Reynard: A real Firefox web browser for iOS 13 or later
github.com
github.com
Apple has been maliciously compliant, putting up roadblocks to testing and distribution. For example, the existing Firefox iOS app cannot be simply updated to use Gecko/Servo; it needs to be a new app.
As far as I know, none of the major browser vendors have released apps with their own engines on iOS. I suppose maintaining two (or more) different codebases for US, EU, etc. is not very attractive.
https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engi...
> Use memory-safe programming languages, or features that improve memory safety within other languages, within the alternative web browser engine at a minimum for all code that processes web content;
> Adopt the latest security mitigations (for example, Pointer Authentication Codes) that remove classes of vulnerabilities or make it much harder to develop an exploit chain;
These allow Apple to take a security-maximalist approach and block alternative browsers that don't include the most performance-killing mitigations possible.
I don't think these points are bad per-se, but within the context of malicious compliance that Apple has already displayed, I'd be scared to invest money on alternative browser for iOS.
Those devices are forced to use an ancient Safari version of WebKit which includes tons of vulnerabilities that are not patched anymore, and same time doesn't support modern ECMAScript functionalities.
With a modern browser engine, those old devices can be used for valid browser usage.
Absolutely spectacular, indeed…
> and long overdue for outdated devices!
I would pause here and reflect. There is zero chance this performs better (speed, latency, memory, battery life, etc) than Safari on iPhones since the latter has been heavily optimized over the decades for this exact use case. Older devices not even getting iOS updates are likely the devices that will work worst with this software in its current form.
Of course if Apple had allowed third party browser engines from the start, it would likely be a much more even playing field!
It’s more likely that Google is trying to boycott EU initiatives to the extent it can since giving them any support would only turn the public opinion more favorable towards more US tech regulation, and that’s very much against Google’s own interests.
Creating a separate app would work, but all existing Firefox users would have to download a second Firefox browser app, probably sync their accounts if they want to keep their data, and then remove the old one manually. You'd end with a Google Meet/Microsoft Teams situation (where one app is labeled "new" and it confuses the hell out of everyone).
Furthermore, developers cannot actually use the released app they've made if they're in the US, where a lot of Firefox devs are.
Then there's the (what I can only presume to be illegal) Apple Tax you need to pay to distribute an app outside of the app store (which is what the Github repo linked is doing), which is an amount paid per user that downloads an app outside of the app store. Epic has promised to cover that cost (out of spite, probably) for one of the major alternative stores, but if they go back on their promises you're suddenly paying Apple so people can use your free app on the phones they bought.
There are also other issues (Apple's arbitrary testing requirements, for one); Apple has once again succeeded in implementing the law in such a way that it's impossible to exercise your rights. Until the next big Apple lawsuit about this, I don't expect browser companies to bother with a non-Safari overlay.
> but all existing Firefox users would have to download a second Firefox browser app, probably sync their accounts if they want to keep their data, and then remove the old one manually. You'd end with a Google Meet/Microsoft Teams situation (where one app is labeled "new" and it confuses the hell out of everyone)
You're making it sound like a problem, but those actions are trivial. You tell someone who's dying for a non-webkit browser on iOS "well okay, but you know you'll have to download another browser! And even sign-in again!". You really think they care?
> Furthermore, developers cannot actually use the released app they've made if they're in the US, where a lot of Firefox devs are.
They absolutely can, because they're free to install development builds, which is what they should be testing anyway. Regardless, if development starts migrating slowly to the EU, that's a natural consequence.
> Then there's the (what I can only presume to be illegal) Apple Tax you need to pay to distribute an app outside of the app store
This is the only real issue, but even then I'd say Mozilla should take the money they're spending on their current nonsense and spend it here instead. "Our mission is to ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all". Really? Prove it. Furthermore, if we role over on this because of the obviously anticompetitive malicious complience Apple is showing, they win. This is the first step to getting them to remove that fee.
Firefox has struggled to get the sliver of market share they have today. I highly doubt that there are that many people like you and me who crave a real Firefox engine on iOS.
> which is what they should be testing anyway
Having a large part of your team be unable to reproduce bugs is a significant development issue. Some of these operating system features are simply not available outside of the EU.
If it were as easy as you're suggesting, Mozilla would have already done it. Google would have already ported Blink over, or Brave, or whatever browser you prefer. So far I think only Ladybird is really trying to go for a custom browser engine, though app store distribution will be an issue until they can pass enough tests (as Apple has decided your browser is not a real browser if it doesn't pass a certain threshold of existing tests).
