zlacker

Apple attempting to stop investigation into its practices involving browsers

submitted by samwil+(OP) on 2023-01-24 08:49:04 | 275 points 344 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
◧◩◪
27. saurik+uh[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 11:23:07
>>mtomwe+Of
https://webkit.org/blog/10218/full-third-party-cookie-blocki...

> As mentioned, the seven-day cap on script-writable storage is gated on “after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site.” That is the case in Safari. Web applications added to the home screen are not part of Safari and thus have their own counter of days of use. Their days of use will match actual use of the web application which resets the timer. We do not expect the first-party in such a web application to have its website data deleted.

> If your web application does experience website data deletion, please let us know since we would consider it a serious bug. It is not the intention of Intelligent Tracking Prevention to delete website data for first parties in web applications.

So, while adding it to the home screen still involves this mechanism, the "first-party"--which I understand to be the website which was actually added to the home screen, differentiating it from all of the third-party websites that it might link you to--is presumably going to be used every time you use that icon on the home screen and since that icon also has its own usage counter it won't ever be counting up when you aren't using it, so you are "good" (unless the user manages to use your home screen added app for seven days without ever ending up back at the "first-party" site somehow, which seems like an oddity and maybe one they mitigated directly).

45. Lio+Fl[view] [source] 2023-01-24 11:59:51
>>samwil+(OP)
This is the original link (vs a tweet including the link): https://www.catribunal.org.uk/cases/157661223-apple-inc-othe...
◧◩◪
56. leland+xo[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 12:20:55
>>onli+Xh
https://gs.statcounter.com/

Firefox is not a serious competitor at this point and its tiny 4% of the market has already slipped to 3% in the last year.

That’s inching close to the “can we please drop IE11” sort of numbers from some years ago.

◧◩
67. spiffy+sq[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 12:36:20
>>xiphia+of
Safari deletes all of a site's local data after a week of inactivity, including cookies.

This makes users feel like they're never logged into a website when they need it, unless they're using it almost daily.

That high-friction experience pushes users towards apps, which of course are always ready to go.

EDIT: source: https://webkit.org/blog/10218/full-third-party-cookie-blocki...

> Back in February 2019, we announced that ITP would cap the expiry of client-side cookies to seven days

> ...

> Now ITP has aligned the remaining script-writable storage forms with the existing client-side cookie restriction, deleting all of a website’s script-writable storage after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site. These are the script-writable storage forms affected (excluding some legacy website data types):

> Indexed DB

> LocalStorage

> Media keys

> SessionStorage

> Service Worker registrations and cache

EDIT 2: That page indicates web apps on the home screen get some variation for this behavior, but the difference isn't clear to me.

78. rejhga+xs[view] [source] 2023-01-24 12:50:20
>>samwil+(OP)
For anyone making the "Apple is the last bastion against Chrome dominance"-argument: Apple is not in it for the web. Quite the opposite, more likely. They are all about control, not letting you choose a browser.

Also, I don't see how fighting a potential monoculture with an actual monoculture is a solution.

For further reading: https://infrequently.org/2022/06/apple-is-not-defending-brow...

◧◩◪◨
82. rypska+ft[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 12:56:36
>>leland+xo
Statcounter is in the list[0] firefox uses to block trackers, it also seems like Edge use the same list [1], so the 3% is more FF-users who are not using the build in tracking protection

[0]https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protecti... [1]https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection#trackers-we-block

◧◩◪◨⬒
94. jacoop+dw[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 13:18:14
>>ThatMe+Bn
To add to that, Firefox sandboxing on Linux is awful.

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.ht...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
96. rvz+ox[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 13:26:33
>>mtomwe+Zr
Firefox is almost no where to be found and hardly has anything to bring to fight against Chrome [0]. In fact, Mozilla is on life support with Google's money with the Mozilla CEO being the one laughing all the way to the bank as Firefox continues to be irrelevant.

Safari (WebKit) is the only one competing against the Chrome ecosystem, especially on mobile devices market. The EU Digital Markets Act will just declare Chrome the winner and will increase Chrome's dominance and will make Mozilla even more irrelevant.

