Imagine going to online discussion platform just to tell you don't have to explain anything to randoms.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Argued Safari Is Three Different Browsers to Avoid Regulation
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Albania and Moldavia can't wait to be oversaturated by overpriced Apple products for people with avg annual salary of $6000
I'm surprised so many people upvoted your misinformed comment.
Other browser engines are banned from the app store. Yes, "Chrome", "Firefox" and other browsers are on the app store, but they don't use the engine that they use on macOS, Windows, Linux, and Android. They instead use WebKit, Safari's engine, because Apple requires them to do so.
As some examples, on every platform except iOS, users can grant access to the browser to access USB devices, use wireless game controllers, the accelerometer, check your battery status, or vibrate the device.
Websites that use these features simply don't work on iOS, because Apple hasn't added these features to WebKit. Installing other browsers won't fix the websites, because those browsers are skin deep - they're just a different wrapper around the same WebKit engine.
Apple has no real incentive to improve the engine, as it has no competition (because they forbid competition.) In fact, they have an enormous incentive to not improve the engine - if they permit websites to use these features, it reduces the need for native apps, which reduces the need for the app store, which means Apple can't shamelessly rob devs blind.
It reduces security and battery life. The same reason Apple was the first one to kick Adobe Flash out of platform back in the day.
And this is just made up bs for more drama. It's the same engine as desktop Safari, getting constant updates.
People think so little of Siri that nobody goes after it for anti-competition or anything like that. They're like, "Yeah, you do whatever, you can't hurt anybody."
I literally gave you a list of features that other features have had for years which Apple refuses to add to WebKit, even though it means WebKit isn't standards compliant. Remember that Apple has employees on these committees that create these standards.
Remember when Apple first switched from Internet Explorer to WebKit explicitly to support those standards? And when everyone said IE was bad for its lack of standards compliance? Now it's Apple that totally ignores standards. What's more, they don't document WebKit at all, so it's a nightmare for web developers to support Safari, even though they have to since if they don't support Safari, they don't support iOS because of Apple's artificial browser engine monopoly on iOS.
Jump down on this page to see a list of features that Chrome, Edge, and Firefox have all had since October 2022 or earlier but which Apple has no plans to support yet:
Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc
If Apple was going to do that, it would’ve stopped selling products in mainland China a long time ago. Not going to happen as long as there’re still profits to be made in these regions. (And yes, plenty of people will switch platforms rather than going through the hassle and expense of importing from sellers in other countries.)
Yet people on this forum shamelessly defend Apple’s practice. For what reason? If you want to keep using Safari then keep using Safari. Nothing is going to prevent you from doing that…
As a web developer I tend to avoid experimental web standards (obviously), but what I noticed the most is Safari has a lot of weird issues the other browsers don’t have. For example, I wrote some WebGL code and the performance is much worse in Safari on my Mac than Firefox. So I would be lowering the resolution in Safari to obtain the same level of performance I get in Firefox. This is despite the full support for WebGL being there in Safari and it’s far from a new or experimental standard.I literally gave you a list of features that other features have had for years which Apple refuses to add to WebKit, even though it means WebKit isn't standards compliant. Remember that Apple has employees on these committees that create these standards.
Remember when Apple first switched from Internet Explorer to WebKit explicitly to support those standards? And when everyone said IE was bad for its lack of standards compliance? Now it's Apple that totally ignores standards. What's more, they don't document WebKit at all, so it's a nightmare for web developers to support Safari, even though they have to since if they don't support Safari, they don't support iOS because of Apple's artificial browser engine monopoly on iOS.
Jump down on this page to see a list of features that Chrome, Edge, and Firefox have all had since October 2022 or earlier but which Apple has no plans to support yet:
Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc
caniuse.com
Exactly like IE back in the day, IE had plenty of weird issues present nowhere else. Safari is annoying to develop for.
Last edited:
Wait, are you suggesting that Android is a cesspool of garbage and iOS isn't, because of Chrome? Or because of the apps you can install?
First of all - you don‘t have to install any third party tools. Second - do you really believe that something like Chromium or Firefox is insecure compared to Safari?
I've actually understood there's nothing to talk to you about when you started whining one can't give accelerometer permission. Accelerometers are a security hole, ranging from device fingerprinting using sensor calibration data to reading what is typed on keyboard near the phone.I literally gave you a list of features that other features have had for years which Apple refuses to add to WebKit, even though it means WebKit isn't standards compliant. Remember that Apple has employees on these committees that create these standards.
Remember when Apple first switched from Internet Explorer to WebKit explicitly to support those standards? And when everyone said IE was bad for its lack of standards compliance? Now it's Apple that totally ignores standards. What's more, they don't document WebKit at all, so it's a nightmare for web developers to support Safari, even though they have to since if they don't support Safari, they don't support iOS because of Apple's artificial browser engine monopoly on iOS.
Jump down on this page to see a list of features that Chrome, Edge, and Firefox have all had since October 2022 or earlier but which Apple has no plans to support yet:
Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc
Table you gave the link to doesn't mean browser not supporting something is bad, e.g. some items in them are supported by Safari and not by Chrome. It's just another example of you not being able to interpret data properly.
It's just easier to develop for one browser. Developers simply push market to Chrome monopoly, that's it. Being different doesn't make Safari bad.
It's not a question of belief, it's a fact. Apple drops a lot of unsecure and battery unfriendly features.
Last edited:
Idk,
WebGLPerformanceText
test.looc.io
Its not absurd lawsuit, imagine you couldn't install anything on your mac, other than wat Apple allows in its app store.
And that's the reason for which I own a Mac but not an iPhone.
I already vote with my wallet. There is no reason for a lawsuit.
EU don’t care about a monopoly, they care the fact context specific monopolies unfairly influence competition with artificial barriers that aren’t justifiable in proportion with their impact.![30734.jpeg]()
And what do you think is going to happen to this percentage in the US when the most popular phone changes from being webkit only? Again, replacing a context specific monopoly (just iOS users, Webkit) with a global monopoly... (Chromium, so Edge, Chrome, Arc, etc...)
It’s completely apples problem if WebKit can’t compete against blink. It’s not EUs job to help them compete or to protect their market. Just how windows was forced to unbundle explorer and media player and give users a choice to pick something else
That is the problem, EU have zero issue with a chrome monopoly and have zero interest in preventing a monopoly being developed as it’s not a crime. They care about fair market competition first and foremost.
And they are perfectly capable to force Google to follow the law and fine them for the simple fact google can’t conduct any business in EU without legal approval
2019 Google announced that it will give European users of Android phones an option of which browser and search engine they want on their phone at the time of purchase to further comply with the EU's decision.
They aren’t banning it if Apple voluntarily leaves.
And why Would EU ever care when Apple is a speck of dust in the grand economic system they participate in? They aren’t a relevant tax contributor.
The rules are simple, follow it or leave.
If you want help to have more options, then I’m sorry to say but EU won’t ever help in that endeavour as it’s beyond their mandate.
Sure, but you are identifying an issue we think is completely legitimate. If in a fair market the users still choose x and giving them a monopoly then that’s fine.
You aren’t sued by anyone, Google just like Apple can’t push chrome on the users who purchased said product.
It’s not your product, the customer owns it, and you don’t have a right to sell anything. If you don’t like the requirements that you have been informed about you are free to leave.
Nobody is forcing a single standard on Apple, they are completely free to provide safari, and users can continue using safari if it’s actually the best for them.
If Firefox want’s to use their gecko engine, if users want to use proper adblocking plugins that is supported in other browsers, Apple is preventing owners to use the browser of their choice.
Not at all, considering it would just be a black market economy. Just how you get a 1.000~$ fine for importing a harmless 1$ kinderegg to the USA, you think you can import a 1.000$ item with a sales ban?
It’s not a lawsuit, Apple filed a complaint against the regulators and claimed they aren’t covering by the law.
The government disagreed and said they are required to comply
This is something you must do within 2months of the regulation getting passed.
Grey market*. Still bought in official store though.
Yeah, you can easily import it as your personal device.
What does it mean for Apple to pullout of EU? Using the iOS AppStore in EU with European bank cards and still having the services provided doesn’t change apples legal obligations.
If Apple closes all their stores in EU but local chains and network providers are still allowed to sell it and eu citizens are still able to use every service, then nothing changed.
Officially device you buy on grey market was sold by Apple to end customer e.g. in Turkey. Or you just go to other country yourself and buy it there.