We use a totally separate WKWebView process pool and WKWebViewConfiguration for Private Browsing.
From the perspective of the underlying web engine, we're two separate browsers.
From the perspective of the underlying web engine, we're two separate browsers.
In my humble understanding Firefox is just a Safari skin, crippled by the lack of JIT.
All these things might be completely different between Firefox and Safari on iOS. Saying that Firefox on iOS is not "a real browser" is an understatement.
More importantly, the rendering engine is what matters to the "open web", if you care about that. If there's only one rendering engine which "everyone" uses, then websites are designed to the bugs and quirks of that engine, then that engine need not fix any bugs, then those bugs become the de-facto standard. Then users can't use the web from the platform or browser UI of their choice if the only web rendering engine of note doesn't support it.
But assuming the engines don't fail to perform correctly, which one do you think 99.9% of passengers care more about?
I still regularly have to help "common people" find everything but the new-tab button in Chrome (and every browser).
Finally, it's clear that UI/UX designers always say they're making software "more intuitive" and "a joy to use" but no one (except grumpy engineers like me...) know what to click or where stuff is hidden anyway. It's all just UI churn, around in circles. Show feature prominently because users don't know how to find it, then hide it because the UI is too cluttered. Repeat.
EDIT: and all that's not the main point, sorry ... anyway, the "mass market" or "common" user's ignorance doesn't change the importance of the engine to the "open web". And don't forget how Firefox started, with only particularly savvy users caring to install it.
And I am not saying the renderer doesn't matter. My contention is just that the featureset and the UI probably matters more today, for most people. Historically, that wasn't true. (I consider switching from IE "historical". I don't know anybody who uses MSIE today, except for one-off reason like accessing some legacy banking system.)
There is no such thing as a Safari skin. Instead we use a low level component called the WKWebView, which is a bare-bones minimal API to 'show web pages'. On top of that we have built a browser.
This is exactly what Apple has done with Safari.
The only common component between Firefox and Safari is the WKWebView. Everything on top of that, like the UI, bookmark management, history, sync is unique and implement in different ways by each browser.
Regarding JIT .. the WKWebView exposes the same fast JIT as Safari uses. Run a benchmark. We are as fast as Safari or any other app that uses the WKWebView underneath.
But no, the result of a bit of chrome (historical name for browser controls) around a WKWebView is indeed just a Safari skin. The renderer is not some minor detail like how tcp connections are made, it's practically the whole thing! It handles the http/https/websocket connections, the html, css, js, html5 video and audio, canvas, webgl, webrtc (or lack thereof), pointer events, everything that matters.
- user of firefox on linux and on android, who never "signs in" to his browser chrome, or saves passwords in the browser, or other ill-advised but marketer-loved things
- also developer working on a webrtc application, who has had to explain to users "Chrome on iOS isn't actually Chrome, sorry"
Mozilla Corp. has become increasingly frantic these days, trying to maintain market share by making all the compromises it can on its ideals. Is it working? Doesn't look like it to me. I'm the only one I know personally who still uses Firefox instead of Chrome (on Windows/OSX) or Safari (on iOS). Notably, I know a number of web developers (though I'm a systems software engineer).
For every nerd who complains about not being able to root their iPhone, there are probably a hundred people who think “I/my kids/my parents won't get mal/ransom-ware”. Repeat for almost every other security or reliability issue.
I'm not entirely in love with the effects but I'm not going to say those people are wrong because they value stability and lack the extremely high level of skill needed to operate a general purpose computer safely.
It's irrelevant how many people believe in something if they're wrong. A billion people believe the Earth is 60,000 years old and was created in a week by an all-powerful bearded deity. That doesn't make it true and doesn't mean we should throw our hands up and reinforce those beliefs instead of improving education and displacing them.
“Wrong” asserts a level of objectivity which has not been established.
My argument is simple: the computer industry has failed to produce general-purpose devices which non-specialists can safely operate. That's security threats like phishing, but also just the ever present fear almost all computer users have of installing something which will break or degrade their computer.
When a high percentage of people choose to buy devices which are more restricted – and thus safer to use – the correct response is not to crank up the smugness and say that they need better education but rather to ask what we should change to make a general purpose computer safer without going all of the way to the app store model. As the most obvious example, strong mandatory sandboxing could be a big improvement while still allowing a knowledgeable user to adjust the sandbox policies or develop their own.
> A billion people believe the Earth is 60,000 years old and was created in a week by an all-powerful bearded deity
I find this comparison apt, but presumably not in the direction which you intended:
We have a preponderance of evidence that people cannot operate computers safely, ranging from the billions of dollars spent on support and data recovery services to e.g. ransomware being an industry with at least 8 figures of annual revenue.
Smugly asserting that people buying safer alternatives is due to poor education seems rather close to the creationists who assert that every hole in their theory is caused by insufficient faith. If that was ever going to work, it would have done so already.
Apple creates devices that are user friendly, they win. Guy creates software that's pain in the bum to use and requires a manual, they lose.
Now more then ever users expect a stylish non-complicated experience. If you don't provide that then users will just move on to the next alternative.
It's totally not.
All the things you list are just components of "showing a web page in this rectangle". That is akin to "how tcp conections are made". The renderer used to be hugely important because many renderers didn't work at all for some sites and features, or were massively slow. That's still true to an extent and why the renderer is still an important point.
But the browser itself is more about application features (and maybe cloud features).
How do you manage windows? How do you manage 10 tabs, or 250 tabs? How does it store your passwords and how do they sync across devices? Can you pull out your phone and easily jump to a web page open on your desktop back at the office? Does the browser crash a lot? Can the browser remember your font zoom settings for each site you visit? Can you override preferences for certain websites conveniently? How can you visualize the current set of websites you are on, or this history of sites you have visited. Can you easily restore a bookmark set of twenty websites? If so, does it restore your window sizes, positions, and tab order? Can you easily identify which window/tab is making annoying sounds? Does it have a 1Password extension? Does it override standard OS features like Print (to PDF) with its own lame-ass UI for the same thing (lookin' at you Chrome)? When you copy text, is it smart about putting the different representations of the copied data on the clipboard so it works optimally whatever app you are then paste into? Does it let you have different profiles to keep e.g. your work cookies separate from your pr0n cookies? Speaking of cookies, how easy is it to inspect and deal with them? How does its extension mechansim work, and what is its defense story against the installer-malware that comes with e.g. Java? Is it fast to launch? Can you easily re-open closed tabs and windows? If so, do they retain their state and Back/Forward history? Can you easily customize things like font and zoom and override bogus sites? Does it have an ad-stripping "reading" mode or does it need an extension? Etc.
In modern times, those things are a lot more important to me than the renderer (unless the renderer is broken).
The renderer is still very critical for developers. We don't really have a browser without a renderer after all.
Also there is ZERO data sharing between Firefox and Safari. Both apps run sandboxed and cannot see eachothers data.
Both have their own unique and private bookmark, history, cookie, password management.