[0] https://gs.statcounter.com/

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
98. mtomwe+Mx[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 13:28:41
>>sbuk+fv
https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#the-chr...
◧◩◪◨⬒
143. leland+7L[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 14:39:09
>>rypska+ft
Yeah, there’s no way to account for everyone. It’s probably not fair to assume there’s a huge amount of untracked users. And Mozilla cops to the continuing decline as well:

> “Looking back five years and looking at our market share and our own numbers that we publish, there's no denying the decline,” says Selena Deckelmann, senior vice president of Firefox

https://www.wired.com/story/firefox-mozilla-2022/

◧◩◪◨
149. noblea+uN[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 14:49:59
>>parasu+yC
They use a Cocoa feature called [WkWebView] (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/webkit/wkwebview) which is an embedded webkit browser. Any functionality that differs from Safari is not part of the actual "browser". It's just "skin" on top of it. (Bookmark syncing, etc)
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
155. onli+uO[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 14:55:28
>>leland+7L
If statcounter is in the list of blocked trackers, and trackers are blocked by default, then assuming there is a huge list of untracked users is only fair. Because it would be everyone not specifically disabling the tracking protection, which no one does. Statcounter would only count outdated FF installations that also do not use an adblocker (3% seems high for that, but not absurdly high).

But I'm not certain that this is the case. https://disconnect.me/trackerprotection claims to link to lists that show which trackers are only identified and which are identified and blocked, but those links just go to https://github.com/disconnectme/disconnect-tracking-protecti..., where I do not see such a distinction being made.

◧◩◪
160. xkcd19+aQ[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 15:03:24
>>ezfe+fF
Y just wait until I get 500rep Ive ur name now :p

Edit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34501173#34504508

◧◩
171. Charle+dV[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 15:25:26
>>fleddr+ZO
> Simply buying the market in the open…

This is slightly hyperbolic. Google is buying a default¹. It can be changed.

https://appletoolbox.com/change-default-search-engine-iphone...

◧◩◪◨⬒
183. endemi+vY[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 15:40:21
>>moonch+yL
Here's just one example that I can remember of Google Search doing UA sniffing to serve a worse experience to Firefox: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=975444
◧◩◪◨
206. Charle+K81[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:16:04
>>cma+hZ
> You can't chose any search engine like on other platforms

With Safari, yes, but Firefox for iOS (for example) allows you to add arbitrary search engines.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/change-your-default-sea...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
207. gls2ro+b91[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:17:19
>>kibwen+XT
You might be right - I did not check the numbers.

My idea was primarily based on my experience is something like this:

I know (meaning I know what they use) around 15-20 devs on MacOS.

Almost all of them have FF installed. Some may open it occasionally but just as an alternative to open in private mode or check some weird behavior to see if it is cross-browser or cache related.

- personal usage: except maybe 2, all the others are using Safari (most of them) and Chrome few

- professional usage: except for the same 2, here I think Chrome is more used and Safari less

Thus in these developers' case, I don't think they will recommend FF to their friends or relatives even if FF is installed on their machine as it is not their daily driver.

I am in the same category regarding usage: I forced myself multiple times to use FF. Still try to do that couple of times per year.

But fallback to Safari because the battery lasts so much longer and because it is integrated with the MacOS keychain.

One might think that with M1, people might afford to lose a bit of battery but it is the reverse. Seeing how long it lasts one barely thinks of cutting those hours short :) Could mean starting to carry again the power adapter or always looking for a table near a power socket.

Here is a browser that I installed not long ago and start to like it more and more: https://browser.kagi.com

◧◩◪◨⬒
209. jefftk+2a1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:19:37
>>rypska+ft
Firefox doesn't block statcounter or other analytics trackers by default. You'd have to go into "Settings > Enhanced Tracking Protection" and change it from "Standard" ("Balanced for protection and performance. Pages will load normally.") to "Strict" ("Stronger protection, but may cause some sites or contact a break.") While I expect Firefox users are much more likely than users of other browsers to do this, I'd also expect a large majority leave settings at the default.

