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

281–290 of 593 posts

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

#281

Post by IX-103 »

AlexandrB wrote: post #153
silvestrov wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also: It was bad for Microsoft if browsers became too good as the Windows OS then could too easily be replaced by cheaper platforms. So Microsoft wanted to keep browsers back as much as possible. It's good for Google when Chrome is good. So Google has a great incitament to improve Chrome. The only drawbacks would be proprietary functionality others can't use.

The other drawback is that Google is an advertising company that has an incentive to track users across the web. In a Chrome monopoly how easy would it be to avoid being tracked? Especially by Google. Recently, Chrome was the only major browser to adopt Google's FLoC[1]. If Chrome was even more dominant would it have mattered if Edge/Safari/Firefox didn't adopt this tracking technology? [1] https://www.howtogeek.com/…

Google is an advertising company, but that's not the main reason for their privacy sandbox and it's ad-friendly features. Google needs the open web to survive as a search provider. If everything turns into a paywall or cookie/privacy wall then Google can't index that content. They already can't see the content on Facebook and Twitter.

Google makes most of their money from search ads -- I've heard upwards of 80% -- and search ads supposedly don't even use targeting information.

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

#282

Post by skerit »

marricks wrote: post #250
m-p-3 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, this denies me from using an actual Mozilla Firefox web browser on iOS. Imposing an artificial limit on iOS isn't how the web will move forward. > Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. I don't see Apple making any effort to diversify the browser ecosystem by making their browser available on other operating systems, so their inaction on other fro…

No one is using Firefox on mobile so it’s good for you, but not web on the whole. Also while an independent entity having a larger presence is better than Apple at least Apple having a large market share makes Google need to consider what happens in safari before they do something particularly shady with web standards

I love Firefox for Android. It works great. It works even better than the desktop version :D

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

#283

Post by snowwrestler »

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…

People do not seem to understand how important it is to Google they they achieve full control of the browser end of the WWW.

The blog post at the top of this thread talks about CVEs and other measures of resistance to 3rd party bad actors. It does not engage with the concept of Google themselves as a bad actor.

With full control of the rendering engine on all platforms, Google can stop engaging with standards bodies. Web rendering standards will become simply what Google says they are, even if it is to their benefit. Imagine AMP but on steroids. When Safari stops rendering mobile sites correctly, there will be lots of helpful friends and family (and ads) telling folks to "just switch to Chrome, it's a better browser anyway."

Google could also ship their own root certificate list and take control of Web PKI. Imagine Symantec but entirely at Google's option. Play ball or get security warnings. This would allow an end run around the democratization afforded by Let's Encrypt, for example. Controlling 90% of the client end of TLS confers just as much power as controlling the CA end.

Google also has no incentive to make Chrome secure or performant on iOS devices; they run the competing mobile OS platform. If Chrome/Blink is forced into iOS, it won't be long before complaints crop up and we start seeing "Android runs Chrome better than iPhone" ads.

The fundamental fight is not about browsers, it is about defining the platform: "commoditizing your complement." Google wants Chrome to be the platform, and commoditize the computer. This will let Google centralize profits to itself. This is why Android is free (as long as you ship Google's services too).

They will spend as much as they must to achieve this. It is existential.

Lots of folks in this thread talking about Firefox. In this context, Firefox is a strategic front-end for Google. Google is essentially paying for Firefox to continue existing, so that people will use Firefox as an ideological cudgel against Apple.

Also seeing some comments about antitrust. So the plan is to get the government to step in to quash the competition that exists, wait for all the predictable bad things to happen, and then get the government to step in again to re-establish competition.

Does anyone actually think this is a good idea? Or is "antitrust" just a convenient way to dismiss legitimate fears and objections.

