BTW, there is a Firefox for iOS, and I use it. It may be a Webkit wrapper, but it surely is a more pleasant experience than Firefox for Android, and I also like it (slightly) better than Safari on iOS. But I'm very casual mobile phone user, so that should not be extrapolated to the web experience in general.
They're noting that Mozilla/FF only truly derives revenue from a Google ad deal. They hold no real power with regards to user numbers otherwise. Whether or not their custom engine exists on iOS has no impact here.
Chrome is by far the largest driver behind "Safari bad, Safari no support standards" of these "grassroots no-name initiatives".
On top of that, Google owns web.dev. And when Chrome releases another half-baked non-standard it's advertised there as "this great new standard now available" that gullible devs buy line, hook and sinker and flock to HN to demand that "the new IE wisen up and implement those things now".
No Safari is the largest driver of the "Safari no support standards". It's Apple's choices, not Google or Microsofts or Mozilla's, that make Safari not support standards.
Edit-reply due to rate limit: my own experience was WebCrypto, which was very much a standard https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Crypto_... and ignored by Safari for years. There are many, many others.
If there are examples of 'Apple ignoring standards' actually meaning Chrome-only features please tell me one.
Easy.
The most obvious/glaring one is WebHID. Enjoy the timeline: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459
It's not just HID, of course. All/most of the hardware APIs are considered harmful by both Safari and Mozilla. Chrome is shipping them enabled by default, and there's no end to clueless developers moaning about this and calling Safari (mostly) and Firefox (from time to time) too slow in "moving the web forward". Needless to say that all those non-standards are pushed forward by Chrome.
The less obvious one is Constructable Stylesheets.
The spec had an obvious flaw that could lead to easily reproducible deadlocks. And that is on top with other issues with design, API naming etc. A team within Google (lit-html) wanted this feature, so Chrome shipped it against clear objections from both Safari and Firefox. And then refused to move the feature back under a flag because "0.8% of page views in Chrome" were suddenly using this feature. And proceded to gaslight other browsers' developers https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45. See e.g. a response to that https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45#issu... Of course there's now a "looking ahead" that wants to do exactly what Safari and Mozilla wanted to do in the first place: https://web.dev/constructable-stylesheets/#looking-ahead
In general, Chrome pushes 40 to over 100 new Web APIs with each release (that is, every two months). How many of them are actual standards that had actual input from other browser developers? In how many Chrome actually listened and implemented suggestions? https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
> All/most of the hardware APIs are considered harmful by both Safari and Mozilla.
Well yes. Re https://wicg.github.io/webhid/, there's a risk in allowing apps to talk to hardware. We still let non-web apps do this. We deny by default, and have permissions screens etc where people can allow/reject the access.
Disagreements are a separate issue from Safari's record of shipping broken versions of uncontroversial web standards though. Eg, Mozilla disagrees with hardware support but nobody accuses them of ignoring web standards.
And there are many known issues with that.
> We deny by default, and have permissions screens etc where people can allow/reject the access.
Yes, we do. And notification/dialog/prompt fatigue is one of many reasons listed behind not supporting these APIs. And at the link to the GitHub issue I provided a timeline of events for this "standard" which is anything but. Why would Firefox or Safari want to implement a standard that they had literally no input on?
> Disagreements are a separate issue from Safari's record of shipping broken versions
You asked for "If there are examples of 'Apple ignoring standards' actually meaning Chrome-only features please tell me one." I provided at least two. There are many others.
> Eg, Mozilla disagrees with hardware support but nobody accuses them of ignoring web standards.
Because it's fashionable to hate Safari with no justification other than because it's a drum incessantly drummed by Google's army of developer advocates. Even though more often than not Safari and Mozilla are in agreement about web standards these days. And are significantly closer to each other in the number of APIs shipped than they are to Chrome: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
Even you didn't know about issues with Chrome's non-standards until I provided you with examples, but "Safari is the largest driver of the 'Safari no support standards'"