You can test behavior on this tracker here: https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
212. jefftk+la1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:20:43
>>onli+uO
Trackers are not blocked by default. You can verify this by visiting https://www.jefftk.com/test/statcounter in stock Firefox, and then again after setting "Enhanced Tracking Protection" to "Strict".
◧◩◪◨
218. jefftk+Ra1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:22:20
>>noblea+AL
Since 2013 Opera has been a Chromium wrapper, like Edge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_(web_browser)
◧◩
219. Charle+6b1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:22:57
>>pjfin1+7a1
Brave for iOS: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/brave-private-web-browser/id10...

Many other browsers are available for iOS too. (Not to be confused with rendering engines, of course.)

◧◩◪◨⬒
226. Snitch+Re1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:34:58
>>runjak+Dc1
Per [1], PWAs on webkit lacks push notifications, full-screen display, hardware acceleration, web bluetooth as major headline features needed, which Firefox on mobile appears to generally support per a 5-second glance (I didn't see web bluetooth, but the rest I did) [2].

That wikipedia page has a support table saying IOS supports PWAs as YES and Firefox as NO is odd considering Apple requires Mozilla to ship a crippled form of safari on IOS, if Firefox could ship their own true application, I suspect they would have better PWA support as a differentiator with Safari.

[1] https://thenewstack.io/owa-takes-on-apples-browser-ban-for-p...

[2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Progressive_web...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
227. LeifCa+Xf1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:39:22
>>jefftk+2a1
Thanks for the tester, on Firefox I just see:

    <html><head></head><body><img src="https://statcounter.com/" vt9kpu8nj="">
    </body></html>
but uBlock Origin with default settings blocks the image.
◧◩◪◨
234. SllX+zi1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 16:48:33
>>cma+hZ
Or just install and use xSearch: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/xsearch-for-safari/id157990206...
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
251. kitsun+Fq1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 17:17:46
>>saiya-+Mb1
> what if Apple allowed Firefox with its free extension model - what argument would you come up then? One can easily use ublock origin with Firefox, a thing Apple fears quite a bit

It can’t be that afraid, because you can use the Firefox version of uBlock Origin in the WebKit-based iOS browser Orion[0] right now.

[0]: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/orion-browser-by-kagi/id148449...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
261. Androi+my1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 17:47:18
>>sebzim+f01
While being 3 years old, this video [1] is a good example of some of the behavior Google uses when they find out you're not using Chrome.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELCq63652ig

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
272. Wevah+OG1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 18:21:46
>>Snitch+Re1
If I’ve read correctly [1], Safari on macOS 13 (released after the mentioned article) supports the standardized Web Push APIs.

[1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
276. leland+5M1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 18:40:47
>>postal+AW
This is a very uncharitable assessment. They drag their feet on API support but they're still a part of the interop group and actually were more conformant by the end of last year on the targeted features than Chrome: https://wpt.fyi/interop-2022

There's a case to be made that they handicap PWA features, but I don't see their team directly implementing features incorrectly.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
300. acdha+5S2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-24 23:36:46
>>super_+qb2
Safari is quite competitive with Chrome - very noticeably faster at a fraction of the RAM and battery usage – and solidly dusted Chrome on the Interop 2022 competition all three vendors ran:

https://wpt.fyi/interop-2022?stable

◧◩◪◨⬒
314. dmitri+YA3[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-25 06:14:40
>>error5+0V1
Please read "Breaking the Web Forward" https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/08/breaking_th...

--- sart quote ---

Back fifteen years ago IE held back the web because web developers had to cater to its outdated technology stack. “Best viewed with IE” and all that. But do you ever see a “Best viewed with Safari” notice? No, you don’t. Another browser takes that special place in web developers’ hearts and minds.

--- end quote ---

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
318. the_ot+B04[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-25 10:15:30
>>izacus+aV
I use Firefox on macOS all day every day. It's definitely Gecko on an Apple platform. This monopoly you're talking about doesn't exist: it's two operating systems on two types of device.

I understand your frustration that you can't use the browser you want on the devices you want. That is annoying. However, *now* is the wrong time to go after Apple. Get more people using other browsers on other platforms first.

