You don't have 901 tabs actively open & running at any given moment. Safari swaps those in & out as you change tabs, to conserve memory, CPU & battery life.
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.
Should Apple Continue to Ban Rival Browser Engines on iOS?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
Suspended
The 901 tabs are actively open in the background. I have a bad habit of not closing down the tabs. Safari has not been able to swap them in and out. They just remain open in the background. Once day I will get to it and close them down individually
There is now an official advocacy group to force Apple to allow Chromium on iPhone: https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA - Bringing Competition to Walled Gardens - v1.0.pdf
Check out page 63: they argue that Apple is banning Chromium for its own monetary benefits, such as saving money on hardware by being able to ship iPhones with less RAM! ?
Check out page 63: they argue that Apple is banning Chromium for its own monetary benefits, such as saving money on hardware by being able to ship iPhones with less RAM! ?
Page 63 quotes a Microsoft manager: "Re-using the WebKit binary maximizes the sharing of "code pages" across processes. Practically speaking, this allows more programs to run simultaneously without the need for Apple to add more RAM to their devices. This, in turn, pads Apple's (considerable) margins in the construction of phones"
This is not a convincing argument. In fact, it's a terrible argument.
A more reasoned account would say that re-using the WebKit binary is the most efficient way of sharing the framework on the device, which is used in multiple places other than Safari. As a Microsoft employee, he should be well aware that his company shares its own core libraries (implemented as DLLs) across numerous apps installed on Windows.
There is no more innovation in browsers. Edge, and Chrome before it, used to be good. Now Edge especially is a steaming pile of ads. Mozilla seems to be working really hard to take away everything that made Firefox different and better and just turn it into a worse version of Chrome. Apple seems to have run out of ideas as well. Their big improvement was supposed to be that redesign that everyone hated. If that was their big idea, what do they really have to offer either?
So no, may as well leave Safari as the only option. This is a good article, and to me makes it clear that that is the least bad option, and there is no good answer.
So no, may as well leave Safari as the only option. This is a good article, and to me makes it clear that that is the least bad option, and there is no good answer.
That is because you have a bunch of lazy web designers who design to the browser rather than to general spec. It is IE modern electric boogaloo
So they admit that Chromium is effectively a resource hog while Safari isn't and want the user to be allowed to do something boneheaded (ie install Chromium). Totally brilliant. /s
MSI Support Request page
You can click on the Submit button all you want in Safari, but the form will never send. In Firefox, the form sends instantly.
A lot of this presumes that users really are missing out. I am not aware of features in Chromium that are missing in WebKit as a user of the iPhone. I don’t really care about the differences. Unless someone can provide a compelling functional reason with benefits to me as the consumer that outweigh the security, code fragmentation and need to provide more info to Google, then I am happy to stay with WebKit. It’s a bit like the argument : I wish my Tesla or BMW idrive system allowed plugins for third party software…. One day your car works, the next, some malicious user with a grudge on the western powers has disabled your car. No thank you!
No YOU don't... so then just keep using iOS the way you are today. Problem solved. No one is suggesting anything that would prevent that.
Lol don’t they remember what cell phones were like before the iPhone? The cell company would decide what you could download and what you couldn’t they had all the control. Now it’s wide open and now there mad at Apple for keeping there stuff organized and mostly safe.
Apple requires all apps that browse the web in iOS and iPadOS to use its own browser engine, WebKit, but amid accusations of anti-competitive conduct, should it continue to effectively ban rival browser engines?
Big tech has been gripped by accusations of anti-competitive conduct in recent times, with Chief Executive of the UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) Andrea Coscelli declaring in a press release:
Among these accusations of anti-competitive conduct, Apple has been criticized for demanding apps that browse the web to use the WebKit framework and WebKit Javascript on iOS and iPadOS, in a policy that effectively bans non-WebKit based browsers. Apple's App Store Review Guidelines state:There is heated debate around this requirement, with some developers and regulatory agencies contending that it actively stifles innovation on iOS and iPadOS, while Apple argues that it is necessary to protect user security and privacy, as well as prevent the dominance of Chromium.
Why Apple Could Be Right to Ban Rival Browsers
Google's Chromium is the technology behind many popular browsers including Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Brave, and Opera. Some have argued that Chromium's dominance is leading to a "browser monoculture," stifling the development of rival web technologies. A tweet from Jen Simmons, an Apple Evangelist and developer advocate for Safari, appears to suggest the importance of maintaining the WebKit restriction for this reason:
According to data from web analytics service StatCounter, Safari holds a 9.84 percent market share of desktop browsers compared to Google Chrome's overwhelming 65.38 percent. Safari currently has a more secure position on mobile platforms than it does on desktops, but it still comes second to Google Chrome. Despite Safari being the default browser on the iPhone and iPad, Safari has a 26.71 percent market share on mobile, while Chrome dominates both iOS and Android with a market share of 62.06 percent. Beyond Chrome, Chromium-based browsers, such as Microsoft Edge, dominate the other most popular browsers.
If Apple stops mandating the use of WebKit on iOS and iPadOS, the developers behind the mobile versions of browsers like Chrome and Edge could switch to Chromium like their desktop counterparts, enabling Chromium to obtain even larger overall market share and potentially limit the chances of rival technologies competing with it.
In its mobile ecosystems market study interim report, the CMA said that Apple defended its WebKit policy on iOS using the following rationale:
Apple argues that, since it controls WebKit and it is the only browser engine on these devices, the restriction allows the company to make sweeping security and privacy improvements across all browsers on the iPhone and iPad, providing a better user experience and preventing fragmentation. It also claims that WebKit is more secure than rival browser engines.
