It’s fine, a lot of people still use Safari on desktop despite Google Chrome being available. And developers have to support it all the same

The same was true when IE dominated. The point being missed is if a single browser is allowed to dominate across the board, the owners of the technology become the gatekeepers of web technologies. That would have been extremely bad under Microsoft, and it is going that way with Google. In fact, there was a groundswell of negativity towards WebKit until Google broke the hegemony with by forking it, creating Blink. Which is now in a significantly more dominant position than WebKit ever was.

I’m not suggesting that Apple would be any better or that not allowing other browser engines is a good thing. However, the fact that they don’t is keeping Google/Chrome/Blink from having total dominance of the web.

I'm a regular desktop Safari user and you'd be surprised how many websites are just flat out broken in Safari, especially government sites. Part of the reason I use it as my daily driver is to ensure that the websites I'm working on get tested properly in Safari since the defacto browser for most developers seems to be Chrome.

I wish Apple would make a Safari for Windows or Linux. That the only way to test that your site works properly in Safari is to buy Apple hardware is certainly a contributor to sites being broken in it.

They had Safari for Windows for several years, but abandoned it because it didn't gain enough market share.

That is the point, they want user to complain to Site owners for not working on Safari and forcing them to Buy Apple Hardware.

Basically if you want to serve the 1.4B Active Apple Devices which nearly all use Safari, you have to buy an Apple hardware to test it.

It’s not a perfect analogue, but under Linux, Epiphany/Gnome Web is a reasonably close match for most purposes. Not sure about Windows.

The main reason safari is used in desktop is because other browsers are not first class citizens. They have access to resources that third parties don't.

Apple doesn't allow competition on their device because they know they can't win if forced to compete. Apple, even with all its resources, can only be spread so thin. By hobbling the ability to run your own engine, they don't have to try very hard.

This is the same reason they don't allow open installs. If they like an idea, they can compete at 30% more margin and with their army of engineers. Look how easy it is for them to enter the banking and movie businesses.

Keeping developers weak means they yield all the leverage. It's the modern anticompetitive playbook.

The DOJ can restore the balance by forcing Apple to open up compete fairly. It'll make for better software and products all around.

I don't think this is true. Safari on Desktop still has a considerable market share. IMO Safari is actually a pretty great browser. It is fast and power efficient, and much of the reduced feature set is stuff that I don't want anyways, like Push Notifications or PWAs on Desktop.

Btw, safari has its own API to get push notifications on desktop.

I assumed it was because they didn’t want users using the default, pre installed browser to see “this site works better I chrome” alerts on their i-devices

A sure sign they can't keep up and aren't winning over mobile web devs.