←back to thread

400 points dulvui | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
mgoetzke ◴[] No.41857244[source]
it also leaks the audio of tabs before logging in.

Even though I had disabled all 'restore' applications features, macos sometimes decides to 'start' browsers BEFORE logging in after a restart AND those start auto-playing audio from whatever was paused before the reboot (or many days before).

Since then I went rather deep disabling that feature, but I never trusted it.

replies(7): >>41857258 #>>41857358 #>>41857362 #>>41857411 #>>41857615 #>>41857667 #>>41857946 #
Jerrrrrrry ◴[] No.41857362[source]
They want their TCP/IP stack and safari browser hot and ready for their demanders of instant gratification.

In the long run, they barter this goodwill for "Safari is shit" credit until they and Google force the internet until a browser-turned App-Play-Store war.

Both companies win, and can blame the other company - all while incentivising anti-competition behavior and benefiting from their own organizational, yet altruistic, self-interests happening to coincidentally collude in similar, yet distinctly more complicated cases of creating monopolies spanning multiple domains.

The internet was captured, gamified, commoditized, and vertically integrated into a handful of giga-Corps.

your mobile devices are essentially tracking devices you are addicted to, and the government is too interested in these shiny grandiose things and their use in facilitating government functions without any real consequence, they fail to see the systematic risks that they themselves have allowed to proliferate by not enforcing stricter laws for systematically - exploitable intersections of law, technology, and business.

replies(4): >>41857456 #>>41857535 #>>41858196 #>>41859496 #
lukan ◴[] No.41857456[source]
"they fail to see the systematic risks"

Or they also fail at providing a solution. Would you prefer diletantic government intervention in this area instead?

replies(4): >>41857493 #>>41857767 #>>41858381 #>>41861042 #
1. Jerrrrrrry ◴[] No.41857767[source]

  >"they fail to see the systematic risks"
  Or they also fail at providing a solution.
Apple has no incentive to improve Safari. "It just works" is what their cultists paid to have the honor to parrot, and they enjoy the majority of web market share of people with actual wages and disposable income. That's why the sell culture, not their people's data (directly, yet).

Since it's not "Safari" that's broken (since iPhones cost a lot of money, they cant break), the users will lie blame at the fault of the web developers, since they had gotten cozy within the comfortable, flexible, expected behaviors of Chrome, having enjoyed a hiatus from IE11 EOL pollyfills and jquery.

Apple then made it easier to roll out an app than to grapple with the pitfalls, nuances, foot-guns, and gabbling documentation that Safari has carefully mal-compiled to shepherd both developers and their users into the Walled Garden.

It's just the browser wars, but with higher stakes. And Microsoft already won.

replies(1): >>41858195 #
2. acdha ◴[] No.41858195[source]
If you’re referring to people as “cultists”, consider that your point might not be as strong as you think. If you have a non-emotional argument about a browser, try making it with logic and data rather than emotion. For example, demonstrate awareness of where the browsers rank on the features which web developers really need (Google’s devrel team likes to highlight PWA features almost nobody uses even on Chrome) and show why the “walled garden” metaphor applies more to a niche browser than the dominant one by a large margin.