are you really saying you would pay higher prices because you can' t press the "no" button and never visit the same website again?
are you really saying you would pay higher prices because you can' t press the "no" button and never visit the same website again?
It's not absurd to me to pay for platforms that attempt to preemptively remove filth rather than need to be on the constant lookout for filth. This is particularly true when most of these entire ecosystems (the web, app stores, video content) seem to be based on sneaking filth in front of your eyes at every available opportunity.
Making an hyperbole here, but wouldn't Mosaic 1993 edition solve every issue then?
I mean, removing features of course makes software more secure
I argue that disabling JavaScript would only bring great benefits to humanity
Apple market is rich, it is the richest tech company, with the highest market valuation ever, one cannot avoid it
So it's gonna drive adoption no matter what
Like it did for Flash (right or wrong, they did it)
I was writing web applications during the 90s, they were called intranets back then, IE wasn't bad, it was simply unavoidable
And being unavoidable halted competition for more than a decade
On another side: having a platform that doesn't obey to common standards creates tech segregation
I remember seeing japanes phones 20 years ago, they were ahead of time,but unusable outside of Japan
Last but not least, having a flag that says "allow me to shoot myself in the foot of I want to" it's less hostile than "you don't know what you're doing let me handle it for you"
WOW
That escalated quickly
I never promoted Chrome, in fact I'm an old time Firefox users and in the 90s I owned a Netscape 3 gold license.
I don't write fronted software anymore, but writing for every browser means adhering to the standard
Apple has steered away more than any other vendor lately
So...
Yes, which you’ll find if you do Safari adheres to quite well. Finding examples where it doesn’t is easy, just like on chrome. Which is why we have media queries and poly fills because it’s simply impossible to have a unified platform without one entity owning it. If you found out Chrome doesn’t render the same on linux as it doesn’t on windows, would you call this not adhering to the standard?
They don' t
Apple refused to implement 16 web API in Safari
> Which is why we have media queries and poly fills because it’s simply impossible to have a unified platform
And that' s why big players like Apple hat control a closed ecosystem shouldn't be allowed to be assholes
At least on Android I can install other browsers and other browser engines
Do you see the difference?
> Chrome doesn’t render the same on linux as it doesn’t on windows
that' s not true
Windows and Linux that have simply different font rendering engines and different native widgets
That's all
> would you call this not adhering to the standard?
absolutely NOT!
In no part of the standard rendering is formalized
It wouldn't make sense
The way things are rendered is standardized, not the way they should look
https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-html5-20141028/rendering.html
> HTML is intended to apply to multiple media (it is a media-independent language). User agent implementors are encouraged to adapt the suggestions in this section to their target media.
OK and these APIs don’t stop real work.
> And that' s why big players like Apple hat control a closed ecosystem shouldn't be allowed to be assholes
And putting all that power into the hands of a single browser will not end well, so stop promoting Chrome or saying other browsers should be like Chrome. FF isn’t going to win.
> At least on Android I can install other browsers and other browser engines Do you see the difference?
Yes, next question, do I care?
> that' s not true
100% true, read the dev blogs and understand the WM on linux is fundamentally different than windows or mac, therefore rendering is not exactly the same.
Standards help align, they do not force alignment. If safari implemented a p element as a span, then this is not following the spec. Choosing not to implement a portion of a modular spec, is still following the spec.
Yes, just like you’re free to never visit an annoying website asking to spam notifications you’re free to take away Apple’s decision making power you grant them by simply not buying an iphone.
That's a very common argument
But it doesn't get any less stupid with time.
I never owned an iPhone.
Because I am an adult homo sapiens that can take decisions for himself.
But you should know that if a standard exists, and the standard has been approved by a consortium, a consortium where Apple is a very important member, they should at least support what they signed for, instead of forcing developers to go through hoops just to support their platform.
When Elon Musk make Teslas he has to put airbags in them, stop lights, front lights, safety belts, they must pass crash tests, because that's the standard, otherwise he couldn't sell them as cars.
So if Apple believe that the standard that they approved is too dangerous, they can make their OS more secure, instead of putting the blame on developers.
They are
> I’m a full stack dev, I understand what it takes to support safari and a majority of the time is actually Chrome being fast and loose with the standard
I am as well, I understand a closed platform when I see one.
> But the features lacking don’t stop meaningful work at all.
If only it was true...
It' s not lacking, it has been removed on purpose.
The web engine Safari is built from already supports those features.
You don't even understand the rules.
Sorry.
Notification APIs are in Webkit, the open source implementation of Safari.
proof: https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/89c28d471fae35f1788a0f...
Can you prove that Apple didn't remove standard APIs from their browser?
Or ask browser vendors to have a global allow/deny flag for every Web API
I don't want websites asking me to enable notifications. 99.9% of the time, the answer is no.
I don't want websites asking me to enable location access. 99.9% of the time, the answer is NO.
Nor do I want them asking for permissions to install to my Home Screen (the answer is no), or to track me (the answer is NO).
>Or ask browser vendors to have a global allow/deny flag for every Web API
When possible, I've carefully configured my browser to automatically reject these requests, but instead of respecting that, these websites, with all their hubris, have chosen to circumvent my preferences by presenting shitty JS-based permission requests (as opposed to using the permissions UI built into the browser).
Each one of these new web APIs have significantly degraded my experience as an end user, by presenting a million permission dialogs whenever I'm visiting webpages, without providing me with any features of value (again, because I'm not ever, ever gonna trust some random website with these permissions).
Users don't care to pontificate about the virtues of the open web, they just want their stuff to work. And until the open web can provide a better user experience, of course users are going to flock to various walled gardens (App Stores, Facebook, etc...). Until we find a way to implement web standards elegantly, without degrading the user experience, the open web is always going to face an uphill battle over the relative safety of walled gardens.
I know I don't want them.
Apple is in the committee.
Every time I pickup an old iOS device the stupid thing is nags me to update it, 100 times. And you can't just click no you have to click multiple things to get it to fuck off.
Beyond the "punch the monkey" game you mention, another massive problem is that web push notifications have just become another vector to deliver spam to users. If you look at devices belonging to "normal" users, you'll often see dozens of spammy web notifications (pornographic content, "30% off, BUY NOW", etc...). And because these are average users, they don't necessarily understand how to configure their devices to reduce or eliminate the spam.
Web push notifications needs a way to proactively filter out those that abuse the API, otherwise its doomed to become just another vector for spam that pisses off end users.
But bad websites are not something we are going to get rid of using only iPhones...
To get rid of the cookie notifications, I can at least set web pages I go to default to reader view.
The problem is that if Apple singlehandedly decide what's right and what isn't we are back to IE.
They just don't want web apps to rival with the native ones skipping the whole store experience and fee
But that's just speculation on my side, I have no data to back it up
On top of that, how many apps are really just surfacing server hosted services where there are no in app purchases?
Among the most popular there are
- Uber
- Telegram
- Trivago
- Tinder
- Google maps Go
- AliExpress
Do you have a citation?
same reason people write native apps on iOS
It's easier to track users, especially those users rich enough to buy high end phones and that will probably spend more money and the ROI is higher.
They also make PWAS to gain user base on low end phones and emerging markets.
And because making them is quite cheap.
Do you propose that Apple makes Safari more able to invade privacy?
If the only purpose of PWAs for Android is to make it easier to run on low end cheap phones - that’s really not a good argument is it with iOS is it? Even the 6s from 2015 is more performant than many mid range new Android phones.