Is Safari the New Internet Explorer? 311
An anonymous reader writes: Software developer Nolan Lawson says Apple's Safari has taken the place of Microsoft's Internet Explorer as the major browser that lags behind all the others. This comes shortly after the Edge Conference, where major players in web technologies got together to discuss the state of the industry and what's ahead. Lawson says Mozilla, Google, Opera, and Microsoft were all in attendance and willing to talk — but not Apple.
"It's hard to get insight into why Apple is behaving this way. They never send anyone to web conferences, their Surfin' Safari blog is a shadow of its former self, and nobody knows what the next version of Safari will contain until that year's WWDC. In a sense, Apple is like Santa Claus, descending yearly to give us some much-anticipated presents, with no forewarning about which of our wishes he'll grant this year. And frankly, the presents have been getting smaller and smaller lately."
He argues, "At this point, we in the web community need to come to terms with the fact that Safari has become the new IE. Microsoft is repentant these days, Google is pushing the web as far as it can go, and Mozilla is still being Mozilla. Apple is really the one singer in that barbershop quartet hitting all the sour notes, and it's time we start talking about it openly instead of tiptoeing around it like we're going to hurt somebody's feelings."
"It's hard to get insight into why Apple is behaving this way. They never send anyone to web conferences, their Surfin' Safari blog is a shadow of its former self, and nobody knows what the next version of Safari will contain until that year's WWDC. In a sense, Apple is like Santa Claus, descending yearly to give us some much-anticipated presents, with no forewarning about which of our wishes he'll grant this year. And frankly, the presents have been getting smaller and smaller lately."
He argues, "At this point, we in the web community need to come to terms with the fact that Safari has become the new IE. Microsoft is repentant these days, Google is pushing the web as far as it can go, and Mozilla is still being Mozilla. Apple is really the one singer in that barbershop quartet hitting all the sour notes, and it's time we start talking about it openly instead of tiptoeing around it like we're going to hurt somebody's feelings."
Already covered over at Hacker News (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
You and I must have read a different Hacker News thread because the opinions seemed pretty divided in both directions.
That is consistent with trying to balance a needle on its tip.
But Betteridge's Law of Headlines has already answered the question.
The problem is in the very premise. Safari never had anything remotely similar to IEs marketshare. Nor the corporate glue. It's silly to even try to compare what happes with the two over time.
IE was a major enabler and roadblock. Safari was never significant enough to even stub your toe on.
Re:Already covered over at Hacker News (Score:4, Interesting)
What do you mean? Every single web view on iOS uses Safari's renderer. It's against the App Store rules to have your own renderer. The problem is that sure, if you design a website around Safari it'll work everywhere else, but it's a pain in the ass to design it to a 5 year old standard when all the other major browsers support other upgrades, extensions and capabilities that can make code easier/faster/better. It's most apparent when an open standard has replaced an Apple designed one that's inferior, and Apple refuses to change, such as WebSQL/IndexedDB.
hit one sour note (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Weird analogy to choose for this summary. Weirder that the next 5 days the top barbershop quartets in the world will be vying to be awarded
"International Champion". (http://www.barbershop.org/pittsburgh/)
New internet explorer (Score:5, Funny)
If Safari is the new internet explorer then that's not bad. If Safari is the old internet explorer then that's really bad.
Re:New internet explorer (Score:5, Funny)
Your comment is quite Edgy.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If only enough people that mattered used Safari.
You mean other than CxOs and VPs that carry an iPhone and/or iPad?
Re:New internet explorer (Score:5, Funny)
Re:New internet explorer (Score:5, Insightful)
If only enough people that mattered used Safari.
You mean other than CxOs and VPs that carry an iPhone and/or iPad?
No I mean accountants and ERP users that actually use applications in the enterprise. C-levels and VPs are a very small group of users, important, but only if you are managing stakeholder expectations.
Oh and I can see the fanbois are out modding again and taking everything personally.
Re: (Score:3)
"Oh and I can see the fanbois are out modding again and taking everything personally."
Been here long?
Good News (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
And "supporting" IE was one of the biggest mistakes ever. They're now living with their bug ridden apps that only work on IE6 with ActiveX. It takes a little more work, but programming to standards isn't THAT hard.
