All of this has been done to preserve the linkage between proprietary OS/APIs, an exclusive software ecosystem, and the hardware sales that software ecosystem supports. The easiest iOS device sale is the upgrader who is worried about losing their software if they switch horses.
-
Show this thread
-
If you're a web developer, this means that iOS -- the whole OS -- is the new IE6. Your CEO and wealthiest users won't switch off it, so it taxes everything you do. They also can't imagine the web being great because, for them, it isn't.
41 replies 258 retweets 804 likesShow this thread -
If you make your living on the web, it's crucial to understand that Apple is *not on your side*. Every dollar you spend on iOS hardware is a vote against your future.
21 replies 134 retweets 481 likesShow this thread -
A necessary addendum: don't take this out on the WebKit team. All of these decisions were made far above their pay-grade. They want a web that can work just as much as you do. Yes, they're Apple employees, but just as oppressed by this as the rest of us.
13 replies 29 retweets 395 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @slightlylate
They aren't all Apple employees
But yes, good thread. If I may mention a separate but related issue, it's hard to say which is more damaging for the web out of this and Google essentially privatising it by making sure their sites only work optimally in their browser. Also AMP.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @cwiiis
Hi Chris, I'm one of the point people for making Google sure sites aren't (or don't stay) Chrome only. LMK if you see new ones. That said, a frequent cause is lack of useable features in other browsers when trying to do ambitious things. I ask teams to publish these lists.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @cwiiis
We (Chrome) do not want a Chrome or Chromium-only world. It's harder to make progress on this when other browser teams under-fund engine development, tho. Puts well-meaning teams in a tough bind.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
Yes, true - though there's definitely a responsibility for a company with as vast resources as Google not to just muscle through.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @cwiiis @slightlylate
I've wondered in the past if it isn't on Google to directly help develop other engines in some cases. Thinking specifically of Mozilla, there are definitely situations where no one objects to a standard but there just aren't enough employees to spare the time to implement it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cwiiis @slightlylate
Maybe just not a tenable situation, but I struggle with the idea that rather than doing that, a company might instead just develop it in their engine only and deploy it on their vast and widely used web sites, forcing other smaller entities to scramble (being hyperbolic here)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
This presumes that other vendors are willing to accept features. Our experience in WebKit and with Web Components is that this has only been the case when major sites use them. And fair enough! This is competition playing out and that seems good to me.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.