Hacker News Reader

Comment by jefftk | Hacker News Reader

This is an excellent article. You should be able to choose a browser and then use it in all situations. Google Search only using Chrome, Apple only allowing their own browser, Facebook and others pushing us into their own in-app browsers, all of this makes things worse for users.

(Disclosure: I work at Google, speaking only for myself.)

View on HN

You can disable embedded chrome in Google app; https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/7013866?hl=en&co...

It's probably a good sign that you had to tell this the Google engineer.

I did know you can turn it off. But I want setting a default browser that supports the Custom Tabs protocol (ex: Firefox) to make that browser be used any time an app asks for a custom tab, without any additional steps.

This is currently not possible because the filtering is done by the application calling CCT. The default CCT library implementation explicitly filters on the list of known Chrome app IDs and the app has to explicitly work around this filtering by trying the default browser first before falling back to the default CCT call.

It sounds like you're saying that this is currently not possible because it's currently not implemented that way? But of course! I'm saying they should change it so that the application asking for a custom tab can only request "please give me a custom tab".

I'm saying it's not possible at the OS level because the filtering is done in application code. CCT is not an OS service, it's a client library and a service IDL. Updating the library to remove the ability to filter by application ID is similarly not possible because binding to specific application IDs is not unique to CCT, it's simply how binding to services works on Android.

You lost me. Are you saying that the people who make Android OS can't reprogram Android OS? That is all this person is saying.

That's not what they're saying. The "chrome custom tabs" feature is a service interface exposed by an application, not the OS. There is no "open a custom tab" feature provided by Android. Therefore applications have to locate an installed browser that is known to support CCT before asking that application to start a Custom Tabs activity. The involvement of the OS in this interaction is to show the calling activity a list of applications that handle the ACTION_VIEW intent for URLs, and to bind the browser's CCT service to the interface for the client. The clients are the one choosing to only interact with Chrome at this point!

Not in Google maps on iOS though.

Data sample of 1, here, but I tapped a link in Google Maps on iOS 15 and it opened using regular embedded Safari, not Chrome or anything remotely Chrome-like. It uses SFSafariViewController and there’s a button at the top to go back to Chrome (Done), it animates in from the bottom, and you can tap an icon in the lower right corner to open in Safari or another browser. Safari is set as my default browser. I changed by default browser to Chrome and the same thing happened, Google Maps still used SFSafariViewController. I like it. :)

It's an embedded browser. When I click a web link in an app, I want my browser app to open it.

There's no option in Google maps to do this.

The button, bottom right, opens the page in Safari, and is standard across all iOS apps implementing that webview. In what way(s) is that not what you are looking for?

I just want it to open my default browser on the first click. There's a setting for that now.

Otherwise the history is lost, among other things.

It’s a usability trade off in some ways. Some people will find it confusing that a link opens their web browser. They might ask how to go back to Google Maps. This way there’s a balance. They can quickly preview the link, and if they want to keep it, they can open it intentionally in their browser or share/copy the link with one tap. Users who don’t understand how tabs work won’t find their browsing interrupted by every webpage an app throws their way.

But indeed, that doesn’t prevent an app maker such as Google Maps from making it a preference. Technically if Apple made it a preference it might break the expected UI for apps using the control. And as I noted before, there are advantages to previewing links this way, it encourages users to stay within the app.

There is no technical reason why it doesn’t log history events when loaded. It could send a message to the default browser or keep a log in the background and let the browser know when it next launches, and arguably for consistency Apple should design such a feature.

> They might ask how to go back to Google Maps. This way there’s a balance.

In iOS when an app opens another app, there is a back button specifically to go back to the original app. It's right there at the top left where the standard back button for most app navigation normally is.

> it encourages users to stay within the app.

This is one of the main reasons why they do it in my opinion. Another reason is because they can track your activity in the embedded webview.

I think this should be looked at a lens of what’s net gained and net loss. From my point of view , if Apple was to allow other engines on their devices chrome will be the de-facto winner.

No Apple is not going to try to make Safari compete with chrome , especially on windows.

No developers are not NOT going to use Chrome as their target browser and use Chrome push standards

Yes people will switch over to chrome since it will be the one browser developers will target for sure to make sure every hiring works. All it takes if for one website to recommend it in order for users to switch.

Ironically the only thing saving the web from complete Google Control is the opposite of competition. I do not see a scenario where competition does occur and Google doesn’t win. Especially on a service they’re not willing to put in their death bin.

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.

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

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.

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 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.

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.

Windows search also uses IE / Edge when you search through the start menu, and this can not be changed as far as I know. Hope they rethink that for Windows 11.

Do you by chance know how to remove the annoying search bar at the bottom of the homescreen without having to install a separate launcher or rooting the phone?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com