Hacker News Reader

Comment by tchocky | Hacker News Reader

No, it's good news! No more forced crappy webkit browser engine in iOS. The other things can be added in a secure fashion as well. Sideloading doesn't need to be wild west. macOS also makes it possible with certificates etc. Messanger interop is also nice, when done right: basically would need a shared standard like the web that is done by a messaging consortium like the W3.

View on HN

> No more forced crappy webkit browser engine in iOS.

you know this just means more chrome right?

> Messanger interop is also nice, when done right: basically would need a shared standard like the web that is done by a messaging consortium like the W3.

we went thru this before. didn’t work then, won’t work now.

I know this means more Chrome. I'm a heavy Chrome user because of the dev tools that are great. At least chrome has good support for web standards compared to Safari.

Why can't it work again? I mean the W3 works, doesn't need to support all the features. Messages and attachments would be enough.

This actually opens a race to be the best mobile browser, which might well see new entrants. As people increasingly use their mobiles as primary devices, they are more likely to move to a new browser on mobile platforms and then adapt their desktops to that choice, rather than the other way around as they did in the past. Current mobile browsers have historical baggage that a new entrant would not need to carry.

> This actually opens a race to be the best mobile browser, which might well see new entrants.

Hahhahahhahahahaha. We will end up with chrome. And developers targeting chrome and safari users being left out because “works best in chrome for my text based website that doesn’t do anything safari can’t do”.

Sounds like Apple needs to work harder to make Safari into a better mobile browser, if you're so sure that Chrome would win.

There’s other browsers on android. No one uses them.

Safari is great. It works. No issues. But developers will do what they did to ie. develop for chrome and shove a banner up blocking safari.

Again, sounds like Apple needs to do a better job improving Safari. If developers and consumers choose Chrome, it's up to competitors to find a way to disrupt their lead, not engage in monopolistic practices to stop a monopoly.

There’s nothing to improve.

Developers want push notifications on a web browser for mobile? That’s not an improvement.

Firefox is a better browser than chrome but you can’t move people away from chrome.

So regardless of what you think. Adding other browsers to iOS will only have a negative long term effect.

Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.

It's not a shallow dismissal and your comments only prove you either don't understand the landscape or are choosing to ignore what's staring you in the face.

Try to use any google property on Safari (or non-chrome browser on any platform) and see all the times Google tries to push you to use Chrome and/or sign into your google account. When logged in it puts a banner at the bottom of every google search and when you aren't logged in it shows a modal that takes 1/3rd of the page.

Google reigns supreme on the web from everything from search to email and docs/drive/etc. Their reach is massive. They have in the past and will continue in the future to use that reach to push people to use their browser engine. How does Apple/Safari/Webkit compete with that? It's not that the browser is better but that the sites they visit push them to use a different browser.

Apple can double down on privacy and security and brand Safari as the browser that won't steal your data. Own that space, spread the marketing, they have enough capital to create solutions. You might as well ask how iOS can compete with Android. This continuous insistence that Apple is helpless is completely anachronistic and demeaning to Apple itself.

I do use FF

That's self-defeatist. You mentioned IE downthread; IE is not the dominant browser anymore, and the reason for that is not just that MS stagnated, but that it was challenged vigorously by competitors that exploited new opportunities better. This is one such opportunity.

Chrome was better than IE, but it won out not because of technical capabilities but through Google's constant and ruthless exploitation of its web properties and operating systems. That already happens on iOS, and I'm sure a Google SVP reading this ruling just started a project to intensify it.

And by doing so, they painted a massive target on their back. On the EU list, they come just a step under Apple, don't worry.

Firefox and Opera browsers could run Google apps just fine. Remember the days when Firefox and Opera got a cut down version of gmail, but if you changed the user agent on the browser to chrome it worked just fine.

That’s how chrome became popular.

FF took ages to come to mobile. Opera actually became pretty popular in Asia, precisely because they exploited well the move to mobile, and was screwed only by stupid commercial manoeuvers.

In theory. Practically, creating browser & its underlying engine is an arduous task. Later, it is inevitable that Google will use dark patterns like shadow dom to optimize their website like YouTube etc. And, website owner will force you to use chromium based browser, because of course "This browser works best with Google Chrome".

Cannot antitrust against Google solve it?

> you know this just means more chrome right?

In practice, probably, but at least you'll also be allowed to install Firefox.

And things don't last forever. Another browser can always gain the crown from Chrome. Without this legislation, it won't even be possible to do that on Apple devices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com