Should Apple Continue to Ban Rival Browser Engines on iOS?

[jonblatho]

If Chrome was on iOS they would just tell people to download Chrome.

I suspect that in the timeline where you’re able to install a browser on iOS with a third-party rendering engine, Apple would make users who choose to install such software endure UX hell such that you should count most iOS users asked to install a non-WebKit browser as iOS users turned away. (That’s to say, I don’t see Apple ever allowing third-party web rendering engines in the App Store, and I don’t propose that they should be forced to do so.)

I don’t know many developers, at least as long as they’re in the business of making money, who would willingly sign up for that.

 

[coolfactor]

It's time for Apple to open this up. Yes, it's going to increase the risk surface for users, and some developers will do everything they can to exploit and abuse this, but it's time.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Apple is way behind on implementing basic standards. This pushes users to apps instead of browser for many things.

Wow.

Apple pushing users to apps instead of a browser masquerading as an app is a good thing. It’s a much better UX.

 

[jonblatho]

I think Apple should bring back Safari for Windows. Give more competition to Chrome, and make it easier for devs to support.

I mean, that’d be cool, but realistically Apple needs to heavily invest in their developer tools for the web, and Safari for Windows doesn’t really serve that goal in 2022.

The ideal scenario for Apple and developers would be the release of an officially maintained, cross-platform, headless WebKit browser with optional select Safari features so that developers can accurately and consistently test their code against WebKit/Safari in CI workflows, while keeping the Safari UX itself limited to Apple platforms.

The cynic in me sees Apple doing this all by itself and selling it as a “Safari Cloud” service. 🤢

 

[kpluck]

Do we really want to live in a 95% Chromium browser world?

What a load of manure. If Apple is so concerned about Chromium dominating the market why did they stop developing Safari for Windows?

-kp

 

[bb9]

If you do not like the IOS ecosystem, you are free to not us it.
Programers wanting to break into the IOS ecosystem because there is money there, lots of it. But if IOS becomes not IOS, then where is the money? Where is the competition?

 

[Realityck]

It's time for Apple to open this up. Yes, it's going to increase the risk surface for users, and some developers will do everything they can to exploit and abuse this, but it's time.

This is a lot more then worrying about what browser engine is running on iOS/IPadOS. Your browser tries to always get you to use a app when possible. Both iOS and IPadOS need to be more capable. Apple seems to see even tablets as simplistic work environments instead of any real multitasking.

 

[citysnaps]

"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?"

Sure, why not? That's Apple's choice/decision, based upon their own reasoning.

With a billion+ customers and record sales/revenue year after year after year, it certainly isn't hurting them.

 

[dk001]

Apple pushing users to apps instead of a browser masquerading as an app is a good thing. It’s a much better UX.

Good thing for Apple's revenue line but a BAD thing for webapps.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Good thing for Apple's revenue line but a BAD thing for webapps.

Native > web anyday.

 

[dk001]

"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?"

Sure, why not? That's Apple's choice/decision, based upon their own reasoning.

With a billion+ customers and record sales/revenue year after year after year, it certainly isn't hurting them.

Problem with this is as Safari lags behind implementing even the standards, this slows down advancement across all browsers as Apple always seems to be late to the table.

Apple's Safari support/development is an anchor at this time.
Like ball and chain type.

 

[dk001]

Native > web anyday.

The ol' "we don't allow that standard functionality in Safari so if you want to be on iOS you will need an app but of course we get our cut $$$$$" ploy.

 

[grouch]

Firefox on iOS is absolutely fantastic, even though it uses Apple's browser engine.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

Problem with this is as Safari lags behind implementing even the standards, this slows down advancement across all browsers as Apple always seems to be late to the table.

Apple's Safari support/development is an anchor at this time.

The "standards" are whatever Google decides they should be, because Google views the Web as its personal operating system. Apple's philosophy is that a web browser should browse the web, not try to replace your device's native OS and APIs. Apple gets called out for not supporting WebPush or whatever... yeah because I love browsing on my Mac and every website feels the need to get me to click on allowing them to spam me with notifications- NOT!

As for forcing native apps in order to get that sweet 30%, yes that is certainly a part of it. But the fact remains that in this situation, Apple's business incentives and users' interests are very much aligned.

