Should Apple Continue to Ban Rival Browser Engines on iOS?

[jonblatho]

And we are returning to the old phone days where cell companies had a ton of junk apps on your phone that you couldn't get rid of.

What? This has nothing to do with that. This would allow users to install web browsers that aren’t just a different UI over the same WebKit engine used in Safari in the event that — due to Apple’s error or a developer’s — a website doesn’t work correctly in WebKit.

As a web developer, WebKit tends to be the biggest thorn in my side because it has a number of unexplained and, in my opinion, inexplicable quirks that break things which work without issue in all other browsers. Just this week at work, we ran into an issue because either Safari or WebKit sometimes doesn’t use the same protocol as the requesting page when loading a resource via a relative path, which was subsequently leading to CORS issues. There are also cases where things break on Safari on iOS but not macOS, or vice-versa. (And no, none of this has anything to do with tracking prevention.)

Never mind that, while I personally prefer to do my work on a Mac anyway, we have to have Macs on hand to test this stuff because Safari is on macOS only.

 

[nt5672]

Since WebKit on iOS historically sucks, (though admittedly it has gotten better) he11 yes iOS desperately needs another browser that actually works when Safari doesn’t.

If Apple built the best, Apple would not have to worry about it. But they don't. Apple's web kit is just shinny, but old, excluding security. I remember when Safari was better at rendering web pages than, the standard at the time, IE. Apple can do better, but it needs someone that understands technology leading, not a supply chain guru.

 

[windrago]

Steve Jobs once said Apple is a company that believes in choice.

yes. Theirs.

 

[buststyles]

Buy an Android phone. 🤷🏽‍♂️

 

[fivetoedbear]

I'm good with it the way it is. There's one WebKit, it's deeply vetted, and has entitlements to be able to create JIT code.

If Apple opens up to let programs embed their own rendering engines, not only will there be security issues, but every program is potentially an Electron app. RIP your security, your storage, and your battery life.

And no, I don't want my iPhone or iPad to be "just like macOS". I have a MacBook Air for that. To use an old phrase, I want a "bicycle for the mind" not a big SUV.

 

[Solver]

When Apple stops updating the iOS for a device they stop updating the built in browser. And, they restrict anyone from creating better core browsing with updated features. Sounds like planned obsolescence.

 

[Zaft]

I mean, it's not rendering 901 tabs, that would be ridiculous. Obviously mobile browsers need to be designed differently to their desktop siblings. It's also completely acceptable that you won't install another browser, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us need to be restricted from doing so...

They literally don't and that's the entire issue...

Tell me then what’s the difference in iOS if chrome used chrome engine?

I mean, it's not rendering 901 tabs, that would be ridiculous. Obviously mobile browsers need to be designed differently to their desktop siblings. It's also completely acceptable that you won't install another browser, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us need to be restricted from doing so...

They literally don't and that's the entire issue...

Visually how is it different? It’s not..

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Absolute, 100%, NO (other browser engines)!

The biggest downside of allowing sideloading is not alternative stores, it’s Chromium on iPhone obviating the need for native apps at all. Currently Apple bans Chromium/Electron and cripples PWAs. This forces devs to make native apps. If Chromium was allowed on iPhone devs would flock to it as it would finally fulfill the dream of “write once, deploy everywhere”. The Web would become the OS of everything, which is conveniently controlled by Google (that is why I think apps store regulation will actually help Google long-term).

Look at how native software on the Mac has been decimated by Electron. Look at how Chrome OS is killing Apple and Microsoft in education. If everything can be done in a web browser (even if it’s way crappier than native) then that’s what devs will do. It won’t matter that Apple’s UI frameworks are better, that they have better APIs, that their processors are miles ahead. Everything will essentially run Chrome OS. No thank you.

 

[yitwail]

For what it's worth, I'm in favor of choice, even though I'm content with Safari. If I had a choice, I might try another browser, but not Chrome. I only use Chrome in desktop because I'm a web developer, so I have to ensure things work on Chrome.

 

[Naraxus]

Seems like regulators want ios=android. Google might just as well buy ios and rebrand it, the way things are going.

Regulators maybe. For me I'd like to have the option to use other browsers. Safari is my default on (mainly because I'm just used to it) but other ones would be nice to have

 

[mjtomlin71]

This has nothing to do with being anti-competitive and everything to do with not allowing 3rd party runtime engines on their platform, which in effect allow the creation of sub-platforms. These sub-platforms, if and when they become popular have the ability to hold back platforms and keep the user base and technologies from moving forward. This happened on the Mac many times when developers would refuse to update their engines in a timely manner keeping users from being to update the OS.

Apple did not want this to happen on personal devices where updates were critical for the sake of privacy and security. This is why they never allowed Flash and it is the same reason they won’t allow a 3rd party javascript/HTML runtime engine.

It would be one thing if Webkit was a proprietary engine, but it is not. It is in fact open source and anyone is free to contribute.

 

[bdub786]

Interesting. I didn’t realize the other iOS browsers were constrained to WebKit API. So it’s two points of contention: let the existing browsers run their own engines, and let others in the App Store. The former seems reasonable — hard to claim Chrome (not constrained by WebKit) is a fraudulent app that poses a higher danger to users than Safari. The latter however is interesting — fraudulent browsers could easily be created to steal passwords from users. How does Google limit the risk of the latter in their store, or is it just up to the user to chance it?

