store that they want. Don't pretend like y…

It is doubtful whether there's any point in me replying as little of what you've said has anything to do with anything I said. It appears you read my post and entirely misunderstood it. I will nonetheless offer a response to what you have written. Your first misunderstanding is this assumption that competition and user choice hinges on the axis of "browsers and app stores". This isn't an objective fact, it's an opini…

> . I haven't seen how any of these EU laws get around the reality of Apple's ownership of its own intellectual property. I can't imagine how the EU could force Apple to supply its intellectual property to app developers under different terms

It is pretty simple. Companies that want to operate in the EU have to follow certain laws, or pay a huge fine.

Technically speaking, these are requirements to operate in the market. So I guess if Apple wants to pull out of international markets, and never sell an iPhone again in the EU, that would also be an option. But, my guess is that they don't want to lose those billions of dollars.

> I'm really not sure how developers are going to legally build apps to put in those stores.

Its simple. Either Apple follows the law and gives app developers the ability to build apps, pays a huge fine, or leaves the entire EU market. Those are Apple's only 3 choices. And if they try a clever way to get around the law by using some sort of intellectual property strategy that you are hinting at, then they pay the huge fine, which is calculated based on a large percentage of global revenue.

Enjoy thoses laws that you cannot stop! They will likely come into effect in less than a year. They can't be stopped. Apple should have addressed its own anti-competitive behavior before it got to the point where this was necessary. Its way too late now though.

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

#558

Post by dmitriid »

mtomweb wrote: post #545
dmitriid wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue is you are focusing on the specific APIs as a strawman argument I focused on some APIs I know about. There's nothing strawman about facts that you misrepresented in your diatribe. How can I be sure that you represented everything else correctly? Oh. I can't. Because I also saw your section on "Edge differentiation". Should I go through everyting else and discover same misrepresentation and falseness? I th…

Pointless discussing if you can’t agree on any of the basic factual points.

> if you can’t agree on any of the basic factual points.

Factual points I started with:

- Both Firefox and Safari are against most hardware APIs for many reasons including technical ones.

- The section "Edge differentiates from Chrome because it removed a few Google-specific things like Google Pay" is laughable

Your "response" is, "oh, you don't believe in web apps" and "Our group was initially formed by a group of people who develop for iOS Safari on daily basis".

These are not factual points. These are attempts to dodge a conversation. And when the conversation seemingly starts happening, it's "the facts you provided are not facts, they are strawmen".

Yes. It truly is pointless discussing this. There are many, many, many issues we can discuss about Safari. With people who have done their research and don't willingly assume the role of Google's propaganda amplifier. Thankfully, as the comments to the original link show, more and more people are starting have a more sober outlook on what's happening.

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

#559

Post by dmitriid »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #550
dmitriid wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue is you are focusing on the specific APIs as a strawman argument I focused on some APIs I know about. There's nothing strawman about facts that you misrepresented in your diatribe. How can I be sure that you represented everything else correctly? Oh. I can't. Because I also saw your section on "Edge differentiation". Should I go through everyting else and discover same misrepresentation and falseness? I th…

as an observer, most of your responses to valid, good faith points (e.g. "I'm not even going to dignify that with a response") seem to indicate that you are arguing to argue, rather than to come to clarity with the other person. Also, they are pretty rude (for reasons beyond the above one), and seem to me to be against the spirit of HN commenting. tl;dr if you think your dignity is above responding to someone, don't.

Sibling comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31907602

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

#560

Post by pers0n »

They want to control it because the real web can destroy their app market. Oddly enough their clamp down, may destroy it anyway as game streaming is going to make strides to get past it. It may take time but it will happen and then they will lose their money maker, because it will all be web based and they will have not offered anything else so they will miss out.
Post reply on HN