Presents... (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's a lump of coal. You'll like it. We'll send you the bill later.
(Apple has always been like that - they Think Different)
This is a big troll (Score:5, Insightful)
The problems with IE were twofold:
1) It contained tons of rendering bugs that websites relied upon, and so Microsoft's refusal to fix them assured the browser's market dominance by making pages render improperly in competitors' browsers.
2) It was completely insecure.
Safari does not do either of these things.
Re:This is a big troll (Score:4, Informative)
Safari does not do either of these things.
Ah the RDF.
1. There is plenty of safari-specific CSS that renders improperly in competitors' browsers (the same is true of IE, Chrome and Firefox as well). Back in the late 90s/early 00s the problem was you do things the IE way or the Netscape way, many of which were non-standard. Nowadays browsers still introduce their own extensions and ways of doing things with different quirks hence the safari/webkit/chrome/ie/etc CSS prefixes.
2. Here [cvedetails.com] you will find pages and pages disproving you.
Note: All the browsers have such problems, not just Safari. Just calling you out on your false idea that Safari doesn't suffer the problems of other browsers. The point of this article is that Safari is becoming the new IE in the sense that with respect to industry collaboration they are behaving like Microsoft did with early IE. Try not to extrapolate beyond that.
Re: (Score:3)
People who are making that comparison clearly haven't witnessed that period as a web developer. There were other problems than CSS prefixes. You had the IE way and then the rest. You had progress and then you had Microsoft dragging its feet with IE.
Yes Apple is not as fast as picking up new stuff as their competitors, but it is a whole other leagu
Conflict of Interest (Score:4, Insightful)
It's simple. As long as a significant portion of Apple's revenue comes from having a closed, "walled-garden" ecosystem, Apple will be disinclined to participate anything that might result in the demise of that ecosystem. After all, it's hard to be in the same boat as everyone else supporting WebAssembly etc., when that same technology will ultimately result in the death of on-platform app stores.
Re:Conflict of Interest (Score:4, Insightful)
Are we really ready to celebrate concepts like WebAssembly? I may be old (get off my lawn) but, to me, binaries injected into the browser from all corners of the internet does not a utopia make.
Apple doesn't make hardly any money from apps. (Score:2)
They make hundreds of billions of dollars by selling physical devices to willing customers--it's always been this way.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's walled garden and iTunes revenue pales in comparison to their iPod revenue, which has been declining for
Why all the Safari/Apple hate ?... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Why safari doesn't work for me (Score:2)
I agree, Safari is faster and more stable than any other browser on Mac OS X.
And yet I own a couple of macs but use Firefox instead. Why? Safari breaks oddly on certain websites I frequent, it lacks privacy add-ons I consider essential, it simply isn't available on linux and the Windows version is flaky in my experience. Plus (totally personal preference) I don't especially care for some of the interface choices. I use it some but primarily I don't bother unless I'm using an iPhone or iPad where there are no other practical options. Apple's applications in my experience rarely
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, as long as you like ads, and don't care about your privacy, there is nothing wrong with Safari.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why all the Safari/Apple hate ?... (Score:4, Informative)
As a 42 year old system engineer (*nix) I can say your inexperience is showing. There hasn't been a company I've worked for who didn't have a plethora of Macs in the hands of the developers, SysAdmins *and* managers.
Most of our linux admins? Macs.
Half our Windows admins? Macs.
1/4 of our developers? Macs.
Went to a couple Puppet conferences. Most of the laptops? Macs.
etc, etc, etc.
The rest of your comment is pure applesauce.
Re:Why all the Safari/Apple hate ?... (Score:5, Funny)
So I guess you still live in your basement? There is a world out there. And Macs have very low adoption (single digit) within corporations.
But he has anecdotal evidence!
Re: (Score:2)
The question is not corporate adoption but developer adoption. Airplanes have a very low adoption percentage among all people who use automated transportation but a high adoption rate among pilots.
Re: (Score:2)
Still, developpers using Macs must not be greater than say, 10-20%.
Conferences are one thing... (Score:4)
Does it really matter that much they aren't at conferences? That shouldn't be where evolution of HTML and browsing happens anyway...
Re:Conferences are one thing... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's more or less what I was thinking as well. From a user perspective, Safari is pretty much like Chrome except more stable and much less resource-hungry.
Maybe this relentless catering to every sloppy demand of every hack web programmer is what makes web browsers the bloated pieces of shit that they are nowadays.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? Why wouldn't you want people to negotiate at conferences?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When you can figure out the reason that no other technical standard is decided at paid conferences, you'll have your answer.
Or you could have it way sooner, but then you didn't choose that option.
Re: (Score:2)
So you don't have a good reason.
Follow the Money (Score:2)
Didn't stamp my feet. Pointed out they seemed to be, unreasonably. You just reenforce the point I made.
Which "new technologies" are they behind on exactly again?
Oh I forgot, they are so backwards in officially supporting ad-blockers going forward... hmm all of the sudden the whining about Safari makes so much more $ense now.
You web developers really don't understand where the market is going, do you?
Was Safari ever a force in the browser market? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
. :)
I post an opinion here and it is mod'd as flamebait. Must be some Apple fanboys around.....
Re: (Score:2)
It was pretty popular if your demographic was younger people, design people, or startups/small scale companies that aren't tied to Windows stuff (a lot of HR or sales software are).
If you were in those demos, you could easily get a 20-30% market share.
Had to be careful when taking the metrics though. Safari's splash page showing most popular sizes would render thumbnails by running all javascripts, with only an http header that can only be inspected server side to differentiate it (so pages on CDNs need not
Why? Applications. (Score:5, Interesting)
Well I think the why is pretty clear with the feature set they have been releasing. On OSX Safari is a default choice whose major advantage is ties with iOS devices. They are fine with people using other browsers and might even welcome a more diverse OSX broswer ecosystem. On iOS they want to move away from the web and towards applications. They need the iOS Safari engine to be fast, but they don't need it to support the full range of web experiences since increasingly they want those experiences delivered via. applications.
The analogy with I.E. is really quite on point. Apple is acting like Microsoft did in the late 1990s / 2000s for the same reason Microsoft was disinterested in I.E. They were focusing on platform specific advantages that come from client / server rather than purely web server design.
Re: (Score:2)
Right. Because Android's toolkits are used on every other platform under the sun.
Windows Phone is probably in a better position in terms of code portability than either iOS or Android, but really UI is so different that having the same toolkit only gets you so far, no matter which platform you're starting from.
Browser updates aren't sexy at Apple keynotes (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I see Safari updates in the App Store app on my Macbook all the time. Stop being ignorant.
Safari, Web API's and iOS (Score:2)
The Edge Conference, which one can attend by invitation only, includes "delegates" from Google, Mozilla, Facebook, but not from Apple. Many of the web API's unsupported on Safari include functions provided by API's in iOS, or even Android. Some people want to create Web Apps, that create experiences very similar to iOS, but run on a mobile or desktop web browser. Apple would prefer you develop such Apps using iOS using Swift or Objective-C API's, which run natively with better performance in security. Wh
iOS users feel it (Score:2, Insightful)
I currently have a web radio transceiver front panel application that works on Linux, Windows, MacOS, Android, Amazon Kindle Fire, under Chrome, Firefox, or Opera. No porting, no software installation. See blog.algoram.com for details of what I'm writing.
The one unsupported popular platform? iOS, because Safari doesn't have the function used to acquire the microphone in the web audio API (and perhaps doesn't have other parts of that API), and Apple insists on handicapping other browsers by forcing them to u
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? (Score:2)
But... but... HTML5!!! (Score:2)
HTML5 was supposed to be the be-all and end-all compatability standard that would render all browser differences irrelevant.
Then reality kicked in...
It's their business model. (Score:4, Informative)
When you expect to get most of your revenue from selling apps in the iStore - it's essential that people are unable to get apps for free via fancy web pages.
Hence, iPhone doesn't support WebGL for doing fancy 3D graphics on a web page - if it did, people would write cool games in HTML/JavaScript/WebGL and monetize them directly without having Apple take 30% of the revenue and "approve" their product.
