zlacker

>>dochtm+(OP)
We don't have to speculate, we've been through this already during the IE4 to IE6 era.

Microsoft just did whatever they wanted with the web "platform", and so will Google.

In Microsoft's case what they wanted was nothing. They weren't a web business, saw it as a threat to their platform leverage, and so just left it abandoned and stagnant for years.

Google is simultaneously better and worse: they won't leave it stagnant because the web is their platform, but on the other hand they have a lot more to gain by abusing control of it.

>>paol+B6
Personally, I think Google already does whatever it wants similar to what Microsoft did. They do offer standards for discussion but it will implemented and expect other vendors to follow suit.

>>wdb+y9
> They do offer standards for discussion but it will implemented and expect other vendors to follow suit.

Safari definitely does not just follow suit (see https://caniuse.com/?compare=chrome+102,safari+15.5&compareC... for example).

>>remus+Dm
They have every incentive to NOT implement things to force devs to create apps. If they wanted to create an actual browser vs. bare bones browser, they'd still offer it on other operating systems.

>>within+ln
Please. I've been using the Web since '95, and working on the Web nearly as long. Safari's where I do almost all my browsing, work and personal. It's a fine browser. If I could use it on Windows and Linux, I wouldn't hesitate to choose it over Firefox and Chrome and their derivatives.

>>corrra+JT
That doesn't change their incentives. They might make a nice browser, for you. On every other OS, Apple's software is so slow as to be borderline useless. Watching iTunes struggle to download album art is almost as entertaining as listening to the music.

I do use a MBP daily, and the software there is amazing. But seeing that their software barely works outside of their platform, it's a miracle they have any customers at all.

>>within+Q11
> But seeing that their software barely works outside of their platform, it's a miracle they have any customers at all.

I don't think very many of their customers run any of their software anywhere other than on Macs and iDevices, so I expect that doesn't have much effect. Aside from the apple TV app on Roku and various TV operating systems and such. And still, none of this makes Safari not an "actual browser".

>>corrra+a91
I think by their decision not to implement so many APIs we can say it is /not/ an “actual browser” and more of “check the box” browser.

>>within+2v1
Maybe. I think implementing APIs like WebUSB, WebHID API, Web Serial API, Web Bluetooth, Web MIDI API etc. is not a big issue. Missing Filesystem Access API and Push API, WebGPU API would be nice to have. But the latter two would need to implement in a way to protect privacy of the user.