Reblogged by slightlyoff@toot.cafe ("Alex Russell"):
owa ("Open Web Advocacy") wrote:
Attachments:
- According to commenters, lack of support for these features would be a more acceptable condition if Apple allowed other, more robust, and full-featured browser engines on its operating system. Then, iOS users would be free to choose between Safari’s less feature-rich experience (which might have other benefits, such as privacy and security features), and the broader capabilities of competing browsers (which might have other borrowers costs, such as greater drain on system resources and need to adjust more settings). Instead, iOS users are never given the opportunity to choose meaningfully differentiated browsers and experience features that are common for Android users—some of which have been available for over a decade. WebKit’s restrictions also have second order effects: In designing for the web, developers are forced to design using a browser engine with feature limitations or give the large Apple app audience. Commenter OWA argues that by supporting suboptimal design for a significant consumer base, Apple’s WebKit restrictions ultimately affect design and hurt all mobile web users—not just those using iOS. Multiple commenters note that the only obvious beneficiary of Apple’s WebKit restrictions is Apple itself, which derives significant revenue from its mobile app store commissions.
Mastodon Feed
