Forum: Author Hangout

Not a story topic

Switch Blayde 🚫

I have a question that has nothing to do with SOL or stories or even writing. It has to do with Apple and browsers.

I have an Apple MacBook and use Safari as the browser. I went to the Fidelity.com site today because my credit card is through them. Things about the credit card didn't work. I called Fidelity and they transferred me to Elan Financial who manages the credit card. They said there were no problems on their end and asked me what browser I was using. I told them Safari. They said their system doesn't always work with Safari and told me to use Chrome. When I did, everything worked fine (Safari had always worked on their site in the past).

The same thing happened to me more than once on JP Morgan Chase's site. Not often, but sometimes. And the state of Arizona told me that Safari wasn't supported on their sites and to use Chrome which I've always done since.

So my question for you Apple users, have you experienced this with Safari?

Replies: Michael Loucks

Michael Loucks 🚫

@Switch Blayde

So my question for you Apple users, have you experienced this with Safari?

All the freaking time. Many, many sites are built to work with Chrome (and thus most Chromium browsers). Once Microsoft ditched IE for Chromium-based Edge, it was game over.

I find this with Firefox, too. I use arc when I need a Chrome-family browser. Other good options are Brave and DuckDuckGo browser.

Sadly, there isn't much we can do about the monoculture developing around Google's control of browsers at this point, except support Firefox.

Replies: awnlee jawking Sarkasmus

awnlee jawking 🚫
Updated:

@Michael Loucks

Many, many sites are built to work with Chrome (and thus most Chromium browsers). Once Microsoft ditched IE for Chromium-based Edge, it was game over.

When using the library computers (Chrome Desktop with Windows 11 under the covers), I came across a couple of websites belonging to large UK companies that didn't work with Chrome, yet when I tried them with Edge, they worked fine.

AJ

Sarkasmus 🚫

@Michael Loucks

Many, many sites are built to work with Chrome...

Just a small correction. Many, many sites are built to use web-standards. Apple's Webkit engine, which Safari is based on, is notoriously slow to adapt new standards. There are VERY few sites using some specific API-Tweak that only works in Chrome. But those sites are usually regarded as trash (it's mostly sites that don't want you to use an AdBlocker, and Chrome, after abandoning Manifest v2, basically doesn't have a viable API for effective AdBlockers anymore).

It's also doesn't help that Safari is just... behind the times.

Basically, as the web was still young, Microsoft had its Internet Explorer, and Apple had its Safari Browser. And BOTH of them did... very weird things that worked solely in their specific browsers. But, over time, standards emerged that developers adhered to, and with Microsoft completely ditching IE to use Edge instead, Apple are now the only ones who still try to do their own thing for some reason.

Replies: Michael Loucks

Michael Loucks 🚫
Updated:

@Sarkasmus

Just a small correction. Many, many sites are built to use web-standards. Apple's Webkit engine, which Safari is based on, is notoriously slow to adapt new standards

Just a small correction — Google introduces new 'standards' to break Safari and Firefox, then blames them.

See, e.g. Who shapes Web standards?

Scroll down the chart and see that Google has more representatives than the next 10 organizations combined. If you include MS, those two basically decide standards. That's not how 'open' standards are supposed to work, and no one company should control the browser.

That's one serious antitrust argument against Google. To blame Mozilla and Apple when the game is rigged is disingenuous.

Replies: Sarkasmus

Sarkasmus 🚫
Updated:

@Michael Loucks

Scroll down the chart and see that Google has more representatives than the next 10 organizations combined. If you include MS, those two basically decide standards.

Okay, what am I missing here? Did you actually read the paper you linked?

The paper you linked clearly states that the graphic you pointed out shows a comparison of the corporations having members inside the W3C groups. It does NOT show how many of the members come from corporations. In fact, right after the graphic you pointed out, it states that the US alone have 2.245 people in those groups.
So, Google has only 27% of the US representitives in the W3C groups. And the US as a whole only accounts for 65.7% of all W3C member representatives. And the paper also clearly states that corporations are mostly found in groups discussing Ads and Privacy.

So... how exactly is Google "rigging the game" when it comes to web standards???

(I also never blamed Firefox. All I said was that WebKit is notoriously slow to adapt new standards. Firefox does NOT use WebKit. Or are you starting to hallucinate yourself now?)

Replies: Michael Loucks

Michael Loucks 🚫

@Sarkasmus

Google's influence outweighs the others, which was my point.

I'm not hallucinating, but extrapolating. I'm not the only one who sees is (including competition authorities).

See, e.g. — Chrome Is the Forgotten Fulcrum of Google's Dominance

Google's market dominance allows it to push subpar web standards that hurt user privacy or drive out competitors.
…
Nowadays, these web standards are more frequently set by the most dominant browser developer, namely Google.

So it's both/and — Google uses its influence in W3C, but also uses its dominance to change the 'standards', which they can do per force due to their dominance.

This isn't news. See, e.g.: There Are No "Good" Web Browsers Left (And It is a BIG Problem)

If a monoculture exists in today's web browsers, this is it. Chromium (Google Chrome) has an astonishing amount of market share in the browser space (more on that shortly). This gives Google MASSIVE power over how the internet is shaped and consumed and they use this power to forward their own interests for profit.

The point is, as I stated, the problem is not Safari (or Mozilla); it's Google. They are anti-privacy and push standards that break privacy-related browsers. It's intentional.

Replies: Sarkasmus

Sarkasmus 🚫
Updated:

@Michael Loucks

Google's influence outweighs the others, which was my point.

I have to admit, I fail to see how.
Web Standards are set by the W3 Consortium. Market-shares have absolutely nothing to do with that. And you yourself just posted a study that shows how Google has less than 10% of the voting power inside the groups discussing new standards.
I mean, look at Manifest v3. It was widely discussed as Google's Attack on Privacy, as it undermines AdBlockers. But fact is that the ENTIRETY of the involved W3C groups voted in favor of the changes, because Manifest V2 had legitimate security flaws everyone agreed have to go. Not just the one out of ten members who are Google-affiliated.

The two articles you linked just now also don't really make much sense to me.

One of them is about a two-year-old ruling regarding Google's being the most-used search engine, where the author makes completely unsubstantiated claims about Google using it's market dominance "to push subpar web standards"... and then try to justify this claim by Google purchasing startups. Most-notably, a company developing protection measures against copying videos. Not only does that have absolutely nothing to do with web standards, but I also have to wonder how Google acquiring a company like this, while operating YouTube and therefore having a vested interest in developing protection measures against users downloading videos, would be "against privacy".

The other article is by some guy who wrote a mile-long rant about the Mozilla CEO wanting to include AI in Firefox, based on nothing but his fantasies and assumptions he never cares to substantiate either (and then, of course, didn't turn out to be correct when the feared update actually came a few months ago).

Reply to topic

Forum: Author Hangout

Not a story topic

WARNING! ADULT CONTENT...