https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025?stable
I don't really buy the conspiratorial takes either. I think they just had different priorities for their browser.
1. Safari isn't updated independently of the OS, so users who don't update or whose iPhones don't get updates anymore will be forever stuck on old Safari versions.
2. Being timely on new features does little to alleviate the pain that comes from all the old messiness.
3. Different priorities driven by economic incentives of protecting their 30% cut. Fair enough. But shutting out alternative web engines on iOS is definitely a dick move.
When they were asking for community input as to what developers wanted to be a part of interop 2025 that then had to go for a further non-public round with the browser makers.
Apple then proceeded to veto all of the most popular suggestions and insist that then running grep over their codebase in order to fix a comparability bug [1] with chrome and Firefox version 1 was somehow a legitimate contribution precisely so they could game the interop stats that you’re citing here.
The moment you look at the real statistics (https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=master&label=experimental&ali...) where Apple can’t game the system the story becomes much clearer and the criticism much more justified.
[1] https://web.dev/blog/interop-2025 (scroll down to the text decoration topic)
This is misleading. The “real statistics” you link to include non-standard, Blink-only APIs like Web Bluetooth and Web USB. These are not web standards. Google proposed them and both Mozilla and Apple have rejected them on security and privacy grounds. Google have not been able to convince anybody to implement them.
Web standards are not simply whatever Google unilaterally decide they want. Standards require consensus.