1. 3
  1.  

  2. 14

    The writer seems to think that “developers” are the same thing as so-called “web ‘developers’”. As a developer myself, I am quite content with Safari and don’t see any overarching need to add features to an already over-bloated web. As a developer, I am content with Safari if it works with Github and Stackoverflow, and leave functionality which has no place in a web browser to programs which are better suited to handle that.

    1. 9

      The top comment on that linked Reddit post made me laugh: someone is complaining that their web framework does all sorts of weird stuff when Safari slightly modifies the HTML to highlight a telephone number. If your web app goes bonkers because the browser modifies some HTML then that’s a problem with your crummy framework and/or webapp, and not Safari.

      /r/webdev is a horrible place anyway with the worst if the webdev crowd. Coincidentally, this afternoon I received this friendly message from one of these types of people. Apparently not using the latest greatest hot JS framework should be literally illegal.

      1. 8

        Yeah, Apple telling developers “make a native app” is, in our Electron based world, “wtf based”.

        It’s not like Safari is like IE6-in-a-Firefox-2 level bad either. Oh no, I can’t use WebUSB, what will I ever do?

        1. 5

          I don’t even think all this web stuff is necessarily all that bad of a way to write GUIs; there’s some advantages as well, like the ability to universally zoom text or modify stuff. Try doing that with GTK. Plus, it’s all really cross-platform too: it kind of delivered what Java promised us back in the day.

          But if you don’t have the latest greatest from the last 2 years then you’re “outdated” and “ancient”. Meanwhile, other types of developers are still supporting Windows 7, CentOS 6, etc. and I don’t see them constantly bitching and moaning about it as if it’s some sort of insufferable burden.

          1. 1

            It’s not the lack of features that I dislike about targeting safari (especially iOS).

            It’s the many, many bugs in the ones that do exist. I encounter them frequently enough that it’s become the first browser I test anything in; anything simple enough for safari to render is going to look fine everywhere.

          2. [Comment removed by author]

            1. 2

              I don’t understand what you’re referring to at all – I’m fairly sure that the FT had a working web page long before Safari even existed — why would you need an app to read a web page?

              1. 2

                What FT calls an “app” is a web page designed specifically to be convenient to use on a small touch screen, with extras like ability to prefetch articles for offline reading (very important for readers who check the news on the Tube).

                My point is exactly that you shouldn’t need to download an app to view a web page, but Safari’s lagging and buggy engine pushes site owners to the App Store for no good reason — just to polyfill Safari bugs and limitations.

          3. 11

            Did you know that it’s possible today to create something for your browser that works like a native app on your device?

            This is categorically false. It is a marketing fiction spread by those who want to develop their apps on the cheap, and, ok, fine. But PWAs do not work anything like native apps from the perspective of the end user, and acting otherwise is just gaslighting those users.

            1. 1

              Safari’s deal breaker for me is the fact that it does not support favicons in the Bookmark bar. I have a bunch of bookmarks on my browser that are just the favicon with no name. They’re highly recognizable and easy to just click my middle mouse button to open a new tab to them.