Safari is the new IE

I had to do some work[1] with, basically, HTML4. Eventually I reached the stage whereby the feature worked in every other browser (IE8+, including Opera), using clean and completely hack-free code. In 3 days I had done my work.

Then I tested it in Safari. Two weeks later I gave up and basically had to `if (Safari)`. I don't know if the code still has that, but it probably does. This wasn't anything 'lacking'. Sure, it was contenteditable-related but the fact remains that I found a consistent subset in every browser except Safari.

So, yes, Safari broke my web - and it wasn't something that was missing, it was something that behaved very differently compared to other browsers. I can't remember what specifically broke it, but even ~2 years ago I had a significantly better development experience with IE than Safari with no new HTML5 features in sight.

[1]: http://help.k2.com/onlinehelp/k2smartforms/userguide/1.0.6/c...

I built websites during that entire period. I saw the rise and fall of Netscape, the "dark ages" of browser development when Microsoft let IE rot - I witnessed the birth of Firefox and the re-ignition of the "browser wars" when Google launched Chrome, and Apple got serious with Safari by moving to WebKit.

The author is right, the details aren't the same but the same attitude exists. The author is simply speaking up before the differences become extreme.

Microsoft didn't "break the web" they created their own web and then let it twist in the wind because they were pissed about the government beat down.

Apple didn't get their hand slapped, but they did build something so lucrative that evolving Safari became a smaller priority, which some would argue aligns well with their push to the App/closed ecosystem model.

    Apple, on the other hand, has no reason to want the web 
    to flourish. They make money by selling hardware, and 
    by managing a closed ecosystem of apps and services 
    that revolve around said hardware.

You have the key thing correct: Apple makes money on hardware.

So it doesn't follow that they would want to stamp out or ignore the web. The web is a huge part of what customers use Macs and iOS devices for, and Apple makes the same amount of money on a piece of hardware whether you use it to browse the web or use the $0.00 Facebook app.

There's no denying that Apple wants you to buy into their ecosystem of apps: it helps bind you to their devices. But there's no incentive for them to extinguish the web.

    At least in the days of IE6, Microsoft didn't really care about 
    the web.

No. The web was directly opposite to Microsoft's goals. Microsoft made money on operating systems and applications. If the web "won" then you wouldn't need a Microsoft OS any more, and Microsoft would "lose."

Uh...

Comparing a webkit-based browser of any kind to the agony of supporting something like IE6 back in the day is like comparing a paper cut to a stab wound.

Nice clickbait title, though, got you to #1, aren't you proud. :P

If Apple really wanted to make Web Apps feel like a second class citizen, they wouldn't be adding Force Touch, custom AirPlay control support and Picture In Picture support to the upcoming version of Safari. Those are deep, native app level features that aren't even Web standards yet.

I assume Apple is underinvesting in safari simply because they have bigger fish to fry, and they are notoriously understaffed with competent engineers (or have bad project management).