231–240 of 343 posts
unless it means having the webpage itself render in VR and not just an isolated model
I am curious why Safari in particular is getting a lot of the hate here when firefox supports even less of the features which leads me to believe that the reason many of these features have not been accepted is because they have not been accepted by the larger ecosystem and is just google pushing their own things as standard (Feels like IE days in many ways). That being said, I am not sure why I would actually want m…
> I am curious why Safari in particular is getting a lot of the hate here Here is HN, where apple is the bad boy in town.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here’s what Mozilla has to say about Web NFC, for example: > We believe Web NFC poses risks to users security and privacy because of the wide range of functionality of the existing NFC devices on which it would be supported, because there is no system for ensuring that private information is not accidentally exposed other than relying on user consent, and because of the difficulty of meaningfully asking the user for…
>The fact is that Google wrote these specifications, couldn’t convince any other rendering engine to implement them, and somehow it’s Apple’s fault the rest of the world rejected their idea. Apple is on the W3C board that gets to decide which APIs become standards. They are preventing these APIs from becoming standards. They have an interest to forbid Web Bluetooth and NFC from becoming standards, because they profit…
I'm writing this in Safari now, I'm a huge fan. There are several "features" that I actively dislike and disable in other browsers. I wonder if not being implemented in mobile safari is preventing them from being required in some webpages. * Vibration * Background Sync * Bluetooth * NFC * Notifications * Web Push
I can understand notifications and vibration. But why not Bluetooth or NFC? I can’t imagine any way those could be annoyances, or even why websites would want them outside of some extremely specialized applications.
Chromium gives 0 sh*t about users' privacy, and just pump the APIs out for websites to track their users more easily.
It would be useful if the site listed whether these had been standardized outside of Chrome yet. It’s hard to delineate which of these are Chrome features or actual web standards. And it’s therefore hard to blame either Safari or Firefox for not supporting them if they’re not standardized yet.
This is a huge list of "features from Chromium", which aren't really standard or even a thing outside of its ecosystem (the fact that both Firefox and Safari lack them is the obvious giveaway). I'm happy that Firefox doesn't expose Bluetooth, NFC or similar stuff to websites: the browser is huge enough without needing to mediate even more access to local hardware. It's unclear how some of these would even work for ot…
So if your blocker to accept this feature is that it's "difficult to support on desktop Linux" then all I can say is cry me a river.
I'm writing this in Safari now, I'm a huge fan. There are several "features" that I actively dislike and disable in other browsers. I wonder if not being implemented in mobile safari is preventing them from being required in some webpages. * Vibration * Background Sync * Bluetooth * NFC * Notifications * Web Push
Looking down the list I can find more features that I'd like to yank out of Safari, and Chrome, than features I'd like to see added. Things that should be removed, according to me: * Audio recording * Geolocation * Motion * Media capture
I'm writing this in Safari now, I'm a huge fan. There are several "features" that I actively dislike and disable in other browsers. I wonder if not being implemented in mobile safari is preventing them from being required in some webpages. * Vibration * Background Sync * Bluetooth * NFC * Notifications * Web Push
Agree and I’d add WebUSB and WebMIDI. Want to interface with USB? Go through the OS.
The alternative is to install random software on your computer for every device (or, if you're a Linux user, you'll likely simply be excluded and whine about it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is clearly for reasons of security. I don't think Apple is terribly interested in market share for Safari. What they are interested is preserving their competitive advantage in privacy.
The security/privacy argument has been debunked many times. How do you explain that all other OSes, including Apple's own macOS, manage to allow other browser engines? Do you think the iOS team is that incompetent?