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

581–590 of 593 posts

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

#581

Post by dmitriid »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #568
dmitriid wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That one doesn't really have a substantive response either. Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps? if so, do you think they should be n-class citizens, where n is the same class as native ios apps? if you do not, then I can see why you do not personally want the things that come with it, like your other conversation partner said

> Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps?

Does this have anything to do with anything I said in my thread? No. So, this question is not in good faith, so why should I engage with it?

> if so, do you think

Do you think that ascribing thoughts and words to your opponent that your opponent never thought or said is a good argument?

It doesn't matter what I think or what I don't think when my argument literally began with finding incorrect arguments made in actual bad faith with no research in the "paper" made by OWA. Both you and OP couldn't care less, and you both try to deflect with "do you believe blah blah blah".

I could go with a not-so-fine-comb through the document and point out every misrepresentation, incorrect assumption and outright lies. I picked two. What followed is now open for the world to see.

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

#584

Post by smoldesu »

dmitriid wrote: post #511
smoldesu wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then why doesn't it target Chromium as the vastly dominant engine that has ~80% of global market? Because WebKit sucks! I don't intend to be vitriolic here, but this really is the status quo of rendering engines. You have Blink, which is capable of making complex webapps and fully-featured browser experiences, and then you have WebKit, which is almost exclusively capable of breaking them. I'm not mad that WebKit su…

> Because WebKit sucks! Of course it doesn't suck > the status quo of rendering engines. You have Blink And so we've immediately arrived at the core of the matter: all you want is Chrome. Which is a) the dominant browser and b) whose "capable" is a bunch of Chrome-only non-standards

I wouldn't complain if Apple let me install the things I want on the device I own. If Apple let me use browsers that had the featureset I wanted, I wouldn't detract from Safari so much. As it stands though, the only sane way to deliver an app to iOS is via the web. Anything else is just a ploy for 30% of my profits and an attempt to Stockholm-syndrome me into becoming an iOS developer.

So yeah, I'm willing to stick it to Apple for being the largest company in the world, and criminally negligent towards their first-party browser. Obviously they're doing this because they directly profit off the failure of the web.

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

#585

Post by [deleted] »

simondotau wrote: post #580
stale2002 wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes basically it is cope. Law makers created these laws, specifically for the purpose of opening up these app stores, among other things. And then you are saying that actually the law won't do what it is directly intending on doing. The point of all of these laws are to open up these app stores. That is the direct goal. And clever attempts to get around them, will result in billions of dollars in fines to Apple. I am…

When someone writes a law saying that Apple is required to give their intellectual property away for free and forcefully open the floodgates of third party app stores, and this law passes, and this law survives challenge in the relevant court, then you'll be entitled to be that "I told you so" kind of person. Happy to wait. In the meantime it seems you're operating under a misapprehension that any of that has occurre…

[deleted]

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

#586

Post by viktorcode »

smoldesu wrote: post #392
viktorcode wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your "marketshare" definition is bogus. I could claim that Firefox has 100% marketshare of PlayStation consoles. There's no such market as devices of a single manufacturer.

...which is equally ridiculous. If Sony is actively preventing Playstation owners from installing other browsers with their control over app distribution, then that too should be considered malicious and just further indicates how necessary sweeping legislation like this is.

That's exactly why markets aren't defined in that way. See judge's notes from Epic v Apple trial.

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

#587

Post by viktorcode »

capableweb wrote: post #401
viktorcode wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your "marketshare" definition is bogus. I could claim that Firefox has 100% marketshare of PlayStation consoles. There's no such market as devices of a single manufacturer.

If you buy a computer from ASUS, you can download whatever browser you want. If you buy a cellphone from a Android-manufacturer, you can download whatever browser you want. But if you buy an iPhone, you can only download browsers that are using Apples own browser. Just because smartphones have traditionally been locked down, doesn't mean that it should be like that. PCs were also pretty locked down the beginning. And…

PCs weren't made "open" by the government regulations. Any company if it wishes so could start selling a locked down Windows machine with no ability to replace the browser. Nobody will call this company "a monopoly" for that fact alone.

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

#588

Post by dmitriid »

smoldesu wrote: post #584
dmitriid wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because WebKit sucks! Of course it doesn't suck > the status quo of rendering engines. You have Blink And so we've immediately arrived at the core of the matter: all you want is Chrome. Which is a) the dominant browser and b) whose "capable" is a bunch of Chrome-only non-standards

I wouldn't complain if Apple let me install the things I want on the device I own. If Apple let me use browsers that had the featureset I wanted, I wouldn't detract from Safari so much. As it stands though, the only sane way to deliver an app to iOS is via the web. Anything else is just a ploy for 30% of my profits and an attempt to Stockholm-syndrome me into becoming an iOS developer. So yeah, I'm willing to stick i…

> Anything else is just a ploy for 30% of my profits and an attempt to Stockholm-syndrome me into becoming an iOS developer.

Have you ever tried developing for consoles or releasing games through Steam? It's probably "but it's different"?

> and criminally negligent towards their first-party browser.

And that "criminal negligence" manifests itself in not implementing all of Chrome's non-standards the moment Chrome comes up with them?

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

#589

Post by thewileyone »

mtomweb wrote: post #17
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…

Safari still has around 60% on MacoS and all the normal users believe that there is browser competition now. At best it's speculation, but we can compare that to the very real harms of Apple's browser ban. We've written about the harms in detail here: https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20Bringing%20Com...

> Safari still has around 60% on MacoS

It's preinstalled on MacOS and you can't uninstall it, just choose not to use it.

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

#590

Post by mtomweb »

dmitriid wrote: post #581
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one doesn't really have a substantive response either. Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps? if so, do you think they should be n-class citizens, where n is the same class as native ios apps? if you do not, then I can see why you do not personally want the things that come with it, like your other conversation partner said

> Just as an example: do you believe web apps are currently treated by apple in a lower tier than native apps? Does this have anything to do with anything I said in my thread? No. So, this question is not in good faith, so why should I engage with it? > if so, do you think Do you think that ascribing thoughts and words to your opponent that your opponent never thought or said is a good argument? It doesn't matter wha…

1. Safari is full of bugs

https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20Bringing%20Com... (Section 5.6 and 5.8)

2. Safari is missing core functionality and significantly lags behind Firefox and Chrome / Edge. Sections 5.3 5.4

If you want to focus on specific functionality, then the ability to install a web app (Section 5.4.3.1 and Section 5.4.5 go into that in detail).

For evidence that Safari is significantly behind Firefox and Chrome/Edge see 5.4.1.

Post reply on HN