Apple Now Allowing Non-WebKit Engines in EU, Offering More Options for Changing Default Browser

[BaldiMac]

I suppose it depends a bit on how you define "viability". What you're really seeing is the widespread deployment of Safari on iOS—mostly iPhone. This is required by Apple. So it's happening because Apple makes it happen.

Thats my point. Without Apple making it happen, we’re closer to the worst case scenario I described.

It's still a 737 Max to the A320s. It is a known fact that Apple is insanely slow to adopt new web technologies. You can look up any of those on MDN and most just show how late Apple is or that they haven't even adopted it yet.

It's on them that the reputation of browser (in)compatibility exists.

Sure, but in practice, I can’t remember the last time I had a problem with a website that wasn’t caused by an extension I chose to use. There are decreasing rewards to all the additional checkboxes.

 

[telo123]

Does this mean we can get extensions to work on browsers other than Safari, such as an adblocker on iOS now?

 

[5786735]

Thats my point. Without Apple making it happen, we’re closer to the worst case scenario I described.

Are you suggesting that it's best for Apple to simply force people to use Safari vs. making it the better browser? Because it seems they done former but not the latter.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It’s all part of the EU’s plan to squash any competition to Apple iPhone and Google’s OS. I would imagine smartphone competition won’t look very different from what it looks like today. Good job EU?

 

[BaldiMac]

Are you suggesting that it's best for Apple to simply force people to use Safari vs. making it the better browser? Because it seems they done former but not the latter.

No. Apple obviously faces competitive forces to continue to improve Safari. They certainly improve it regularly, even if they don’t implement every checkbox on the standard list.

 

[makitango]

It’s all part of the EU’s plan to squash any competition to Apple iPhone and Google’s OS. I would imagine smartphone competition won’t look very different from what it looks like today. Good job EU?

Marketplaces get added -> less competition?
My browser says there is a render error

 

[5786735]

Apple obviously faces competitive forces to continue to improve Safari.

But do they? Really? I don't think so.

P.S. Only partially implementing standards ("don’t implement every checkbox on the standard list") is sort of the point. 😆 If you don't check all the boxes then...well...what's the point?

 

[makitango]

No. Apple obviously faces competitive forces to continue to improve Safari. They certainly improve it regularly, even if they don’t implement every checkbox on the standard list.

I also brush my teeth regularly, like every 7 years.

 

[BaldiMac]

But do they? Really? I don't think so.

Of course. They even devote time in their keynote to it.

P.S. Only partially implementing standards ("don’t implement every checkbox on the standard list") is sort of the point. 😆 If you don't check all the boxes then...well...what's the point?

The point is diminishing rewards. Not every standard is equally important. As I said, I can’t remember the last time I had a problem with WebKit.

 

[bluecoast]

About damn time! Hopefully this change will make its way to U.S. as well.

And everywhere!

 

[bluecoast]

Chrome and Edge will switch to native Chromium and as a result, Google will have total control of web tech.

This is an amusing decision considering that even now WebKit is the underdog by a huge margin. Google is sure as hell laughing right now.

I’m really worried that Safari becomes a second class citizen for web developers. If that happens, people switch and often there is no way to get those switchers back, no matter how good technically Safari is.

I have zero interest in switching to Chrome. Safari is fantastic.

You make a great point. But arguably, Apple didn’t improve Safari / WebKit as much as it could’ve done because it wanted people to create apps instead (platform lock in and $ reasons).

 

[5786735]

Of course. They even devote time in their keynote to it.

They face competition? Not on iOS. That's the point some people are arguing. If they did they'd be forced to do better than they have.

 

[5786735]

You make a great point. But arguably, Apple didn’t improve Safari / WebKit as much as it could’ve done because it wanted people to create apps instead (platform lock in and $ reasons).

This is almost certainly what they've done and the reasons they've done it.

 

[bluecoast]

To be fair, the EU already foisted endless cookie notices on us, they clearly love pop-ups.

They were trying to give people a choice as to if people wanted to be tracked or not.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

This needs to happen on macOS as well. Once Apple quits supporting an OS version, in time Safari tends to encounter problems on updated websites. If they allowed this for macOS, users could use FF or another web browser with an updated web engine.

 

[Analog Kid]

Safari never was a viable competitor, never. Apple tried on Windows and failed miserably. They didn't even try on Android.

Fact is that Safari is lacking quite some language features that web devs want, and therefore is holding back web development for all. While I am not happy that Chrome is now winning, Apple brought this onto their own head by systematically neglecting some modern features in the hope of stalling Chrome, just because they held their users ransom.

Now things might change and Apple might have to actively develop Safari again. Horrible, I know.

Killing Safari isn't going to bring about some golden age of web technologies.

As a user, I find Safari faster, lower memory, cleaner, more stable, and more secure.