Wikipedia suggests this breakdown:

> As of November 2022, Android, an operating system using the Linux kernel, is the world's most-used operating system when judged by web use. It has 42% of the global market, followed by Windows with 30%, Apple iOS with 18%, macOS with 6%, then (desktop) Linux at 1.0% also using the Linux kernel.[1][2] These numbers do not include embedded devices or game consoles.

(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_syste... )

Android and Windows make up 4x the number of iOS users on the web. When the % of Chrome users on those platforms goes down, and Firefox and others go up, to a level where any of them could temporarily steer the direction the HTML/W3C standards take, _that's_ the time to go after Apple. Until then, lean on the fence Apple are holding up for you (and getting Google to pay for).

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧
319. the_ot+c14[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-25 10:20:51
>>jsnell+hF1
> Just when will the right time arrive?

Android and Windows make up four times the number of web users as iOS. That's almost the same ratio (Chrome:others) as browser use across the web. Get a significant proportion of those user to move onto to other browser platforms first, then go after Apple give the final 20% of users more choice.

(based on stats from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_syste... )

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
320. rvz+084[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-25 11:27:38
>>acdha+xR2
Yes. 'Allowed'. After Mozilla claiming they can live without Google's money and knowing that they could not 14 years later. [0] Then getting itself sabotaged by Google for years [1] to be overtaken as the browser with the largest market share.

With Firefox's declining usage and market share, they are essentially on life support with Google's money since they know they would be completely irrelevant without it.

It appears that [0] has not aged well at all.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20120105090543/https://www.compu...

[1] https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has...

◧◩◪◨⬒
324. dmitri+0w4[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-25 14:22:30
>>postal+6X
> And for users who prefer keeping control.

The moment Firefox implemented one of the many hardware APIs aggressively pushed and promoted by Google, they immediately discovered it was used for fingerprinting: https://twitter.com/denschub/status/1582730985778556931

Chrome doesn't even show a prompt in this case. So much for "control".

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
330. dmitri+ej5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-25 17:49:12
>>error5+o85
> I'm just not sure why you mention 'anti-Apple'

Said nothing about "anti-Apple". I'm just agreeing with the poster above saying that people being vehemently anti-Apple actually haven't learned anything from history. At all.

> Apple's leverage is being used in many of the same ways, just much more aggressively than 'best viewed in IE'

Of course this is bullshit. Again. There's probably not a single site out there that is "best viewed in Safari". And there are numerous sites that are "best viewed in Chrome". Including, especially, the ones that Google themselves (#1 search, #1 mail, #1 video hosting, #1 web ad business in the world) creates.

And to quote again:

--- start quote ---

Regardless of where you feel the web should be on this spectrum between Google and Apple, there is a fundamental difference between the two.

We have the tools and procedures to manage Safari’s disinterest. They’re essentially the same as the ones we deployed against Microsoft back in the day — though a fundamental difference is that Microsoft was willing to talk while Apple remains its old haughty self, and its “devrels” aren’t actually allowed to do devrelly things such as managing relations with web developers. (Don’t blame them, by the way. If something would ever change they’re going to be our most valuable internal allies — just as the IE team was back in the day.)

On the other hand, we have no process for countering Google’s reverse embrace, extend, and extinguish strategy, since a section of web devs will be enthusiastic about whatever the newest API is. Also, Google devrels talk. And talk. And talk. And provide gigs of data that are hard to make sense of. And refer to their proprietary algorithms that “clearly” show X is in the best interest of the web — and don’t ask questions! And make everything so fucking complicated that we eventually give up and give in.

--- end quote ---

Google releases 400 new APIs a year with little to no oversight and with complete disregard of any objections or concerns from the other browser vendors: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence

The things that you think Safari is lacking in are largely Chrome-only non-standards.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
332. dmitri+AP5[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-01-25 20:18:47
>>postal+9o5
Could be they fixed it after this. Info on no prompt from the same person: https://twitter.com/denschub/status/1582730988118867968

--- start quote ---

Chrome still allows web developers to enumerate attached MIDI devices without user consent or even a notification, btw.

--- end quote ---

[go to top]