-
A lot of comments here suggest it's a good thing that Safari is behind on implementing web standards (~70% vs Chromium's ~90%) because it "counter balances" Google. This is ridiculous mini🧵 tech.slashdot.org/story/21/10/22/141222/apples-safari-browser-runs-the-risk-of-becoming-the-new-internet-explorer----holding-the-web-back-for-everyonePermalink On twitter.com
♻️ 5 Retweets ❤️ 9 Favorites Mood 0
-
First of all: the article itself argues that, by lagging behind, Apple surrenders control of the web to Google. Chromium is dictating the direction because they come up with new ideas while Safari is struggling to even support the current standards.Permalink On twitter.com
-
Second: arguing that having a mandatory "slow kid" in the classroom is a good thing, because it counters the fast kid(s) from dictating the speed is just 🤷♂️Permalink On twitter.com
-
"Safari's monopoly on iOS prevents sites from going "chrome-only"": if Apple would invest in Safari, they would be able to keep up and sites would be able to support all browsers.On twitter.com
-
(Sites that rely on experimental/early Chromium API's are an exception here of course, but such a site would probably not rely on an exp. api if it wasn't strictly required for the thing the website tries to do in the 1st place)Permalink On twitter.com
-
Counterbalancing product B by enforcing product A does not seem to be the solution to prevent a monopoly. It's pbbly closer to how you create one. Legislation that tries to prevent monopolies doesn't mandate you use the other product. It is not the way.Permalink On twitter.com
-
Appendix: if you've read this far, you'll probably also like this thread: x.com/slightlylate/status/1451608336302948352?t=bx54Vy2ItakLwVf_ghifEA&s=19Permalink On twitter.com