See "Google engineer calls out Apple
In article <tni90u$3dgkt$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
nospam wrote:
In article <tni90u$3dgkt$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Not needed, and nobody wants it.
Hell, we've got *you* as our infallible source for all things Apple.
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
they (and others) say a lot of things, not all of which are true.
Only what Apple says about webkit is true.
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
they (and others) say a lot of things, not all of which are true.
On Dec 17, 2022, nospam wrote
(in article<news:171220221732376890%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
they (and others) say a lot of things, not all of which are true.
Only what Apple says about webkit is true.
Ron, the humblest guy in town.
nospam wrote:
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
Yes, that is correct.
There is the Onion browser which is not as good as Tor but it's as much
as you can get on iOS or iPadOS, for now.
I cover this in 111a on page 54 of the document
Only what Apple says about webkit is true.
In article <tnlm8f$3pjjt$2@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
For example, browsers are less able to accelerate the speed of page
loading and cannot display videos in formats not supported by WebKit.
that is false. safari is among the fastest browsers on ios and obscure formats are not a problem.
For example, browsers are less able to accelerate the speed of page
loading and cannot display videos in formats not supported by WebKit.
that is false. safari is among the fastest browsers on ios and obscure
formats are not a problem.
Amen. It's the finest browser in the whole universe. It's under
attack by evil people who want to destroy apple
There is the Onion browser which is not as good as Tor but it's as much
as you can get on iOS or iPadOS, for now.
On 17 Dec 2022, Hank Rogers <hank@nospam.invalid> wrote in misc.phone.mobile.iphone:
For example, browsers are less able to accelerate the speed of page
loading and cannot display videos in formats not supported by WebKit.
that is false. safari is among the fastest browsers on ios and obscure
formats are not a problem.
Amen. It's the finest browser in the whole universe. It's under
attack by evil people who want to destroy apple
Webkit is under attack by those evil Tor developers who said webkit stinks.
Evil Tor developers.
They don't know anything about privacy.
They never did.
Only Apple does.
Apple says so themselves.
In article <tnlm24$3pjjt$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
Yes, that is correct.
they may have said it, however, it's very much *not* correct.
it's also irrelevant to the topic and an obvious troll.
There is the Onion browser which is not as good as Tor but it's as much
as you can get on iOS or iPadOS, for now.
only because the tor developers have chosen to not bother with ios,
which means it's a tor issue, not an apple issue.
I cover this in 111a on page 54 of the document
of course you do, because you revel in disinformation.
On 2022-12-17 22:41:52 +0000, RonTheGuy said:
On Dec 17, 2022, nospam wrote
(in article<news:171220221732376890%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for
privacy?
they (and others) say a lot of things, not all of which are true.
Only what Apple says about webkit is true.
Ron, the humblest guy in town.
The problem is that you could easily end up back in the old days
where garbage like Microsloth Exploiter tried to make up its own
rules that simply caused a massive headache for web developers. :-(
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for privacy?
Yes, that is correct.
they may have said it, however, it's very much *not* correct.
it's also irrelevant to the topic and an obvious troll.
There is the Onion browser which is not as good as Tor but it's as much
as you can get on iOS or iPadOS, for now.
only because the tor developers have chosen to not bother with ios,
which means it's a tor issue, not an apple issue.
I cover this in 111a on page 54 of the document
of course you do, because you revel in disinformation.
He simply has not drank the apple koolaid yet, but he'll come
around soon enough.
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for
privacy?
they (and others) say a lot of things, not all of which are true.
Only what Apple says about webkit is true.
Ron, the humblest guy in town.
The problem is that you could easily end up back in the old days
where garbage like Microsloth Exploiter tried to make up its own
rules that simply caused a massive headache for web developers. :-(
We are *STILL* in the old days, except now it's google instead of
microsoft doing the same shit.
It's Apple's webkit doing the same old shit just as much as Google and Mozilla do today given those 3 mega companies own today's browser market.
Once he drinks the Apple kookaid he'll realize the only web browser anyone wants is Safari so that all other browsers are just webkit skins of Safari.
It is possible to like Apple products, and like the company, but still
point out when there are issues with either. When enough users say
something then change is possible.
Not sure why our favorite trolls are upset at the potential for there to
be third party web browsers that are not based on WebKit. This is a good thing, not something to complain about.
In article <tno3fl$258r$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
It is possible to like Apple products, and like the company, but still
point out when there are issues with either. When enough users say
something then change is possible.
true, except what you do is deliberately fabricate issues that do not actually exist.
the best example is your claim of face id not working in the dark.
On 12/18/2022 1:11 PM, RonTheGuy wrote:
<snip>
Once he drinks the Apple kookaid he'll realize the only web
browser anyone
wants is Safari so that all other browsers are just webkit skins
of Safari.
Three years ago I was actually drinking their beer and wine, and
eating their food, at the grand opening of Apple Park. There was no
Koolaid, that would be low-class. I also got to give a speech at
the event.
It is possible to like Apple products, and like the company, but
still point out when there are issues with either. When enough
users say something then change is possible.
In article <z0gzp0p14y9n$.dlg@news.solani.org>, RonTheGuy
<ron@null.invalid> wrote:
It's Apple's webkit doing the same old shit just as much as Google and
Mozilla do today given those 3 mega companies own today's browser market.
google chrome, the most popular desktop browser, uses google's own fork
of apple's webkit, known as blink.