Is this because Apple can't support WebGL? Hell no! The browser actually DOES contain code for WebGL, but it's disabled...UNLESS your web site signs up to display Apple-provided advertising banners...in which case, WebGL works great!
Safari uses the exact same core rending software ("WebKit") as Chrome - so it can trivially support everything that Chrome supports - it's really just a matter of Apple deciding to deliberately cripple the browser to prevent people from providing apps for free.
Re: (Score:2)
it's really just a matter of Apple deciding to deliberately cripple the browser to prevent people from providing apps for free.
And other browsers as well... Safari is an Apple app, installed and updated from the iOS installations and as such has an unfair advantage in terms of OS resources. Just use and compare Safari and Chrome on the iPhone...
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome uses a fork of WebKit. Sure, Apple could back port the changes, but that's not much difference than saying they could use Gecko.
Re:It's their business model. (Score:5, Informative)
How does a post that gets almost all of its facts wrong get modded up as Insightful? You started on a provably faulty premise, backed it up with inaccurate statements regarding WebGL, and then closed it out by saying something that I'd have hoped most of us here would trivially recognize as incorrect.
When you expect to get most of your revenue from selling apps in the iStore
Apple announced at the start of the year that they've paid out $25B to developers over the life of the App Store. Do some quick math, and that means that Apple is averaging $0.45B in revenue each quarter from the App Store, which would put it at <1% of their quarterly revenue (e.g. Apple posted $60B in revenue in their latest, post-Christmas quarter).
Which is to say, your basic premise here is that Apple is intentionally crippling the product that makes up 60% of their revenue (iOS hardware) in order to bolster the revenue in a segment that accounts for less than 1% of their revenue (App Store downloads). Seriously? Apple's main business isn't selling apps; it's selling selling devices that run apps, and you may even recall that back when the iPhone launched in 2007, the "apps" it supported were web apps, not native apps.
iPhone doesn't support WebGL for doing fancy 3D graphics on a web page
Could've fooled me. [ludei.com] iOS 8 has been out for nearly a year at this point, and has had WebGL support from the beginning without any of the weird requirements you're talking about.
The browser actually DOES contain code for WebGL, but it's disabled...UNLESS your web site signs up to display Apple-provided advertising banners
A) You're confused. You're talking about iAds (and I'll discuss why I know you are in a sec), but the iAd advertising network only operates in iOS apps, not on websites. Sites can't sign up to it.
B) It's not disabled. See above. WebGL support was available as an experimental feature in iOS 7, and as a standard feature in iOS8. No ads or other funny business required.
The reason you're confused is because, technically speaking, iOS did have support for WebGL as far back as iOS 4.2 [atnan.com], but it was only available to iAd developers. By that, I don't mean people who agreed to put iAds in their app. I mean people who were actually making the iAds themselves, since iAds are basically just mini webpages that display an ad.
If that seems a bit weird at first glance, recall that WebGL was a resource-intensive feature on the devices of that day, and Apple has a history of restricting the scope or operation of resource-intensive features until the implementations or device capabilities improve (see: background processing, native apps on Apple Watch, etc.), so it made sense at the time why WebGL was restricted to iAds, since they were designed to only be on the screen for short periods of time yet could stand to gain the most from such a feature.
The only sense in which what you said is correct is that for a few years the only people who were able to make use of WebGL on iOS were the ones making the ads, but it was never a feature that web developers had to make a Faustian pact with Apple to use. It simply wasn't available to them.
Safari uses the exact same core rending software ("WebKit") as Chrome - so it can trivially support everything that Chrome supports
They haven't both used "WebKit" since Google forked WebKit to create Blink over two years ago [chromium.org], but even before that, they weren't even running "the exact same core rendering software" for the last several years back when they were both running "WebKit".
Google and Apple have had divergent multi-process architectures for quite some time. Google built
Re:People still use Safari? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, people still use iOS (Score:5, Informative)
Just because you no longer use Apple's iOS doesn't mean millions of other people don't still use iOS. There are two kinds of browsers on iOS: browsers that run remotely and behave akin to Remote Desktop, such as Opera Mini, and browsers that wrap the system's UIWebView or WKWebView control, such as Safari. The App Store Review Guidelines forbid third-party web engines that run on an iOS device. This means the vast majority of browsers for iOS are essentially window dressing around Safari.
