![]() I fully agree it's dragged it's feet on a few features, but that's also partially in relation to Chrome tossing in the kitchen sink. Safari feels far better than any other browser, supports a number of important features others don't, and what it does support it renders as nearly as consistently as others. better position: sticky / display: contentsĪnd again, it literally feels about 2-3x faster than Chrome, battery lasts significantly longer, UI responsiveness is way ahead. ![]() various font values: ui-rounded, ui-serif, etc ![]() better css filter() support, blur support Here's an arbitrary list of things it supports that Chrome doesn't: It's maybe a little behind in specs, but way ahead in other areas. IE11 was known for way behind in every aspect, that's not the case for Safari. But in terms of quirks in rendering, they are arguable ahead of FF. In accordance with specs, they aren't very weird at all, they just support a few less than others. Safari is updated on a super-regular schedule. Still nowhere near as comparable, and cherry picking doesn't really make a great case. For all the pissing and moaning about edge conditions of standalone web applications, Safari was far and away the earliest mobile browser to actually support them! Long before Chrome on Android did. Yet in the actual real world, Safari is the most performant browser by a country mile. Usually because someone, at some point, stomped their feet and had a fit because Apple didn't immediately support whatever their pet proposal was, and this got spun into a fantastic conspiracy about invented motives. No, Apple doesn't "force" people into app store apps, and by actual empirical data, facilitates browsing the web even more than alternatives.Īs to Safari being the "worst web browser in existence", after chuckling at what I assumed was some sort of parody, I realized some people actually believe this noise. In just about every country the representation on statcounter significantly exceeds the actual sales metrics of the device. It just turns out that users on iPhones browse a lot more than users on other platforms. Only in actual sales data, iPhone devices are far below 50%. StatCounter uses web browsing to measure the prevalence of given clients, in which we find that iPhone users make up more than 50% of US mobile devices. One of the most common stats cited on HN to demonstrate that Apple has a supposed monopoly is StatCounter. Without needing a corporate sponsorship to do it. but of course if you plug one in, it'll do all the above. Its an OS - it'll function without 'the Internet'. Imagine an OS that allows you to properly maintain a nice timeline of everything you do with your device(s), locally. ![]() Now, what if that same OS knew how to talk to other users of the same OS without hassle or fuss, and sync stuff to each other?Īnd then, don't you think by then, that OS would have decent social-media services onboard, which don't require any third party other than actually confirmed friends. without involving a third party.Īll of these things are the fault of the operating system vendors, who have fallen asleep at the wheel and sublimated themselves to the web. properly run email tools) that allow them to maintain a social network with ease - i.e. They don't have the patience to have to copy that data to another server to get it published.Īnd they also don't seem to have what it takes on their own local systems (e.g. People have also forgotten how to maintain a filesystem of data and keep it up to date and well organized, themselves, locally. This is great for our "AI" revolution because user interaction/engagement with computers has been dumbed down to its stupidest form thus by comparison the "AI" seems very smart. Now people have full blown computers in their pockets all the time and all they can think of doing with them is scrolling down and clicking "like" button. Then facebook happened.Įven facebook at first was receptive to the idea of some degree of personalizing with facebook apps, but as they grew bigger and powerful it became obvious that total control was the best for their bottom line. People who wouldn't know what HTML meant if their lives depended on it were willing to learn the basics in order to personalize their profiles. It was an aesthetic and security disaster but it was also AMAZING. It feels like a lifetime ago but people forget that one of the things that made myspace so appealing was the ability to "pimp" one's profile page. As others have noted, the issue isn't a lack of ways to build your own website, it is the capture of the web by the likes of facebook, google, apple.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |