281–290 of 368 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you explain how fixing IndexedDB bugs hurts battery life? Can you explain how WebRTC hurts battery life?
It doesn't hurt battery life. It just takes engineering hours away from working on battery life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
IE6 continues to work fine for what it supported originally as well.
The difference between IE and (iOS) Safari is that Microsoft got fined for bundling IE ( http://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs181/projects/micros... ) while Apple get away with not only bundling a browser but banning competing implementations on their platform.
At the time Windows had more than 95% (pulling percentage out of thin air but I think it is realistic) of the desktop operating system market. Apple is less than half of the mobile market. This doesn't mean I agree with the limitations but it is certainly legally relevant to whether they are "get away" with doing it.
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…
Perhaps the biggest thing is that IE6 had a broken CSS box model.
Web dev was "fun" in the early 2000s.
Also console.log and javascript debuggers didn't exist. Working with complex JS got really interesting really quickly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the important scalable features are incompatible - so-called 'bundling' where many streams use a single port etc. Aggregation of error feedback so an MCU can sensibly report bandwidth limits. Slow connect/reconnect times. No 'supernode' support. Pretty much anything that takes it from a toy with 3 or 4 p2p connections, to a product that can handle up to 100 streams with audio/video switching realtime through an M…
>All the important scalable features are incompatible - so-called 'bundling' where many streams use a single port etc. AFAIK this is being fixed. Firefox should support the standard and Chrome is fixing their implementation to conform as well.
The more developers who get on board with the "fuck you, Apple; if you want our sites to work for our users, then you need to fix your shit", the more pressure there will be from users for Apple to either fix Safari themselves or allow the installation of real alternative browsers on iOS, and thus the sooner either of those things will happen (or Apple slips closer to its pre-iPod days of borderline-obscurity).
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…
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…
Again, it doesn't allow them to be made as the 'default' browser - which in itself is a big reason to criticize them.
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…
> in my experience, it's the fastest browser on OS X by a pretty > wide margin. Chrome is so bloated and full of garbage at this > point that when I have it open, I usually have at least one tab > sitting at 100% CPU (and this is with FlashBlock enabled). Safari > also manages to feel faster while using significantly less power > -- I suspect Apple has done some optimizations through Grand > Central on this front. Th…
For me it's just video perf, but the worst part is that it's Google own web services that are spinning up the fans, and their video services work 10x better in Safari!
I have a shiny new 15" Retina MBP, which heats up like a stove if I use Chrome to open a video Hangout or watch YouTube. So for work meetings I've made a habit of having my calendar always open in Safari so when I click the video link, I get the Hangout in Safari as well.
And Safari manages to not set my computer on fire, amazing!
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.