Comment by dfabulich
2 years ago
We do have "Super Apps" in the Western world. They're called "web browsers."
Note that Apple doesn't allow alternative web browsers on iOS, so Safari/WebKit is the only Super App allowed on iOS.
https://open-web-advocacy.org/apple-browser-ban/
> When you download Chrome, Firefox or any other browser that isn't Safari on an Apple device, that browser is forced to use Safari's rendering engine WebKit. Chrome normally uses Chromium, and Firefox Gecko. However, Apple will not allow those browsers to use their own engines. Without the ability to use their own engines, those browsers are unable to bring you their latest and greatest features, and can only go so far as whatever WebKit has added.
First, Chrome's rendering engine is Blink. Chromium is not a rendering engine, it's the open-source version of Chrome.
Second, third-party browsers use their own rendering engines (Gecko, Blink) on MacOS, while iOS only allows WebKit.
Not the case anymore in EU thx/because DMA (since ios 17.4)
Although Apple now has to allow alternative browsers to ship their engines in the EU, they actually set out ridiculous conditions for browser vendors to be able to do so. Therefore, as of now, none have done it.
This is malicious compliance from Apple to try and make the law ineffective.
Does enforcing a single rendering engine make things like Progressive Web Apps (PWAs) possible?
(It's not just a link to a web app on the homepage, it can also hold state, receive notifications, and (within reason) take over most of the screen.)
https://web.dev/explore/progressive-web-apps
1 reply →
It'll get done sooner than later, that's money just left on the table right now for EU browser makers. And the enforcement of the DMA correcting Apple's most obvious malicious compliance has been swift (backtracking on EU PWAs).
> Note that Apple doesn't allow alternative web browsers on iOS,
Nor [embedded] programming languages (e.g. Python).
That’s how Steve Jobs put down Flash.
No, for a a platform to survive, its maintainers need the leverage to call out laggards and make them truly sweat and work with it. Not just build 10 layers of Cordova fluff
Your second paragraph is incorrect and is explained why in your quote. Apple does allow alternative browsers, it does however restrict the rendering engine. Saying there is only one browser on iOS is like saying Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge are the same browser because they both use chromium.
That means I cannot install uBlock origin and other extensions on FF, so we can call it one way or the other, but it's restricting.
You got that right. I have an old basic 6th gen ipad with a cracked screen and slowly disappearing battery life but I refuse to get a new one until they drop the requirement for webkit because the web has become a miserable place without ublock. It's amazing that what was once a surfing champ has been reduced to almost unusable with all the trackers, frameworks, adworks, et. I'm mostly reading text, I should not need a super computer.
I see it as Apple allowing a facade around their browser. You can't really call Chrome on iOS as "Chrome" if it's still just Safari under the hood. It's like putting Ferrari body on a 2010 Honda frame. Is it a "Ferrari" or is it really a "Honda"?
No, I do not think it's fair to say that Apple allows other browsers, and neither does the DOJ.
People get confused by this because "engine" is being used too loosely (to mean totally different things).
> Saying there is only one browser on iOS is like saying Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge are the same browser because they both use chromium.
This is the correct take, though. They ARE the same web browser, just with different skins.
I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted. Chrome and Safari on iOS aren't using Webkit because they both use the WebKit source and compile it into their browsers... They are both using webkit because Chrome offloads rendering to a WKWebView. Chrome on iOS is not rendering anything at all
> it does however restrict the rendering engine
This isn't a sufficient description. Apple actually requires all third-party browsers to use the WebKit framework. If they actually allowed browsers to use the WebKit engine, then you could make a new browser incorporating the open source WebKit engine compiled into it. But this is not allowed.
> Saying there is only one browser on iOS is like saying Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge are the same browser because they both use chromium.
No, Edge and Chrome both use the Chromium engine. They are different browsers that incorporate the same engine. Edge can do this because Chromium is open source.
But Chrome on iOS doesn't have its own engine at all (not even the Webkit engine). It just offloads to the WebKit framework.
Microsoft __chose__ to use Blink, ostensibly because they felt that maintaining EdgeHTML was too costly. On iOS, you either use WebKit or your browser is technically and legally banned.
Chromium is open source and both Google and Microsoft do whatever they want to it as part of developing their browsers. WebKit on iOS is a closed source blob of rendering engine and assorted bits that it is not possible to deeply extend or alter.
WebKit is also open source. https://webkit.org/
1 reply →
None of what you said is incorrect.
Blink is the name of the rendering engine, not Chromium.
That’s a specific strategic choice, wanted by Steve Jobs himself to maintain leverage on the browser ecosystem.
If Chrome was let loose indiscriminately on any platform, how long before it became a Macromedia Flash, hobbling battery life and performance on whatever platform didn’t align to Alphabet’s strategy?
Also, how long before Alphabet began prime-timing Android, leaving Apple versions trailing months of not years behind, and restoring the “Works best on IE” experience of the ‘00s?
That is stretching the definition of a browser. Superapps enable all the miniapps in them to access the same user data, the history of app interactions (e.g., message history, shopping history), and to integrate closely. Webapps are nowhere close to that.
This is no longer correct I believe at least in the European union.
Arguably, F-Droid is a (Android-only, not possible to make such an app on iOS) super app that very much exists in the western world.
> Apple itself offers a "super app" of course, which is the Apple ecosystem of apps.
To be fair to Apple, both Google and Meta have loads of apps for iOS that compare to the Apple suite of apps. Although there is definitely a pre-installed advantage for the Apple apps.
> F-Droid is a (Android-only, not possible to make such an app on iOS) super app that very much exists in the western world.
I’d call that an app marketplace, not a super app.
Then wouldn’t the same argument apply to the Apple App Store?
1 reply →