On Dec 18, 2022, Hank Rogers wrote
(in article<news:oMJnL.37517$t5W7.11855@fx13.iad>):
See "Google engineer calls out Apple
nothing like an unbiased source
Didn't tor browser developers also say webkit is no good for
privacy?
they (and others) say a lot of things, not all of which are true.
Only what Apple says about webkit is true.
Ron, the humblest guy in town.
The problem is that you could easily end up back in the old days
where garbage like Microsloth Exploiter tried to make up its own
rules that simply caused a massive headache for web developers. :-(
We are *STILL* in the old days, except now it's google instead of
microsoft doing the same shit.
It's Apple's webkit doing the same old shit just as much as Google and Mozilla do today given those 3 mega companies own today's browser market.
like everything, there are advantages and disadvantages for alternate rendering engines, security being at the top of the list.
Yet they are not allowed to use it for mobile versions of chrome?
They have to hang a skin on safari and call it chrome, right?
Do you think apple is jealous of google's blink fork?
Hank Rogers <hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Yet they are not allowed to use it for mobile versions of chrome?
They have to hang a skin on safari and call it chrome, right?
Do you think apple is jealous of google's blink fork?
Apple is a multi-trillion dollar company. Not a 15 year old girl.
No one at Apple is “jealous” of any other company.
Hank Rogers <hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Yet they are not allowed to use it for mobile versions of chrome?
They have to hang a skin on safari and call it chrome, right?
Do you think apple is jealous of google's blink fork?
Apple is a multi-trillion dollar company. Not a 15 year old girl.
No one at Apple is “jealous” of any other company.
Grow up.
"If Apple lets developers adopt third-party browser engines with access
to all iOS APIs, it will end up hurting the App Store business." That's
the bottom line.
On Sun, 18 Dec 2022 22:28:47 -0800, sms wrote:
"If Apple lets developers adopt third-party browser engines with access
to all iOS APIs, it will end up hurting the App Store business." That's
the bottom line.
How is it then that Google presumably lets developers adopt third-party browser engines with access to all the Android APIs and Google allowing
that doesn't end up hurting business for Google's App Store but the same thing by Apple hurts the Apple App Store?
like everything, there are advantages and disadvantages for alternate rendering engines, security being at the top of the list.
If you say security is at the top of the web kit list, what about privacy?
"If Apple lets developers adopt third-party browser engines with access
to all iOS APIs, it will end up hurting the App Store business." That's
the bottom line.
They could use
the GPS in the iPhone to only allow installation of certain apps in
certain regions, just like some streaming services now do that.
On Sun, 18 Dec 2022 22:28:47 -0800, sms wrote:
"If Apple lets developers adopt third-party browser engines with access
to all iOS APIs, it will end up hurting the App Store business." That's
the bottom line.
How is it then that Google presumably lets developers adopt third-party browser engines with access to all the Android APIs and Google allowing
that doesn't end up hurting business for Google's App Store but the same thing by Apple hurts the Apple App Store?
Google isn't dependent on the Google Play store for a large percentage
of its income.
They probably also feel that the open ecosystem brings
benefits to them.
On 12/18/2022 9:18 PM, Bob Campbell wrote:
Hank Rogers <hank@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Yet they are not allowed to use it for mobile versions of chrome?
They have to hang a skin on safari and call it chrome, right? Do
you think apple is jealous of google's blink fork?
Apple is a multi-trillion dollar company. Not a 15 year old girl.
No one at Apple is “jealous” of any other company.
It's not "jeaIousy," it's just business.
The reason that browser are forced to use WebKit is discussed at
<https://9to5mac.com/2022/03/01/web-developers-challenge-apple-to-allow-other-browser-engines-on-ios/>:
On 12/18/2022 11:18 PM, Tim+ wrote:
On Sun, 18 Dec 2022 22:28:47 -0800, sms wrote:
"If Apple lets developers adopt third-party browser engines with
access to all iOS APIs, it will end up hurting the App Store
business." That's the bottom line.
How is it then that Google presumably lets developers adopt
third-party browser engines with access to all the Android APIs and
Google allowing that doesn't end up hurting business for Google's App
Store but the same thing by Apple hurts the Apple App Store?
Google isn't dependent on the Google Play store for a large percentage
of its income. They probably also feel that the open ecosystem brings benefits to them.
Incidentally, Google is not completely innocent here. In the EU, Android users are explicitly asked which browser and search engine they want to
use, it doesn't default to Chrome. See <https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/20/18273888/google-eu-browser-search-choice>.
What both iOS and Android users can hope for is that the EUs actions end
up promoting better availability of apps and services everywhere.
"What is this really about? Web developers want full access to all the sensors on the phone. This obviously has significant privacy
implications. Safari is not following the direction Google wants to take
the web but it is leading the way with privacy.
How can Apple be "leading the way with privacy" when the web developers who know privacy inside and out have said that webkit can't provide privacy?
In article <1ac8u2fwxrs1m$.dlg@news.solani.org>, RonTheGuy
<ron@null.invalid> wrote:
How can Apple be "leading the way with privacy" when the web developers who >> know privacy inside and out have said that webkit can't provide privacy?
they're lying. very simple.
For example, browsers are less able to accelerate the speed of page
loading and cannot display videos in formats not supported by WebKit.
that is false. safari is among the fastest browsers on ios and obscure formats are not a problem.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 03:34:22 |
| Calls: | 10,386 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,595 |