Re:Yes, people still use iOS (Score:5, Interesting)
i switched back from chrome to safari (Score:2, Interesting)
For a while chrome was better than safari but not any more. Safari consumes much less resources than chrome and it handles multiple tab loads much better on my boxen. The final straw was when chrome deleted every single bookmark during a synch. Lost everything and no way to recover it. I tried restoring a backup but chrome just resynched and erased it again . With safari time machine works beautifully.
My faborite browser is Firefox but that's only because it has the zotero plug in.
This article is total
Re: (Score:2)
> I tried restoring a backup but chrome just resynched and erased it again.
What about unplugging the network cable, restoring your backup, and not having it resync.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, presumably it would just resync the next time you used chrome, unless you fuck around in Chrome and/or your Google account until you find the setting which changes the priority of local vs. remote storage.
This seems to be a problem with most platforms. It can be partly (and condescendingly) dismissed as user error, but Google does seem to make things more confusing than necessary. We use google drive at work, and the unclear referents in its dialog boxes made me lose a directory before i realized it w
Re:i switched back from chrome to safari (Score:4, Interesting)
I also use Safari, though I'm still pissed off with them for combining the URL bar and search box (which means that I keep typing one-word search terms and having it try to resolve them as domains, which then go in my history and so become the subject of autocomplete. The only way to avoid it is to get into the habit of hitting space at the end of a search, which is no saving on hitting tab at the start to jump to the search box). Chrome doesn't properly integrate with the keychain. I use Firefox on Android (self destructing cookies makes it the first browser I've used with a sane cookie management policy), but overall the UI for Safari does exactly what I want from a browser: stay out of the way.
TFS is nonsense though. Developers don't know what's going to be in the next version of Safari? Why don't they download the nightly build [webkit.org] and see?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not looking? (Score:2)
That may be, but just as myself on my 5 family iOS gadgets, everybody I know uses Chrome
You must not know many people since Apple sold 74 million iPhones [statista.com] and 21 million iPads [statista.com] in the first quarter of 2015 alone. I see plenty of Android out there but the only way you won't see iOS devices is if you have your head in the sand.
Re: (Score:3)
hint: Chrome (or any browser* on iOS) is little more than a skin over Mobile Safari (=webkit). sure, sometimes the skin is useful, but iOS Chrome is actually more like "Safari with some Chrome-ish Extensions".
*: at least any browser on the App Store; Apple literally won't allow any other renderers. maybe there are homebrew browsers for jailbroken iOS. i don't know.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL - you realize the the original iPhone allowed *only* HTML/JS apps? And there are a lot of limitations in the iOS APIs because they'd prefer you do certain things in browsers where it can follow standards instead of being some developer's hack-up of poor security or poor performance?
Re: (Score:2)
LOL - you realize the the original iPhone allowed *only* HTML/JS apps?
you realize they they ditched that favor of the "app" model?
Safari was late in implementing some web APIs (Score:2)
LOL - you realize the the original iPhone allowed *only* HTML/JS apps?
True, Apple originally planned for the iPhone to use web applications. But it took a long time for Apple to follow through on this plan. For instance, please explain why it took until iOS 6 for HTML/JS apps to access the user's photo and video libraries through an <input type="file"> control and until iOS 8 for HTML/JS apps to put the most basic 3D view on screen (WebGL).
Re: (Score:3)
Because exposing a user's files to any in-page behavior is a security risk and needs to be handled in clean managed ways with limited APIs? The hooks they established to do this went far beyond just browsers and also affect how content is provided to apps and 3rd party API calls.
Because 3D in
Re: (Score:2)
For instance, please explain why it took until iOS 6 for HTML/JS apps to access the user's photo and video libraries through [HTML file upload]
Because exposing a user's files to any in-page behavior is a security risk and needs to be handled in clean managed ways with limited APIs?
If Apple were sincere about making the web its API in iOS 1, it would have put a "clean managed" media chooser in place since iOS 1.
Imagine how bad it would be if "it works on the latest release, but only on these specific models".
