Apple's WebKit Rules Reportedly Cost iOS Users Almost 30% Browser Performance

[cnnyy20p]

Sorry But in my experience Safari has the best UX in any smartphone browser.

 

[xpaulso]

I've had mixed feelings on this for a while. On the one hand I don't love the idea of Apple enforcing Webkit as the only browser engine on iOS, but on the other hand the reality is that Apple doing so is the only reason we don't have an Internet Explorer-tier web monopoly from Chrome/Chromium. I think what Apple is doing is the lesser of two evils, currently.

Also The Web Browser (html/javascipt) is the largest exploit vector on the iPhone. It's understandable why Apple wants to standardize on an engine they own and can patch via the OS update system. You could make a case for a toggle on iPad that allows third party web engines, but on the mobile phone, the trade-off just don't make sense. It's the same reason apple didn't allow emulation until recently. They enabled it once, they could sandbox the code at the hardware level using Apple Exclaves.

In theory they could allow other browsers to function in an Apple Exclave, but then you'd loose interaction with any other app, filesystem etc.. Which again doesn't seem like a worth wild trade-off.

 

[xpaulso]

Flash was relegated off the Internet for being highly insecure and buggy as heck.

And Apple avoid's third party web engines for the same reason. Javascript is the largest exploit vector on the iPhone. It allows arbitrary code downloaded from anywhere to run on the user's device. It's the same reason apple refused to allow emulators until recently on iOS. The modern AS platform with Apple Exclaves, finally allowed them to sandbox the arbitrary code in (bin files) at a hardware level. Similar to the Micro Kernel design.

 

[xpaulso]

From what I understand, Apple is also doing this for security. They are taking responsibility for everything that can run code (JavaScript and WebAssembly) on the iPhone.

This is the primary reason. Javascript is the largest exploit vector on the iPhone. It allows arbitrary code downloaded from anywhere to run on the user's device. It's the same reason apple refused to allow emulators until recently on iOS. The modern AS platform with Apple Exclaves, finally allowed them to sandbox the arbitrary code in (bin files) at a hardware level. Similar to the Micro Kernel design.

The trade-off is exclaves are truly isolated meaning a third party browser running in an exclave wouldn't have access to shared libraries, or share data with any other apps etc ..

 

[marte91]

i always find it interesting when forum people applaud or even just find it acceptable that a trillion dollar corporation should limit their choices in software or how they choose to use the devices they paid a premium for - strange world we live in. 😂 😂

As long as people are informed of what they are asking, i see no problem, an abundancy of choices don't automatically make's everything better, Linux is open source and free, but is not preferred as a desktop os, It is actually the least used for desktop, now that's different from Linux on the back end where something like 70 % usage on Servers.

 

[xpaulso]

As long as people are informed of what they are asking, i see no problem, an abundancy of choices don't automatically make's everything better, Linux is open source and free, but is not preferred as a desktop os, It is actually the least used for desktop, now that's different from Linux on the back end where something like 70 % usage on Servers.

I love linux, I've been using Linux in some capacity since 1998. I even ran many distros on my primary desktop & laptop for years. But my entire household runs Macs/ipads/iPhones. Because they just work for 99% of users. Most of the population don't even know what javascript is. But if they're phone got exploited because of some random browser they installed, they'll blame Apple.

The trade-off is better security & ease of use. Javascript is the largest exploit vector on the iPhone. It allows arbitrary code downloaded from anywhere to run on the user's device. Apple controlling this critical library allows them to test & patch via OS updates. If a javascript bug is found, an apple iOS update patches every application on the device that renders html & javascript. It's the same reason apple refused to allow emulators until recently on iOS. The modern AS platform with Apple Exclaves, finally allowed them to sandbox the arbitrary code in (bin files) at a hardware level. Similar to the Micro Kernel design.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

You’re not obligated to have your cake and eat it too. If having an open system is that important to you, you have an option. You shouldn’t get to take the option of a closed system away from everyone else just because you can be bothered to use Android.

You don't leave your front door open, do you? If you want it closed leave it closed but don't remove the knob and hinges.

 

[loopy123]

I love linux, I've been using Linux in some capacity since 1998. I even ran many distros on my primary desktop & laptop for years. But my entire household runs Macs/ipads/iPhones. Because they just work for 99% of users. Most of the population don't even know what javascript is. But if they're phone got exploited because of some random browser they installed, they'll blame Apple.

The trade-off is better security & ease of use. Javascript is the largest exploit vector on the iPhone. It allows arbitrary code downloaded from anywhere to run on the user's device. Apple controlling this critical library allows them to test & patch via OS updates. If a javascript bug is found, an apple iOS update patches every application on the device that renders html & javascript. It's the same reason apple refused to allow emulators until recently on iOS. The modern AS platform with Apple Exclaves, finally allowed them to sandbox the arbitrary code in (bin files) at a hardware level. Similar to the Micro Kernel design.

