There's no conspiracy. Everyone is doing what incentives suggest absent fair rules of the road. It's slow erosion. Apple killed browser competition because it helps cement native + fears about insecure runtime. FB undermines browser choice on Android for similarly narrow reasons
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate
This is all very dramatic. You just said they were knifing the web to death. Then you said they killed browser competition, and implied they did it intentionally. Sounds pretty conspiracy theory like to me.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @devongovett
Alex Russell Retweeted Alex Russell
It's *written into the app store rules*:https://mobile.twitter.com/slightlylate/status/1191026446715604993?lang=en …
Alex Russell added,
Alex Russell @slightlylateSection 2.5.6 is the Hotel Cupertino clause: you can pick any browser you like, but you can't choose a better web. In fact, iOS prevents other browsers from even replacing Safari as the system default. 2.5.6 caps web progress at the rate that Apple (under) invests.Show this thread2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @devongovett
Safari started (back in '08) as a fully modern browser of the time. Lack of competition took a long time to rot the mighty ship, but what I'm telling you is that it's leaking below the water line now.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @devongovett
I shared some of the data last year. It's a slow-moving emergency; the sort humans are worst at recognising and dealing with:https://vimeo.com/364402896
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
I think it is clear that Apple is investing in the web, just in different areas than you want. Privacy, security, and user facing features seem to have priority over new web APIs designed by Google. Look at the latest iPad Safari becoming a real desktop class browser.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
-
Replying to @slightlylate
Pretty sure it was a lot more complicated than that and you know it.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @devongovett
I'm sure that, given the staffing of their team, it was a relatively large investment. That's the problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The team is so darned small. They're great, but *wildly* understaffed. Apple could solve this by allowing better engines, or by investing reasonably. Doing neither gets you what we'v got: slow rot.
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate
“Better” is subjective, based on your priorities. What in particular do you think is “rotting”? As a web dev, I can’t think of something that I’m excited about using in a real world project that I’m only waiting on Safari to implement. IMO they’ve kept up pretty well.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @devongovett
That statement is worryingly circular, and part of how the architecture of control works: by withholding APIs for years, developers don't consider other widely-implemented features "available". We collectively lower our sights in response. Deadweight loss.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes - 8 more replies
New conversation -
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.