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

#284

Post by GrabbinD33ze69 »

jpgvm wrote: post #37
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…

I don't think the IE comparison is apt. IE shipped on (almost) every machine, had a ton of lock in features like ActiveX, etc. MS actively abused their monopoly position to make it so preventing default installation of Netscape by OEMs, incentivising ISVs to ensure web based enterprise products shipped with "Works best in Internet Explorer" etc. Netscape lost market share to IE not because it lost users but because w…

Pretending that just cause chrome doesn't come installed with the android open src project, means it isn't a "default" for android is silly; yes, google play services isn't required for android, but an overwhelming majority of android users will see chrome as the default for the OS. You claim they are making a choice, but for the average user it doesn't seem like much of a choice. It's easier for most android apps just to use chrome as an "in app browser", while the users have the option to use a different browser, most won't.

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

#285

Post by IX-103 »

nneonneo wrote: post #269
mtomweb wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anti-Competitive Behaviour from google should also be addressed by regulators. Our suggestions were covered in sections: 3.1.7 No Chrome Prefrencing 3.1.8 Website Transparency Obligations https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20HDMC%20(Japan)...

As parent stated, Google can simply neglect to make their apps work well in Safari. They’ve done so in the past; GMail on Firefox was nigh-unusable due to a raft of dumb bugs for a long time, and it still uses substantially more CPU and memory than literally any other tab I have open on my browser. Right now they have to make an effort to support WebKit (Safari); as soon as they can push Blink (Chrome) to users, that…

To be fair, it's not like Safari is free. Should site owners have to pay Apple to make sure that their website shows up well in Safari?

That seems like it creates perverse incentives for Apple to keep Safari "broken".

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

#286

Post by _8j50 »

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…

It isn't in Chrome's interest to dominate 90%+ anyways. It already is being treated as the default browser when devs create frontends. It will almost certainly see regulation, at least in the EU to have some sort of standards compliance else Google is fined.

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

#287

Post by j0hnyl »

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…

The difference between Chrome and IE is that IE sucked, but Chrome is currently the best user experience. What's the problem? If you have privacy concerns there are enough alternatives. Opera, Brave, Tor browser, etc. perform pretty well.

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

#288

Post by Jcowell »

lenkite wrote: post #209
lamontcg wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get FF or some other browser a healthy market share first and then talk about cracking open iOS. Instead what happens is this internecine warfare where everyone shits all over FF for political reasons (most of which have no relevance to their day to day use of a web browser) and uptake of Tor/Brave is miniscule and most everyone sticks with Chrome.

"Get FF or some other browser a healthy market share first" Why ? Open up the platform first.

One would say it would be disastrous to open a platform first and then take on Chrome because

1) Firefox cannot compete against Google endless resources m. Google will win, not a matter of it but will.

2) The time it takes to decouple chrome from google will be too long. It may just kill Firefox before any action can really be done.

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

#289

Post by the_third_wave »

marricks wrote: post #250
m-p-3 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, this denies me from using an actual Mozilla Firefox web browser on iOS. Imposing an artificial limit on iOS isn't how the web will move forward. > Whatever you think of their decisions, Apple is the only thing stopping a 90%+ Chrome web. I don't see Apple making any effort to diversify the browser ecosystem by making their browser available on other operating systems, so their inaction on other fro…

No one is using Firefox on mobile so it’s good for you, but not web on the whole. Also while an independent entity having a larger presence is better than Apple at least Apple having a large market share makes Google need to consider what happens in safari before they do something particularly shady with web standards

> No one is using Firefox on mobile

I am No one, we are legion. Have been using FF on mobile since it became viable, many years ago. I just like my ads blocked and my data mine, that's why.

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

#290

Post by jcranberry »

googlryas wrote: post #240
cute_boi wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome is installed by default in android. The choice won't be preferred choice if website starts to put message like "Works best with Google Chrome".

No it isn't - that is a choice made by phone vendors to include it, but they are perfectly free to ship their phones with firefox, or opera, or no browser at all. The android OS has no knowledge of chrome and it doesn't get any special handling or abilities like iOS/Safari.

Samsung by default has their own chromium based browser as the default.
Post reply on HN