Firefox already does this with its WebGL driver blacklist. It does not support WebGL on pre-OpenGL 2.0 GPUs, such as the integrated GMA 3100 in the Atom N450 processor in my laptop.
Re: (Score:2)
Only because Firefox cannot control the hardware and the software layers. What's the point in saying your software supports feature X if all the hardware it runs on can't support X? Apple controls both sides within their products so they can choose what "support" means. They chose to make iOS8 the point where hardware-accelerated
Re:Safari was late in implementing some web APIs (Score:4, Informative)
Your reasoning is way off. Apple does exactly what you claim they didn't want to do all the time. Siri is not supported on some models that run iOS 7. The new multi-tasking in iOS 9 (multiple on-screen apps) is only supported on newer iPads, and not the iPhone at all, not even the 6+. So basically, you're so completely wrong it's not even funny.
Re: (Score:2)
With the question mark it is an implied continuation of the previous question.
Speaking of which, Mr. Grammar Nazi, you forgot your own question mark:
Re: (Score:2)
You are obviously a complete and total idiot. Please stop commenting. Ever.
You have been able to load publicly-hosted web-content within an app's UIWebView from the very first day that such views were available in the SDK. That would be iPhoneOS 2.0, for those not familiar with the SDK evolution.
Re: (Score:2)
Starting a sentence with "surely" to indicate disbelief is asking for confirmation of the statement contained therein.
http://www.englishpractice.com... [englishpractice.com]
But I wasn't the one playing grammar nazi with where question marks were being placed.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
When Steve Jobs was alive high end Android phones were from a hardware perspective usually quite a bit more advanced than Apple / iOS. Today the opposite is true and high end Android are often quite a bit behind by most metrics. If anything Android has been falling further behind Apple phones since Steve Jobs died.
On OSX Apple was mostly ahead than and is ahead now. How far is Microsoft towards retina only systems? While Apple has converted over most of their major lines and likely around 2017 is sellin
Re: (Score:2)
Today the opposite is true and high end Android are often quite a bit behind by most metrics.
Citations????
Re: (Score:2)
touch response, camera, display quality, battery life per mAh, 64 bit- CPU
Re: (Score:2)
It's taken Google until their 13th major release to copy iOS's permissions model. Apple is not afraid of using good ideas, no matter where they originate. Obviously, Google is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is getting tiring, and along with "walled garden", it is really stale and worn out as an argument. What company (that turns a profit) isn't interested in customer retention? What other products and services are portable in the manner you imply compared to Apple? Jesus, this has been going on for ages with tech. Did your Atari 2600 carts work in that fucking ColecoVision your weirdo friend had? No... they didn't. And tha
Re: (Score:3)
This is getting tiring, and along with "walled garden", it is really stale and worn out as an argument.
If you could install your own browser on iOS, then browsers wouldn't be a problem. Because of the walled garden, you can't.
"Walled garden" isn't a tired argument against iOS, it is a very serious problem, but fanboys would rather ignore it or call it 'worn out.' In reality it sucks and there's no need for it, and plenty of reasons to not have it.
Re:I think Apple's glory days are over (Score:5, Informative)
When you're describing vendor lock-in, I fail to see how the comparison is not relevant.
They do? Are you high? I just took one of the tracks from that U2 album Apple pushed. Track 6, Volcano. I took that track, an m4a, copied over to a Windows box, and played it in VLC. VLC runs on OS X along with a host of other MP3/media players. So, wtf were you saying??
So no...fine, user lock in without Chrome. Give me a break.
You better keep trying, because your first two sucked ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does not force you to use iTunes unless you have an iDevice, and increasingly, even that is not true. You can do almost everything from the device itself these days.
You could use Chrome if you wanted to. I think you'll have to build it yourself, though.
Please find something that you are not allowed to do on OS X that you are allowed on other OSes. Technical limitations are technical limitations, and do not count (e.g. no DirectX). Other Mobile OSes have limitations too, though Android seems to hav
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does not force you to use iTunes unless you have an iDevice, and increasingly, even that is not true.
Can I buy music from the iTunes store without installing the iTunes software?
