Hacker News Reader

Comment by spacedcowboy | Hacker News Reader

The main thing stopping Chrome from being the only web browser people cared about supporting was that Safari was the only thing that worked on iphones, and if you have to support 2 browsers you might as well go to 3 or 4. The cost calculation for support is 1 <<< 2 < Many.

And that’s about to change - thanks EU. Safari is losing its protection, and soon enough the equivalent of “Have you tried turning it off and on again ?” is going to be “Have you tried installing Chrome ?”

I actually think this is going to be one of the keystones in the dam holding back utter domination of the Web by a company that makes its money exploiting your privacy. Hope I’m wrong.

View on HN

If Apple hadn't stopped investing (for real) in Safari 10 years ago, maybe people would choose it based on the merits.

It would be stupid to keep "protecting" Safari when it's clear to anyone the reason why so many web features were kept back from it were precisely to keep web apps from competing with the sweet sweet 30% store tax.

I'm a Firefox daily user and will continue that until the browser becomes truly unusable, at which point I'll give Ungoogled Chromium another go.

> The main thing stopping Chrome from being the only web browser people cared about supporting was that Safari was the only thing that worked on iphones

It's IE6 all over again.. so gross, right? but that's real life for you.

Chrome is far above what IE ever was. Just thinking about supporting old version of IE again makes me sweat and I'm glad those days are gone.

Huh? Isn't the entire point of GP's comments that they are /not/ gone?

Just because Chrome is a bit less terrible than IE6 in terms of user/dev experience (which, to me, is entirely a matter of more sophistication in software development and Internet stuff, and a keen and burning desire to sell ads) doesn't mean we're in a good position. A browser monoculture is good for nobody but Google.

This feels like the exact same bad old days to me, where if you're not using the modern-day IE6, the web is a pain in the ass. That was my takeaway from the article and (as a Firefox user that also reaches for Chrome far too often) one I sympathise with.

Safari shouldn't be protected, but rather Chrome/Google should be regulated.

Just as Apple and their iPhone/Safari/App Store monopoly are being regulated by governments worldwide.

These giants get to push every society and their citizens and businesses into funnels while wrapped in straight jackets. Once regulation starts to catch up, we'll see open computing, proper competition, untaxed airwaves, mobile and device rights, and healthy market shares again.

There is an argument to be made that Firefox is what is stopping Google getting hit with anti-trust, by being a competitor on paper.

Unclear how much damage Google will do before getting slapped, WEI might have made it if Mozilla wasn't in the picture.

I’ve never bothered with Chrome on Apple machines thanks to the iCloud Keychain. Surely there are other services that can create stickiness.

Apple published an official Chrome extension last year that integrates Chrome with iCloud Keychain. So that's one dump truck of dirt into their own moat.

Well, I would call that them giving up the ghost, but the ship sailed a long time ago to mix metaphors, when Apple canned Safari for Windows.

Maybe this much ballyhooed trust in mobile Safari as the last bulwark against Chrome ubiquity is just an affectation of the HN set and not even something Apple cares about very much at all. Maybe you’ve all been placing your trust in a champion who’s uninterested in your fight.

As for me, I’m glad that Orion is an alternative if I ever was to switch away from Safari.

Apple has warned about power usage when using other renderers than WebKit. Orion also mentions this as an advantage for them as they are using WebKit. Awesome browser if you are in Apple’s garden btw. Kagi also mentions that WebKit is developed by both Apple and FOSS community. I wonder how much of that holds..

https://blog.kagi.com/orion-features

Isn’t that for windows only?

I can see the argument that allowing users to run Chrome on iPhones may hurt browser engine diversity, but I don't see how that translates to giving Google more dominance. Most alternative browsers are based on Chromium, and strip out Google shit. Even in the bleak potential future where running a non-blink browser is untenable, non-Chrome browsers will exist and stymy Google's attacks on the free web.

That's not to say that there's nothing to be concerned about; engine diversity is valuable all on its own, and Google won't stop attempting to capture the web for as long as it exists and hasn't yet succeeded. This is one of those "patient monster vs eternally vigilant guards" deals where the monster is guaranteed eventual victory unless it is destroyed or victory is rendered impossible.

Google can (and has) ignored web standards/pushed their own features.

They are limited in what they can do today because every iPhone uses uses WebKit. e.g. Google _could_ do whatever they want today, but they'd miss out on iPhone uses.

Even assuming that Google is benevolent, it makes less sense for developers to target alternative web browsers if they don't have sufficient market share. Today most businesses support Chrome and WebKit (because they want those iPhone uses). If Chrome is dominant then it becomes self-reinforcing.

The market share for other browsers is minimal, so nobody is going to develop/test for other browsers, so the experience on other browsers becomes worse, so users are forced to use Chrome, so the market share for other browsers drops further.

Orion is based on WebKit and not specifically Blink, at least.

A bitter irony if the EU’s attempt at anti-monopoly regulation leads to a browser monopoly.

Not if they go after Google next.

> And that’s about to change - thanks EU

Lol, the EU law is there to protect you from a monopoly, not to force one. The mental gymnastics are in the circus territory for this one.

You've heard of unintended consequences right?

Have you been living under a rock for the last 20 years to think that regulations can't result in outcomes that are opposite to what was intended ?

I'm not sure it will backfire, but it's absolutely not mental gymnastics to think it could.

I might be misreading you, but Chrome has worked on iPhones for 10+ years. I've never used Safari.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/12/06/28/first_look_google...

Chrome on iPhone is based on WebKit, like Safari, not Blink, like Chrome everywhere else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com