News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security. Parent comment

Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by JCWasmx86 on Monday June 27, 2022 @11:52AM (#31896307)
While I admire your stance on the internet being open I disagree.

Yes, opening browser engines would be good for the competition. But you missed one point: You assume all players will play fair in the competition. If all browser engines would be allowed over night, what would happen: Google will probably play really unfair. E.g. sadly the layout of Google will be messed up in Safari, youtube videos stutter/have lower resolution, everything is a lot slower, the performance will be sabotaged, but on Chrome everything will be working fine. There was even a precedent for something similar: [1]

This will probably come alongside with "Try it in Google Chrome", a lot of users would probably switch, thus the monopoly of Chromium would be unstoppable by pure market forces.

Yes, having only one browser engine is bad for the choice of the user, but it does have significant downsides.

Damned, if you do, damned if you don't

[1]: https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/4/18529381/google-youtube-in...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by mtomweb on Monday June 27, 2022 @12:18PM (#31896735)
Anti-Competitive Behaviour from google should also be addressed by regulators.

Our suggestions were covered in sections: 3.1.7 No Chrome Prefrencing 3.1.8 Website Transparency Obligations

https://open-web-advocacy.org/files/OWA%20-%20HDMC%20(Japan)...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by nneonneo on Monday June 27, 2022 @02:02PM (#31898264)
As parent stated, Google can simply neglect to make their apps work well in Safari. They’ve done so in the past; GMail on Firefox was nigh-unusable due to a raft of dumb bugs for a long time, and it still uses substantially more CPU and memory than literally any other tab I have open on my browser. Right now they have to make an effort to support WebKit (Safari); as soon as they can push Blink (Chrome) to users, that motivation will go away.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by IX-103 on Monday June 27, 2022 @02:20PM (#31898505)
To be fair, it's not like Safari is free. Should site owners have to pay Apple to make sure that their website shows up well in Safari?

That seems like it creates perverse incentives for Apple to keep Safari "broken".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by simondotau on Monday June 27, 2022 @07:16PM (#31902167)
In a discussion about encouraging browser diversity, are you seriously arguing that it’s an unreasonable burden on web developers to ensure their websites work on more than one browser engine?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by joshuamorton on Monday June 27, 2022 @12:03PM (#31896502)
> There was even a precedent for something similar: [1]

No there wasn't, unless you mean killing a 10 year old version of Internet explorer with a banner to a newer version of Internet explorer is somehow playing unfair.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by dmitriid on Monday June 27, 2022 @02:45PM (#31898886)
Yes, there was. See this thread from Mozilla's former Vice President: https://archive.ph/2019.04.15-165942/https://twitter.com/joh... (or directly on Twitter: https://twitter.com/johnath/status/1116871231792455686)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security by JCWasmx86 on Monday June 27, 2022 @12:08PM (#31896584)
Maybe precedent was an unfair word - I apologize - but it shows, how Google can/could use the power of having one of the most used websites in order to influence the choice of the browser.
[ Parent | on HN ]