That's not a rhetorical question: I would like to buy something that is only available there, but there is no Linux version of iTunes.
Re: (Score:2)
You are simply an ignorant fuck. Find one thing that only Apple does that both qualifies as vendor lock-in and that is not intended to improve quality for the user.
How does Safari have anything to do with lockin? (Score:2)
Safari has always been an extremely standards compliant web browser. And Apple is a huge supporter of Webkit which the underlying rendering engine in several other browsers.
You're completely full of shit. You don't like Apple because you don't like Apple customers.
Re: (Score:2)
That's OK. Apparently you've also given up on intelligence and knowledge.
It was under Jobs that Apple moved to "the" standard PC platform -- Intel.
The iPod always supported media from any source; iTunes (Store) was not even available at launch.
OS X has always supported 3rd-party development, and Xcode has been freely-available for roughly forever. You've also never been tied to Xcode for development on that platform.
The only way Apple locks you in is by not being Microsoft (Windows) or Google (Android).
Re: (Score:2)
Apple has reinvented themselves before and when whatever train they're currently on runs out of steam they'll likely do it again. Back at the introduction of the Macintosh they were about saving users from conformity. Eventually they ended up getting so far in the hole their saving grace came from Microsoft and now it's the complete opposite, conformity and lack of choice is their game.
Re: (Score:3)
Please point out the "good" Android phones available in August 2007.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You clearly are thinking with desktop-coloured glasses. Despite Android market penetration, Safari is clearly the dominant force in the world of mobile websites, to an even greater degree than Chrome is dominant in desktop websites (and yes, I recognize that's true).
Couple that with some really backwards things, like support for touch-events over pointer-events (http://mobiforge.com/news-comment/who-wants-pointer-events-api-everyone-nearly). Key advantage of pointer-events is that it is declarative/reacti
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well actually it seems to me Chrome itself is the new IE, in that I see more and more websites working on Chrome and maybe IE, but with compatibility issues in Firefox, like menus not working properly. Old IE was too far behind and deviated willfully in non-standard ways. Chrome is so bleeding edge, and web devs are lacking more and more insight into the issue of browser compatibility, that it seems to me we are heading into a whole new era of compatibility hell...
Re: (Score:3)
The "Android browser" browser is not Chrome.
Re: (Score:3)
He didn't say the Android Browser, he said the default Android browser.
In newer versions of Android, you don't get the old Android stock browser. It was the default in the past, but hasn't been so for a long time now, and isn't even available unless you run hacks to install it and its dependencies.
Re: (Score:2)
Standards - They've supported tons of standards, and all their enterprise/business support tool chains are built up from *NIX libraries. Yes, they layer their own customizations on top (just like everyone else) and yes, these often change between releases without warning (but that's the point about secretive roadmaps).
It's pretty hard to claim that Safari always sucked. Webkit was a fork of KHTML and from day one it was better than any KHTML browser (Konquerer was horrendous!). By limiting the browser to ju
Why Apple has no interest in enterprise (Score:2)
This is why Apple is dead in the enterprise.
You say that as if Apple cares. Apple has pretty much never really cared about enterprise customers. They are high volume, low margin customers who don't give a shit about the things that actually make Apple's products different (software mostly) and certainly won't pay for them. Apple really has little to gain from getting into the enterprise business in a big way. If you want to see what would happen to Apple if they got into enterprise products look at the profit margins for HP (around 5%) versus App
Re: (Score:3)
Apple doesn't care. That's not the same as "not knowing". Get real. Apple is a huge company, both in financial terms and in number of employees. Do you really think they don't know what an "Enterprise" needs in terms of IT support?
Re: (Score:2)
A privacy-oriented browser doesn't make the developer of said browser any money.
Re: (Score:2)
A better question is is Apple the new Microsoft?
Nope.
The thing about Microsoft was there was only one Microsoft. Now we have Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon... and Microsoft was still there, last time I looked. Consumers are now free to choose which of half-a-dozen evil empires to sell their soul to. Hurrah for consumer choice!
...but at least Macs now run Unix.
Pot meet kettle (Score:2)
As opposed to you posting an opinion on someone else's blog.
Cool story 'bro...
Re: (Score:3)