Egg on Apple's face for expending so much effort to deny so few people something they don't actually want.
Let's put this another way, would many people be interested in a full blown adblocker like ublock origin? Because that's what I have on Firefox on Android.
I want to see Brave and Firefox fight it off in an ad-blocking-mobile-browser competition to get some more market share, but it seems like iOS users are content with just Safari and ads.
Let me put it another way: why has no other browser company released a browser yet? Mozilla is only a small player, after all.
I think the things mentioned in that open source report, basically Apple making it as hard as possible, plays a big role there.
But I just said, they are free and able to use development builds, regardless of geographical location. As far as I know, the OS is exactly the same, just has certain things disabled depending on region (for example you can breifly see the iPhone mirroring in the EU the first time, before it disapears).
> Firefox has struggled to get the sliver of market share they have today. I highly doubt that there are that many people like you and me who crave a real Firefox engine on iOS.
Why bother with any of it then? If it's hopeless and not enough people want it, why even bother?
Mozilla makes roughly $500m per year with maybe $1.5b in the bank. That's about 1-2 orders of magnitude short of what would be required to poke Apple in the eye and make them feel it.
Yeah this, I honestly couldn't care less. On Android I have switched between nightly and regular several times. It's a 2 minute job.
Well, sounds like the next lawsuit waiting to happen then if the regulations can't be applied because of that
Plus, iOS can really use a solid F-Droid alternative.
> Furthermore, developers cannot actually use the released app they've made if they're in the US, where a lot of Firefox devs are.
Yeah that's a bit insane.
...
Yes, I thought so too, they won't, not without a court order. Now that several courts have ordered such and there is a precedent which makes clear that those dragons aren't all that fierce the fruit factory shouldn't have any excuses any more but that doesn't bother them just as long as the true believers keep on coming for their indulgences. Hence, ditch that thing and maybe they'll get the message.
The last time I checked Android, the security and privacy story was much worse than Apple. Further, it's not just me who has to make the change - it's the family I share photos and videos and other things.
Yes, I would prefer to have other App Store options, but it is balanced against other issues. (And yes, I have owned an Android phone before - every time I buy a new phone I compare the two again.)
The example you gave on it not just being you who needs to change but the family I share photos and videos and other things [with] is all the more proof that you shouldn't touch these mobile prisons with a 3-metre pole. I share my photos and videos and other things with family as well but I don't care what they're using to access them 'cause I use a (self-hosted, but that is not essential) web service for it. No lock-in, no nothing. If you want to view those photos on your Commodore-64, have at it. There's even apps you can use, including one for those stuck on fruit phones.
I don't believe the 'security and privacy' story the fruit factory pushes, there've been far too many examples to disprove the narrative. Not that I trust Google, mind you. I use Android but I do not use Google, do not have a Google account, don't have Google services (etc.) on my devices.
Should Android become too distasteful I guess the next step will be a Linux device of some sorts. I have about 8-10 years to find or build one assuming these G75s hold up like the Redmi Note 5 Pros did (used them for 8 years) and the Motorola Defy/Defy+ before that (used for 9 years). All those devices still work, one of the 2 Redmis is my new 'dangerous work phone', the other plays Linux server since it no longer has a screen (which is what happens when you lend it out...). One of the Defy's is in use as a trailer camera, also without a screen. Android devices remain useful long after the market has given up on them.
I install my apps using Aurora and F-Droid.
So having two versions on iOS would be fine, and as apps can be limited to only show up in some regions wouldn’t be confusing as many would just see one
Just because other efforts and initiatives are flasher or noisier doesn't mean Firefox isn't the main priority.
> One or more apps in source "Reynard Browser" are missing a marketplaceID. This most likely means they are not notarized, which is not supported by this version of AltStore.
I'm really looking to a successful version of a Gecko browser that can be installed with just AltStore via the Japanese law.
I just wish they had a different name now for AltStore Original… telling them apart from the icon is basically impossible
Glad the apple ecosystem is being opened up (albeit unwillingly) by hackers.
I am 100% over the walled garden, lock out, right to disrepair bullshit. If we had a government instead of a quasi-fascist kleptocracy billion+ dollar corps wouldn’t have the power to do this.