Businesses want data. Chrome is a bloated mess, but it's a bloated mess that drips data. The same businesses that thought self checkout and club cards could be sold as customer benefits don't care what the experience is like as long as they can squeeze out that data juice.

Web devs serving those business interests want to develop for one browser only. It doesn't matter which one, just one. Everything else is extra work that's only worth doing if it means you have a larger market. "Language features" is largely an excuse-- yeah there's a bunch of red-green charts you can publish that are pedantic but not really pragmatic. There's nothing I've seen Chrome do that Safari cannot from a user side view. So the belly aching about language compatibility is simply that most of their work is for Chrome and they're forced to support a second browser. It doesn't matter which second one, just any second one.

For now, Safari is supported because iOS customers have no alternative and writing off the iOS customer base is bad business.

We're all Chrome users now. I hope those language features the devs want so badly suddenly make my web browsing an epic experience...

 

[makitango]

As a user, I find Safari faster, lower memory, cleaner, more stable, and more secure.

If only that were true. In my browsing experience, Chrome is way faster on most sites and that is largely due to the fact that they are also faster to adopt web technologies which means said websites don't need to fallback to older tech which is slower or worse in general, but supported by Safari and enforced, because it doesn't know the new technologies.
I don't know if Apple's Nitro engine still fares well against Google's but it doesn't matter for as long as Apple doesn't devote any meaningful resources to catching up on web technologies.
I mean, they have been swimming in their 15 or 30% pools all this time and did not fare well. I don't expect them to do better now.
On top of that, Safari is zero times more secure than Chrome. Security is the same issue on both browsers. Heck, I would even say Chrome is faster with bugfixes (aka more secure) because more people contribute to Chromium than to WebKit, which is also just the engine from which Apple also forked away.

The client itself may be faster and use less RAM by itself due to the native UI, but use it a bit and collect some windows and a rich number of tabs and Safari will see the same fate.
Also, I don't see Safari being more "stable" than Chrome.

Web devs serving those business interests want to develop for one browser only. It doesn't matter which one, just one. Everything else is extra work that's only worth doing if it means you have a larger market. "Language features" is largely an excuse-- yeah there's a bunch of red-green charts you can publish that are pedantic but not really pragmatic. There's nothing I've seen Chrome do that Safari cannot from a user side view. So the belly aching about language compatibility is simply that most of their work is for Chrome and they're forced to support a second browser. It doesn't matter which second one, just any second one.

So Apple should be allowed to guide consumers on a constrained path with no alternative for all the security that Palpatine promised, and web developers are not allowed to choose a platform which does it all for them? And instead they are supposed to support, what, every number of engines which think they are all the best?

We don't have that time on the planet, some people like to go home after work.

 

[seek3r]

FFS Apple let me run Firefox with its own engine the way I can on a Mac in the US

This is just as bad as MS and explorer back in the bad old days, the DOJ really needs to force at least this to change in the US, for the same reason they forced MS to decouple explorer

 

[topdrawer]

That only happens once.

then why do i see it all the time on the same sites?

 

[Analog Kid]

As a user, I find

If only that were true.

It's true. I'm the user, it's what I find.

So Apple should be allowed to guide consumers on a constrained path [...]?

Yes. They should. If people stop buying iPhones, Apple will know they did wrong.

 

[5786735]

If people stop buying iPhones, Apple will know they did wrong.

This all-or-nothing thinking is frustrating. People could like—even love—most of the product but desires some changes. The suggestion that if you don't like X then give up iPhone and go to Android seems rather simplistic.

 

[Analog Kid]

This all-or-nothing thinking is frustrating. People could like—even love—most of the product but desires some changes. The suggestion that if you don't like X then give up iPhone and go to Android seems rather simplistic.

If you don’t like it, buy something else is how a market works.

I find the death by a thousand cuts approach frustrating. I bought an iPhone because I like the system level approach to thinking. The idea that you can keep changing parts of the whole and keep it fundamentally the same seems simplistic.

 

[jdawgnoonan]

I am indifferent to all of the other App Store related changes, but this browser change needs to come to the US.

 

[5786735]

If you don’t like it, buy something else is how a market works.

Yes. In a coarse and simplistic sense. But to imply there cannot be more fine-grained changes is simply wrong.

 

[1129846]

I do not remember a moment when Apple was the leading horse in web technologies. Just because something is different doesn't make it better.
The better browser will win, as it always was. Safari has had this userbase not because Safari was that good but because Apple mandated it for long enough.

There was a time I would argue Apple was leading in web technology but that was over 20 years ago now. Apple was really pretty forward when they started showing off WebKit. It was great in html5. Google forked it and kept expanding and improving while Apple kind of stopped and feel behind.

Apple had a massive lead in voice assistant and that with Siri then Apple just stop and went from class leading to by far dead last for the 4 major players. The gap between 4th and 3rd is almost as big as the the gap Apple created when they launched Siri. Class leading to they just stop and everyone blew them by. Same thing happen in web technology.