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

291–300 of 593 posts

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

#291

Post by Jcowell »

tambourine_man wrote: post #273

A few random thoughts: • There's a place for closed platforms if open ones are a reasonable choice. A closed platform must not be the only choice available to the customer, but it should be allowed to exist given a healthy market. It's hard to argue that iOS is a monopoly, and if so, than a browser engine and JS interpreter with access to the open web is a very powerful thing that the owner of the platform may deem t…

> It could even void battery warranty or something

This is illegal in a variety of places. They need to prove that these actions caused damage to the battery.

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

#292

Post by nemothekid »

cowtools wrote: post #70
nemothekid wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No; my problem is when people are using the "open web" as a bludgeon to get Apple to allow Chrome on iOS. If you want Chrome on iOS, just say that. To pretend that there is open future of browser diversity once Chrome is allowed on iOS is underhanded.

I want Firefox on iOS, and I want Tor Browser on iOS, and I want Lynx on iOS, and I want wget on iOS, and I want youtube-dl on iOS, and I want to run whatever the hell I damn well please on iOS. Underhanded? It's pretty clear that your stated goals don't align with your real goals here. Edit: I have a hard time putting into words why your arguments seem so deceptive to me. It is like whataboutism: the arguments you a…

I can be clear and transparent here. My position is that if you actually care about browser choice the biggest elephant in the room is Chromium. The reality is Google has shown that it will leverage it's properties like Gmail and YouTube to get users to install Chrome; from nagware to just outright breaking sites on other browsers.

If you want to force Apple to allow different browsers without addressing this problem, then you are trading one company's monopoly on a single platform for another company's monopoly globally. And there is no reason to believe that Google will behave any better than Apple has. It's not like Google hasn't tried to skip the standards process before.

So when people argue that "it's for browser diversity" I have to consider them as 1.) naive, 2.) actually working for Google. 3.) just developers who are tired of being forced to target multiple platforms.

Do I think it's ethical that this is how this stalemate is handled? No; taking away user choice is limiting the freedoms of users.

Do I think Safari is amazing? No; I think Chrome on Android, today, is better than Safari on iOS. I may be harming users today by forcing them on Safari.

Would I fold if Apple only allowed Firefox/Lynx/Netscape? Yes; My problem is with Chrome, not with other browsers. But I think the number of people who genuinely want to Firefox is tiny in comparison to the number of people who would just install Chrome.

My worst fear is that once Chrome is allowed on iOS, then there is no reason for Google, or anyone else, to target anything other than Chrome; and that would ultimately be harder to fix. A year of Chrome dominance, where developers only target Chrome would fully entrench Chrome and make it difficult for anyone to build a browser that wasn't just a Chrome fork that emulated all of Chrome's bugs and unspecified behaviors. The alternate solution, where the Chrome problem is addressed first, then the fix is "just" passing legislation that opens up iOS. One fix involves just changing the behavior of one company. The other fix involves changing the behavior of thousands of companies.

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

#293

Post by MBCook »

toast0 wrote: post #202
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…

Safari for Windows did exist (it was supremely terrible, IMHO). Apple says 5.1.7 was the last version of that; if versioning matches the Mac OS builds, that was from 10 years ago.

I love Safari. I tried to use it.

Garbage.

As far as I’ve ever been able to tell it only existed to help people test the fake “apps” and their sites without buying an iPhone.

As real apps were allowed and the iPhone became more popular (so devs had them for testing sites) that need went away. And so did Safari.

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

#294

Post by sparker72678 »

j0hnyl wrote: post #287
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.

IE gained market share most when it was a great user experience. IE 4 was frickin amazing compared to other browsers at the time. 5 and 6, _when they were released_, were also excellent browsers.

It wasn't until after they had dominance that IE really withered.

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

#295

Post by smoldesu »

jeromegv wrote: post #141
smoldesu wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Websites already have to do that, because Safari still lacks a number of web technologies that get picked up faster on Chrome and Firefox.

But they can’t on mobile. Which is now a bigger part of the web.

Sure they can.

"The Reddit experience isn't complete in your browser. Please download the official app to continue:"

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

#296

Post by smoldesu »

robertoandred wrote: post #120
smoldesu wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They definitely have the capital to make it happen. Every time I boot up Safari after a MacOS update, I'm consistently wowed by how little of their revenue actually goes in to making a comfortable, feature-complete browser. It's almost like you're using a different, nerfed internet with Safari, but maybe that's just me being angry that uBlock Origin doesn't work anymore.

There are plenty of ad blockers for Safari, not sure what nerfed experience you're referring to.

And which of those ad blockers are Open Source?

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

#297

Post by popcube »

cowtools wrote: post #70
nemothekid wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No; my problem is when people are using the "open web" as a bludgeon to get Apple to allow Chrome on iOS. If you want Chrome on iOS, just say that. To pretend that there is open future of browser diversity once Chrome is allowed on iOS is underhanded.

I want Firefox on iOS, and I want Tor Browser on iOS, and I want Lynx on iOS, and I want wget on iOS, and I want youtube-dl on iOS, and I want to run whatever the hell I damn well please on iOS. Underhanded? It's pretty clear that your stated goals don't align with your real goals here. Edit: I have a hard time putting into words why your arguments seem so deceptive to me. It is like whataboutism: the arguments you a…

he just pragmatic, if the results are worse than now, someone will not do the "right thing" on moral

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

#298

Post by MBCook »

toast0 wrote: post #208
Melatonic wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lets face it - IE always just sucked. A lot. Whereas Chrome does not. Here on HN we might rail on it mainly for ideological reasons but the user experience is pretty solid. This is coming from a Firefox user.

IE 4 and 6 were decent to good compared to competitors when released (although, IIRC, neither had ftp support?). What sucked was that they stagnated at that point in time while also becoming dominant. IE 5 for mac was well regarded, but I don't have personal memories. None of the future IEs were very good though, IMHO.

That’s my memory. I remember IE being a great browser.

It’s only what MS let happen later that turned IE into the pariah it is today.

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

#299

Post by babypuncher »

adrr wrote: post #216
babypuncher wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not a fair comparison. An entire browser engine has way more surface area for attack than a JPEG decoder.

It was just an example. What about a pdf editor/viewer like acrobat?

Still far less attack surface area than a browser engine.

Browsers can download and execute arbitrary code in the form of JavaScript or WASM. Your options for poking at the sandbox are far more plentiful when it is parsing and executing turing-complete instructions rather than a markup languages or other static data.

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

#300

Post by GekkePrutser »

m-p-3 wrote: post #119
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…

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…

In fact Apple doesn't even bother supporting Firefox on some sites. Case in point https://business.apple.com
Post reply on HN