Why Apple Could Be Wrong to Ban Rival Browsers
Others have argued that the WebKit restriction actively harms browser competition on iOS. The CEO of Epic Games, Tim Sweeney, was at the center of a tumultuous dispute with Apple about App Store fees and now says that the WebKit restriction is anti-competitive and uninclusive:
Apple's policies around WebKit have caught the attention of regulatory agencies, such as the CMA, which has heavily criticized the restriction:
The CMA highlighted that app developers cannot differentiate their browsers from Safari, while web developers are bound by the features that WebKit supports.
The debate also links to Apple's long-running reticence to allow app sideloading on iOS and iPadOS. The only practical obstruction to developers shipping web apps on iOS and iPadOS that are indistinguishable from native apps, outside of top level games, is Apple's WebKit restriction and control over Safari. If developers could use a different browser to open web apps, sideloading from the web effectively becomes possible.
It is also of note that CMA does not accept Apple's argument that limiting web browsing on iOS and iPadOS to WebKit is better for performance and tackling security vulnerabilities:
Amid the ongoing debate, some developers have rallied behind the Twitter hashtag #AppleBrowserBan and launched an advocacy group to express their frustration with Apple's WebKit restriction.
Final Thoughts
The discussion around Apple's WebKit restriction is growing to be at the forefront of many issues with browsing on iOS and iPadOS. It remains open to debate whether allowing non-WebKit based browsers onto iOS like Firefox, Chrome, and Edge would be good for users or diminish the experience and security of browsing on the iPhone and iPad. Would allowing Chromium onto iOS, for example, lead to a browser monoculture where Safari has less than a five percent market share? Would lifting the WebKit restriction be good for browser engine competition or cement the dominance of Chromium?
Apple is seemingly concerned about its worsening relationship with some developers with regards to Safari, and the company recently sought to tackle the accusation that "Safari is the worst, it's the new IE" by asking for feedback. Apple reneged on its controversial Safari redesign from WWDC last year, but Microsoft Edge is now on the verge of overtaking Safari as the world's second most popular desktop browser.
As a result, Apple is facing pressure to improve relations with developers, as well as make Safari and WebKit more compelling, but it is unclear whether any of this is enough to prompt the company to change its position on the WebKit restriction. There is also the question of whether Apple can realistically continue to maintain its policy in the face of increasing regulatory pressure.
Article Link: Should Apple Continue to Ban Rival Browser Engines on iOS?
That is crap. People have very high opinions on what browser they want to use, because the engine matters.
If I felt you actually cared I might take the time to write something... here is some links instead.
Apple is Holding the Web Back with 'Uniquely Underpowered' iOS Browsers, Reveals Google Engineer
As the Epic vs Apple battle goes on, a Google engineer has uncovered some interesting details about how Apple is holding back the iOS web browsers.
wccftech.com
USB - Web APIs | MDN
The USB interface of the WebUSB API provides attributes and methods for finding and connecting USB devices from a web page.
A number of the application developers who have had problems with apple's ridiculous rules and approval process could have just created PWA's if it weren't for the requirement of using Apple's engine, which in my opinion is one of the reasons Apple has never been in a hurry to improve the situation.
Actually if you are worried about excessive writes to the SSD you should be worried. That is why even though chrome on the Mac is on a fork it has to use standard webkit on iOS.
As anyone who paid attention to the whole SSD write issue these people totally clueless (Chromium is effectively crap):
"The author’s point is good though: Safari is becoming the final bastion of hope against a purely Chromium landscape just by virtue of being an Apple product with an immediately large market share."If I felt you actually cared I might take the time to write something... here is some links instead.
Apple is Holding the Web Back with 'Uniquely Underpowered' iOS Browsers, Reveals Google Engineer
As the Epic vs Apple battle goes on, a Google engineer has uncovered some interesting details about how Apple is holding back the iOS web browsers.
"Experimental: This is an experimental technology". Heck, Firefox on Mac and Android doesn't support this.USB - Web APIs | MDN
The USB interface of the WebUSB API provides attributes and methods for finding and connecting USB devices from a web page.developer.mozilla.org
As has been shown several times Apple likely doesn't want to get bit in the butt by browsers that write to the SSD like a drunken sailor.
This is the wrong take on this... its not hope, its in this situation because there isn't a choice on this platform. There are no other options.
In other works, iOS is purely a Safari landscape. How is that any different?
This is a lie. Safari is dead and on life support. Apple killed it the second they abandoned the Windows version of safari. instead of using safari on my iPhone/iPad and Windows computer, i must use safari on iphone in a browser wraper and firefox or chrome on windows.
then i can use chrome/firefox skin on iphone for easier integration with my windows experience.
safari exist only on MacOS and iOS. nothing else. this is a dead platform.
firefox, chrome, Edge exist on all platforms
I suspect they generally don’t know what to do with the iPad and also deliberately seal off product directions that could prevent someone from buying both a mac and iPad.
It’s a real shame and I think they’re fully aware of it. The most infuriating part is they insist on total control but refuse to do enough to move iPadOS forward.
thats apples fault for practicaly abandoning safari. safari existed on windows; but now it's exclusivly a iOS and MacOS thing. blocking out 90% of users to use chrome or firefox etc instead
Dramatic, are we.
So anything that’s Mac- and iOS-specific is “dead”? Is Overcast dead? Tweetbot? Xcode? Things? OmniOutliner?