grecommunication.blogg.se - Chromium web browser engines

Marketing and distribution play a prominent role but have been indecisive in recent browser battles.

Past swings away from OS default browsers have hinged on the new features, better performance, improved security, and superior site compatibility. What are those mechanisms? And why are some commenters so sure the end is nigh for WebKit? That potential future requires mechanisms of action - something to cause Safari users to switch. Nobody frames it precisely this way instead they'll say, if WebKit weren't mandated, Chromium would take over, or Google would dominate the web if not for the WebKit restriction. "WebKit couldn't compete if it had to." # They're excellent engineers some of the best, pound for pound, but there aren't enough of them. This line is frankly insulting to the good people that work on WebKit.

Apple continues to self-preference through exclusive API access for Safari e.g., the ability to install PWAs to the home screen, implement media codecs, and much else.ĭefenders of Apple's monopoly offer hard-to-test claims, but many boil down to the idea that Apple's product is inferior by necessity.

publishes a paltry set of options that carry an unmistakable odour of first-party app requirements.

Apple will not even allow competing browsers to provide different runtime flags to WebKit.

For 14 years and counting, Apple has prevented competing browsers from bringing their own engines, forcing vendors to build skins over Apple's WebKit binary, which has historically been slower, less secure, and lacking in features.

From iOS 2.0 in '08 to iOS 14 in late '20, Apple would not allow any browser but Safari to be the default."WebKit couldn't compete if it had to."Īpple's Long-Standing Policies Are Anti-Diversity #Ī refresher on Apple's iOS browser policies:.Apple's Long-Standing Policies Are Anti-Diversity.