 

[jonblatho]

The "standards" are whatever Google decides they should be, because Google views the Web as its personal operating system.

That is absolutely not true.

 

[TheLunaPark]

Comically, this potential monopoly (Chronium) is currently being stopped by another monopoly (WebKit).

 

[VictorTango777]

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.

You do know that webkit was released as a open sourced so external engineering sources can contribute.

Does anyone can contribute also mean that everyone’s contributions will be incorporated into the official release?

 

[dk001]

The "standards" are whatever Google decides they should be, because Google views the Web as its personal operating system. Apple's philosophy is that a web browser should browse the web, not try to replace your device's native OS and APIs. Apple gets called out for not supporting WebPush or whatever... yeah because I love browsing on my Mac and every website feels the need to get me to click on allowing them to spam me with notifications- NOT!

As for forcing native apps in order to get that sweet 30%, yes that is certainly a part of it. But the fact remains that in this situation, Apple's business incentives and users' interests are very much aligned.

You really should take a look at what currently isn't in Webkit that should be.
Yes, Safari is great at what it does however Apple limits that functionality detracting from what browsers like Firefox and Chrome can do that Safari cannot.

However, if you like Safari, good for you.

 

[Mr. Rod]

True, but Chromium is a heavily modified fork of WebKit that is very very different from the main branch.

The engine is actually called Blink. Chromium is the name of the open source project that both Chrome and Edge are based on.

 

[huge_apple_fangirl]

However, if you like Safari, good for you.

I don't like Safari. On my Mac I use Chrome because I prefer its UI over desktop Safari and the extension I use supports Chrome. What I like is that on my iPhone and iPad, apps like Spotify and Discord are native, while on my Mac they are Electron apps that are constantly updating and taking over my Mac every time it restarts. While I would definitely make Chrome my default browser if the real desktop version were available on my iPad Pro (as opposed to the current Chrome iPad app, which is garbage and uses the iPhone UI), it's not worth having if it will also degrade the iOS app ecosystem (as it has done on the desktop). Everything is a tradeoff, and I think the one Apple has made here is a net positive.

 

[MBAir2010]

 already has, with those 3 dots on top of the ipad that blocks edge, etc controls.
many times after an upgrade, Safari sometimes does not function, while edge does,

 

[Spinnetti]

Do you get to choose the software that runs your car? Don't like it, don't buy it. Android is a perfectly viable alternative. The control over the ecosystem is what makes it better for many of us. As an alternative, build Firefox/chromium et. al using webkit. Its hardly insurmountable. (PS I do use chrome and safari on the desktop)

 

[Ethosik]

Honest request: I'd love to see somebody reference a page that doesn't render properly on iOS... Can you point me in that direction?

I would also love to know. People here keep preaching that Safari is the new IE. But have they been around with IE 6 and 7? Its not even close to IE. The problem with IE was it did not follow the web standards, and forced you to use hacky CSS/HTML to even get the page to work right. From my web development experience, I do not need to do this at all currently for Safari.

 

[00001000bit]

I think we are all looking for some laughs with Chrome going to 3 digit version and a web page saying that browser is not supported. Yep simply ratcheting up the version number doesn't earn you points.

The movement toward "integer" release numbers and away from the endless "dot delimited" isn't just for high version number bragging rights. Most non-developers don't see the numbers as dot delimited, and read them as decimals. When you end up with minor revisions that run into the double digits, you get the situation where the public sees the newer version as having a lower number than an older version and doesn't recognize it as newer.

A lot of people would perceive "10.2" as being higher than "10.15" because they read it as a decimal number and not as "major version dot minor version"

So, Mozilla and Chrome got a lot of blowback for incrementing version numbers so easily with every release, but it's far easier for the non-technical person to know that 75 is newer than 68 than it is for them to know that 6.12 is newer than 6.3

 

[Ethosik]

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.

Fully agree. Who is actually complaining about this? Developers? To make the website look fine on iOS, you need to test with Safari since everything else is based on it. To make your website work on computer, you test with several browsers. So are developers wanting MORE work to make sure their site works for iOS? Is the customer complaining? Because the same thing will happen, a random browser will not render a page correctly because developer X did not test with it on iOS.

This is why I am so sick of dealing with some bank sites, or services websites where I have complained it didn't work well in Browser X and the response I always get is "Use Google Chrome Browser for the best experience".