Thank god for a sane response that really covers the reasons why.

 

[surferfb]

You don't leave your front door open, do you? If you want it closed leave it closed but don't remove the knob and hinges.

If I’ve rented an apartment that advertises “we have a doorman who makes sure that only residents can enter the building”, suddenly deciding “I’m just going to leave the unmonitored backdoor unlocked so my friends can visit without the doorman having to let them in” doesn’t just harm my security, but the security of everyone who lives in the building. Even if my friends are completely trustworthy, not everyone coming in the back door may be.

I’d argue that’s pretty selfish of me when I could have just rented an apartment in a building without a doorman if it’s that important to me.

 

[thebarrkbyte]

That's the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[TracesOfArsenic]

Requiring Webkit is ridiculous but that's what Apple does to stifle competition.

People don't like to hear it but Apple can't make software that competes with third party software anymore. They've lost that knowledge. That's why they lock it all down and give their own software OS level integration, so you have to use it and they have an advantage albeit an unfair one.

 

[ricom2ger]

And why we don't have this magical browser in the EU?

 

[marte91]

No. A lot of us, including myself, want to have a choice, as we have on computers. And for me, it's not about speed.

The iOS platform does not automatically because worse by allowing other browsers to run on it. Whoever wants to stick to Safari can do so. Nothing changes for them.

Also, on your first argument that I quoted: yes, certain companies making browsers may want to track more users, but it's up to each user to decide what browser they install on their devices.

You and other people seem to be implying that the alternative to Safari is Chrome.
It is not. Browsers like Vivaldi and Firefox have no interest in collecting users' data, show you ads or sell you anything.
(Chrome and Chromium are not the same thing.)

Allow competition and let people be free to choose.

Safari would probably even get better because Apple would have to compete with other browsers.

You have the choice of Android.
but seriously, you are correct not every one knows the level of closedness in IOS, that is a fact of life but might i suggest that if you are spending the kind of money that an IOS device commands (over 1K depending on model), you should do at least some basic research as end user, those people I'm ok, not everyone is a expert on these things, but in your case you do know how IOS and Apple in general is about their devices, you can ask and complain about it as is your right, but let's be honest apple is not changing this unless they are dragged in court by the EU for example, and at some point they might just decide that maybe the size of that market is not worth the resources, so they just don't include SIRI on the OS for some regions.
Don't misunderstand me, i agree with some of your points, but i don't see Apple changing their stance on this just because some people are complaining about this, specially when a big percentage of user's don't know, but then they don't really care if the os is open or closed, they just care about the app they are interested in runs on an iPhone / iPad.

 

[jole]

Over the years, I have moved almost solely to Safari. Main reason is privacy. On my Macs performance is on par with Chrome. Downsides thus are worse compatibility with poorly tested web apps and worse dev tooling)

(Still have Firefox, Chrome, Brave, and Atlas installed, but very rarely use them)

 

[Karma*Police]

Your argument is a fallacy. You are implying that that's the only reason why people go with the iPhone. As if it wasn't a closed system, there would be no other reasons.

Let's be honest: that's not true.

You have all kinds of people using iPhone. A considerable percentage has no idea that it's a closed system or what that even means.


I agree, but do you not see how you're contradicting yourself? You are the one defending that there should not be browser competition in the iPhone!
Let there be a real browser market for the iPhone, with competition happening because each browser maker is trying to make their browser better!

My argument is sound. What’s lacking is your comprehension of context in both my reply to the poster and what’s being discussed. Otherwise, you would have known that I never said or implied that the only reason people buy iPhones is because it’s a closed system.

As I stated, if Safari is so bad, or if people really want more browser options, people will stop buying iPhones and buy Androids instead. Hence, the market will decide. There’s zero contradiction. Forcing Apple to be like Android and letting the market decide which browser they adopt is a completely different discussion. Again, context matters.

 

[Abazigal]

Websites are getting too bloated.

It shouldn't matter how unoptimised iOS safari is. With 12gb ram and an A19 chip, my phone browser could impose a 80% performance penalty and webpages should still run like butter on it. And this is with an ad-blocker as well.

 

[sgtaylor5]

You’re not obligated to have your cake and eat it too. If having an open system is that important to you, you have an option. You shouldn’t get to take the option of a closed system away from everyone else just because you can be bothered to use Android.

Oh, I'm not saying I agree with that position at all! I was merely trying to fairly state their position. Notice I said "them", as a separate group from "me". I'm just as annoyed at it as you probably are. I don't really want to use Linux on my laptop or have to fight with an alternate OS for a usable phone. I want an ecosystem that works and gets out of my way, and the Apple ecosystem is best for me.

 

[lostPod]

I don’t really get all the hate for Edge. Is it because it has a built in AI that you can turn off ? Microsoft telemetry, that you can pretty much disable ? Or is it mainly because everyone hates Microsoft?

Brave has done some extremely questionable and unethical shenanigans in the past, not to mention their joke of a cryptocurrency. Safari is chill but only on Macs … omg do you remember Safari for Windows ?! Zen cannot play DRM content. Arc is no longer updated. Vivaldi is kinda cool you cannot sync your custom setup between devices so you have to rebuilt it multiple times (probably the only downer). Sidekick looked really cool actually, but got acquired and destroyed. Samsung Internet could have some potential now that they made it for Mac too. Shift looks expensive. Opera is a no go …

Firefox I would personally use as a daily but some websites just don’t function correctly in FF. Don’t get me started on Chrome.

It’s extremely hard to find a browser that is ALL devices compatible … especially a mobile browser that can support extensions as well.

 

[chucker23n1]

They can publish in the App Store - in the EU.

BrowserEngineKit is specifically meant to let third party browser engines have the integration surface they need to compete with WebKit.

I know. I was leaving that out for brevity (and because I was typing on the phone), and because the article already did mention it — and because vendors are, in practice, not doing it. So why aren't they doing it? Pretty sure it's because it isn't really worth the effort — users don't really care.

 

[macduke]

the results illustrate a 17-year cost to consumers.

LMAO I don't think a browser running 28% faster on some fringe benchmarks is going to save me 17 years of internet browsing over the course of my life.

 

[lostPod]

I don’t really get all the hate for Edge. Is it because it has a built in AI that you can turn off ? Microsoft telemetry, that you can pretty much disable ? Or is it mainly because everyone hates Microsoft?

Brave has done some extremely questionable and unethical shenanigans in the past, not to mention their joke of a cryptocurrency. Safari is chill but only on Macs … omg do you remember Safari for Windows ?! Zen cannot play DRM content. Arc is no longer updated. Vivaldi is kinda cool you cannot sync your custom setup between devices so you have to rebuilt it multiple times (probably the only downer). Sidekick looked really cool actually, but got acquired and destroyed. Samsung Internet could have some potential now that they made it for Mac too. Shift looks expensive. Opera is a no go …

Firefox I would personally use as a daily but some websites just don’t function correctly in FF. Don’t get me started on Chrome.

It’s extremely hard to find a browser that is ALL devices compatible … especially a mobile browser that can support extensions as well.

Well crap. MS removed the ability to get rid of copilot on the mobile Edge very recently. Now that makes me pretty annoyed …

 

[Dirk Pieters]

i always find it interesting when forum people applaud or even just find it acceptable that a trillion dollar corporation should limit their choices in software or how they choose to use the devices they paid a premium for - strange world we live in. 😂 😂

There's another trillion dollar company that does phones that are "open" and allow you to do your thing.

They do come with a few downsides. Like you being the product that is being sold. Apart from that: gold!

 

[Dirk Pieters]

I have no opinion on Apple limiting browser engines on their platform. It's their platform and it's their rules and I choose to buy.

The thing here is that I have never thought of mobile Safari as slow. I type a url and the page is there. Given the power of an iPhone processor I would say 99.9% of delays comes from the mobile connection. Once the data is on the device a 30% speed increase in actually rendering it makes zero difference. We're talking microseconds here.

The fact that they use a percentage number says it all. People use percentages to keep numbers vague.

"We grew 100%!!!" says nothing. Maybe last year you had one user. Now you have 2.

They should have given us the url they tested, with the rendering speeds in time between webkit and chromium. The difference would have been nowt and would not have warranted an article. Click bait, at best.

 

[LuisNeto]

I know. I was leaving that out for brevity (and because I was typing on the phone), and because the article already did mention it — and because vendors are, in practice, not doing it. So why aren't they doing it? Pretty sure it's because it isn't really worth the effort — users don't really care.

In theory it all sounds great as if Apple is complying just fine.
However:

1. BrowserEngineKit has multiple problems, including bugs.
2. Apple's Safari keeps having special access to the iOS functions instead of using BrowserEngineKit. (see here.)
3. Therefore, Apple has zero or very little incentives to address the problems with BrowserEngineKit.
4. Additionally, Apple imposed a rule according to which any browser using a different engine must be published as a completely separate app in the App Store, meaning they'd lose their existing customers, App Store reviews, etc. (source).

Apple's compliance EU's Digital Markets Act is questionable. They're doing everything they can to keep other browsers away.

More info:

• Balancing Security and Fair Competition - Open Web Advocacy
• Apple DMA Review - Open Web Advocacy

 

[LFO8]

I thought that people always were aware that they are buying into a walled garden when choosing Apple and make that choice willingly..?

I mean.. isn’t that kind of the point that made the whole experience good over the past decades?

If I’d abhor that I wouldn’t have chosen Apple and would have stuck with a PC and Windhose all those years ago