 

[mschmalenbach]

iOS is not people's only choice - it seems to me some folk want to have their cake AND eat it...

I am on iOS primarily for security/privacy reasons and for reducing the chances of having really poor quality apps messing with my primary device, the one device that I do banking & personal communications on.

I absolutely want security & privacy.

If folks want other things too, then they can go to Android, and good luck to them.

 

[fontman]

Apple does not want to support other companies' software. there is a cost to that

 

[jonblatho]

I'm good with it the way it is. There's one WebKit, it's deeply vetted, and has entitlements to be able to create JIT code.

If Apple opens up to let programs embed their own rendering engines, not only will there be security issues, but every program is potentially an Electron app. RIP your security, your storage, and your battery life.

And no, I don't want my iPhone or iPad to be "just like macOS". I have a MacBook Air for that. To use an old phrase, I want a "bicycle for the mind" not a big SUV.

Conversely, when WebKit has zero-day vulnerabilities, which has happened multiple times in the past year or so, all browsers on iOS are impacted and a fix requires updating the entire OS, not just the impacted browser(s). So much for security, right?

 

[cmaier]

Steve Jobs once said Apple is a company that believes in choice.

Exactly. You can choose apple’s curated ecosystem, or you can choose android’s malware-infested UX nightmare system. You have a choice.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

For what it's worth, I'm in favor of choice, even though I'm content with Safari. If I had a choice, I might try another browser, but not Chrome. I only use Chrome in desktop because I'm a web developer, so I have to ensure things work on Chrome.

The only people whose choice will be increased by bringing Blink to iPhone are the web developers who now get to choose not to make native apps. And Google who can now choose to ignore anyone’s vision for the Web but their own. Benefit to users is marginal and theoretical at best. Downsides are very real and large.

 

[TheSapient]

If Jen Simmon's tweet was really about opening up iOS to other rendering engines (and it is not clear to me that it was), her argument is quite terrible. She seems to be saying that if Webkit would simply go away if other engines were allowed to compete with it, and that would be bad for innovation. But if Webkit is that uncompetitive, how is it helping anything?

 

[jonblatho]

The only people whose choice will be increased by bringing Blink to iPhone are the web developers who now get to choose not to make native apps. And Google who can now choose to ignore anyone’s vision for the Web but their own. Benefit to users is marginal and theoretical at best. Downsides are very real and large.

Maybe Apple should make its platforms and terms more competitive, then.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Conversely, when WebKit has zero-day vulnerabilities, which has happened multiple times in the past year or so, all browsers on iOS are impacted and a fix requires updating the entire OS, not just the impacted browser(s). So much for security, right?

Solution is not Blink, it is Apple investing more in WebKit and allowing Safari to undated separately from the iOS. It’s idiotic for them to still be tied together like this.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Should they? Not necessarily. It is THEIR playground, and if they want to control it, they can. I wish there was an effective popup and spam blocker, but that would likely need deeper access to the OS than Apple would be willing to grant.

Should there be a FireFox for iOS? Why not. Should Apple work harder to address the issues, the serious issues, that some seem to be complaining about? Sure. Like: I'm getting tired of the 'Can't find the server' errors when I have 'private wifi address' on. REALLY tired... I'm also not happy that 'iClod Private Relay' is such a stinking turd. I mean, sure 'beta' means it might not work, but it works sometimes and then cries 'MOMMA!' and curls up and dies. Apple has been slightly less than successful in getting it to work for me.

Again, I get 'beta', but... It's like a 'ghost feature'. No one knows how to make it work well, or keep it running, and apparently some phone providers are killing it too. (Makes me wonder how much they do snoop, and what kind of money they get for it)

 

[Realityck]

Do we really want to live in a 95% Chromium browser world? That would be a horrible future for the web. We need more voices, not fewer.

I really like this comment she made, The world doesn't need a total monopoly of google Chromium, in spite of people that fault Apple trying to modernize Safari and encounter problems. Give it time, getting a better browser is a long process of development. Just look at how many have been trying to improves web browsers in wiki's Timeline of Web Browsers.

Instead of making this a Safari vs Chromium, how about supporting everyone else working on web browsers.

 

[CubeHacker]

I for one would absolutely love to have native Firefox on my ipad. The current one has none of the great features found on the desktop or android version and is pretty much just Firefox by name, but under the hood its just safari with no way of using extensions. I love my ipad, but Safari as a browser is certainly not my favorite and would probably fall in my top 3 major changes wishlist.

 

[jonblatho]

Solution is not Blink, it is Apple investing more in WebKit and allowing Safari to undated separately from the iOS. It’s idiotic for them to still be tied together like this.

Agree that Apple should improve WebKit and unbundle Safari/WebKit updates from the OS. Whether Blink or other rendering engines are the solution should be left up to the user.

 

[sdf]

Apple must continue to ban embedding of competing browser engines.

Neither Apple nor users can rely on apps updating the browser engine they use in the event of vulnerabilities. Making it a core part of the system and Apple's responsibility to update is the only workable solution.

This matters less for actual browser apps like Chrome than apps that just embed browsers, but still: Apple can't be blacklisting browsers (and, worse, apps containing a browser) every time there's an unpatched vulnerability. If Chrome worked yesterday but not today it doesn't really matter to users why.