Live data from Hacker News

Safari is the new IE

nolanlawson.com

201–210 of 368 posts

Re: Safari is the new IE

#201
post #38

Nolan, I'm not familiar with what you do or have done, but have you ever tried to make a website back in the day? Ever tried to support IE6? 7? 8? IE literally broke the web. CSS rules which worked in every browser ever wouldn't work in IE. Entire webpages weren't formatting correctly, having to spend hours, days, on workarounds. Comparing Safari to IE is just wrong. Safari doesn't break the web, it 'just' lacks supp…

And I'm sure using this tone gets you more upvotes, but it feels very ad hominem.

Re: Safari is the new IE

#202
post #34

Disagree with this assessment. IE was so bad because Microsoft tried to go off and create its own standards that were incompatible with Mozilla / Firefox / etc. (I'm thinking of IE6 specifically). And this was big, core functionality like page layout and CSS; not some data structures that can be implemented in other ways (albeit with a performance hit). This was doubly bad because "enterprise" companies (SAP, SAS, Or…

> IE was so bad because Microsoft tried to go off and create its own standards

That's a common misconception, but what actually happened was that MS implemented draft CSS specs which ended up being a bit different from the final standard. At the time they were extremely eager to pack new stuff in IE (including a state-of-the-art XML/XSL processor!), so they rushed in a lot of stuff before other players had agreed how this stuff should really behave.

IE was then basically abandoned. MS just refused to fix their engine to adhere to newer standards. By the time this became to be seen as a problem, Netscape was dead, IE was dominant, and they were busy trying to plug the ActiveX security sieve, rebuilding on .Net and finding an alternative to Flash.

In this sense, Apple have done exactly the same with Safari: they poured resources into it while they were competing on the desktop. Now they only care about iDevices, where they have no competition at the browser level, the priority is battery time, and stability (aka rot) is preferable over innovation. Look at Safari for Windows: they built it only to support iTunes, and basically dropped it when iTunes on Windows became fundamentally unnecessary.

They went ahead when they wanted to be in the game, now they own the game so their incentives are different. Exactly what Microsoft did back in the days.

Re: Safari is the new IE

#203
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Another difference is that MS never blocked you from installing a better browser, but Apple does that on iOS. That policy is becoming increasingly ridiculous..." Why has that not resulted in anti competitive behavior lawsuits? MS got in to a fair bit of trouble for similar things. They didn't stop you installing an alternative.

Because Apple does allow you to install other browsers. But then again that depends on how you define browsers...

Let's define it as apps that actually use a different browser engine, and aren't merely a reskin of the exact same engine used in Safari. In short, something that is actually capable of supporting new features that Safari doesn't.

This is not possible on iOS without a jailbreak, because Apple simply doesn't allow alternative browser engines to be used.

Re: Safari is the new IE

#204
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you can't. You can install wrappers around Safari, but you can't install any app that uses the rendering engine of Chrome, Firefox, IE, or any other browser better than Safari.

Chrome for ios is a wrapper for safari? Are you sure? Safari and chrome definitely render certain pages differently when both running on the same iOS device.

Absolutely sure. Apple is totally transparent about this being a requirement for them:

https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

"2.17 Apps that browse the web must use the iOS WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript"

Re: Safari is the new IE

#205
post #62
post #38

Nolan, I'm not familiar with what you do or have done, but have you ever tried to make a website back in the day? Ever tried to support IE6? 7? 8? IE literally broke the web. CSS rules which worked in every browser ever wouldn't work in IE. Entire webpages weren't formatting correctly, having to spend hours, days, on workarounds. Comparing Safari to IE is just wrong. Safari doesn't break the web, it 'just' lacks supp…

If it lacks very basic functionality, isn't the effect the same as breaking the web? I think one unfortunate aspect of the article is that it focuses on some of the less common deficiencies of Safari. I would have called out mobile Safari being unable to download files, or Apple's insistence against video codecs that all other vendors are aligned in agreement on when it comes to video.

> If it lacks very basic functionality, isn't the effect the same as breaking the web?

No. If what worked before continues to work, it means it's not broken.

Also: What "very basic functionality" doesn't the latest versions of Safari support?

Re: Safari is the new IE

#206
Well.. that's certainly one way to make sure developers own an Apple computer and an iOS device.

As long as one browser sticks out like a sore thumb you have to make a conscious decision to either pay attention to it and its ecosystem or ignore it.

Re: Safari is the new IE

#207
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you can't. You can install wrappers around Safari, but you can't install any app that uses the rendering engine of Chrome, Firefox, IE, or any other browser better than Safari.

Chrome for ios is a wrapper for safari? Are you sure? Safari and chrome definitely render certain pages differently when both running on the same iOS device.

Gruber claims it is: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/06/28/chrome-ios

Re: Safari is the new IE

#208
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What rules that had been there for tens of years were broken by IE6? IE6 was the best browser available when it was released, and the web standards ecosystem was nothing like it is today. I think the analogy is very clear. If you want to code like it's 2000, supporting IE6 is easy, because IE6 is a very good 2000 browser. If you want to code like it's 2010, supporting Safari is easy, because Safari is a very good 201…

"Another difference is that MS never blocked you from installing a better browser, but Apple does that on iOS. That policy is becoming increasingly ridiculous..." Why has that not resulted in anti competitive behavior lawsuits? MS got in to a fair bit of trouble for similar things. They didn't stop you installing an alternative.

Apple isn't trying to use the weight of the monopoly it doesn't have in a market to try to monopolize another.

Re: Safari is the new IE

#209
I think the title is right, but mainly because of the multitude of Safari bugs and its incredibly slow performance. This is for Safari of OS X: assuming it doesn't crash on startup (so for me, about two out of three computers these days, up from one out of three), Safari is a piss poor browser even when it manages to run. I have a lot of code that runs incredibly slow on Safari yet has no problems in other browsers. Sometimes it drops connections randomly. Sometimes pages just crash. Sometimes it just won't render anything. The exact same code works fine in Chrome, FF, etc. and is pretty typical angular code. In other words, it's cross-browser code. Luckily, I don't think we have many Safari customers and at this point, if things don't work in Safari, the bugs I find are filed with the lowest precedence (ie: they will never get fixed) and that only because we have a person on our team who insists on using this broken browser. The lack of support for the APIs mentioned in the article only serves to drive the point home for me. The developer tools are also substandard compared to either Chrome or FF.

IE at least had market share. There is nothing that makes developing for Safari (OS X) worth the time spent.

Re: Safari is the new IE

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 b…

> 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. I was around as well. My recollection is that they let it twist in the wind because SaaS competed with their two interdependent quasi-monopolies: Windows and Office. Which is another instance of the Innovator's Dilemma: How can a successful company embrace techno…

> they let it twist in the wind because SaaS competed with their two interdependent quasi-monopolies

It wasn't called SaaS back then, but in any case -- they let it "twist in the wind" because their market had become the enterprise, and that's a market that wants stability, predictability and no updates if they can be avoided. By then they had killed all competition, so their incentives were to keep businesses locked-in through backward compatibility and security fixes. Add to that the big move to .Net and an effort to replace Flash...

IMHO it wasn't about the antitrust or platform control (they could have broken all the SaaS apps they wanted with each update, they had 95%+ of the market and were n.1 target for every website out there). They just had other priorities: the browser war had been won and attention was now on the enterprise market. Around that time, IIRC, Gates also retired, leaving Ballmer in charge; Ballmer was not the sort of technologist to lose much sleep over "the future of the web"...

Post reply on HN