Apple is gonna do what apple wants.

cute_boi 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

And their Safari browser is the worst. It doesn’t properly support PWAs or many other features because they want to maintain tight control over their App Store.

▲

dlahoda 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

My wife, son and me not using Safari. Do not see how Safari relates to App Store.

We use App Store.

	▲	SR2Z an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The point of a PWA is that instead of downloading an actual binary app, you essentially get a webpage that runs like it was an app. They can be installed from anywhere and are safe by nature because they're really just webpages. That was the original conception of iPhone apps, until Steve Jobs realized just how much money could be made from the app store. Now you get to pay Apple a 30% cut for the privilege of installing software on your own device!

▲

arkon_hn 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not to mention how updates are tied to OS updates...

▲

dlahoda 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What Updates tied? App Store updates use same networking and storage as OS? Why it is bad?

	▲	2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

tengwar2 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Hasn't been the case for some time.

	▲	spartanatreyu 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not true. MacOS releases a new version each year, the current MacOS landscape looks like: - MacOS Sequoia (previous version, everything works as expected) - MacOS Tahoe (current version, broken experience, basically Apple's "Windows Vista/8 moment") - MacOS Golden Gate (next version, fixes what was broken in Tahoe, comes out in a month) I'm on MacOS Sequoia because I have things that can't be broken by updating to Tahoe. I also cannot test how my websites/webapps will work in a month, because Safari's beta (called Safari Technology Preview) only works on Tahoe and Golden Gate. I cannot wait a month to update to Golden Gate because Golden Gate drops support for my iMac. And I can't test the new version of Safari on my Windows or Linux devices because Safari isn't available for them. I can test the Webkit browser, but that doesn't include the Safari specific changes that apple makes which I need to be able to test. --- So, I can't test Safari until I wait a month and purchase a new apple machine. (Oh by the way, apple keeps cancelling orders for new machines)

▲

nchmy 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

who are the knuckledraggers that are downvoting this comment? Its completely factual.

Significantly more on that here: https://infrequently.org/series/browser-choice-must-matter/

	▲	chuckadams 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Maybe because they don't want to see this thread dragged down into an open-ended gripe-fest against Apple, especially when it's concerning a feature Apple did ship before everyone else.

▲

llm_nerd 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What a funny tangent to go off on.

JXL was dead. Apple is who brought it back to life[1], and the only reason Chrome resurrected JXL, and now Firefox followed their path, is because Apple pushed JXL support to a billion plus devices.

I know people like complaining about Apple, but there's a "read the room" kind of moment where people just seem to either not know the context or are just knee jerking.

[1] Worth noting that Apple used the reference implementation, libjxl, and that project still remains the reference implementation with the Rust port being experimental (and of course Apple deployed JXL support over a year before the Rust port even existed). Maybe they'll switch to it at some point, but it's a bit premature to complain about.

▲

ChoosesBarbecue 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I believe Firefox was the first to put out a standards position about adopting jxl if a Rust implementation happened. Chromium only aligned their position this year I believe, prior to that, it was a complete rejection.

Which is to say, Chrome followed Firefox here.

(Yes, I know Google Research implemented jxl-rs, but then, they also implemented jxl. Chrome’s position appears independent of them.)

▲

spartanatreyu an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> JXL was dead. Apple is who brought it back to life

No, it was actually the PDF Association.

They added JXL to the PDF standard.

If google wanted to maintain support for displaying PDFs, they would need to add support for JXL.

	▲	NewJazz an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		* wanted to maintain support for displaying jxl images that are embedded in PDFs
	▲	llm_nerd an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The PDF consortium added JXL to the PDF spec two years after Apple deployed support to billions of devices. To anyone ackchyually paying attention to the JXL spec, lamenting that this superior format wallowed in obscurity (largely, it should be noted, because Google dumped it, and so many others just follow the leader of Google), Apple actually completely changed the path of the format's adoption.

▲

deadbunny 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I wasn't complaining, it's a factual statement made sarcasticly.

Things apple do because apple do:

- make a mouse you can't use while charging it

- gets bored of the power inefficency L of x86, makes the fastest arm cpu that causes x86 manufacturers get serious about power

- hey, those f keys? what if useless strip

- decades ahead in panel tech and refuses to compromise

▲

concinds 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't see what this has to do with the topic, sorry.

	▲	wongarsu 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Their point is that Apple is the Nintendo of computing. They don't care what others do, they just do their own thing. Which produces some great things and some stupid things. They also don't care whether you think what they are doing is great or stupid, they just continue doing their thing Which then tracks back to the beginning of the thread: the correct answer to whether apple will adopt jxl-rs or keep libjxl is "who knows, no point trying to predict them". Which is not a value judgement How you square all of that with the iPhone regularly copying features Android had for years is your decision. Might be a symptom of the same, might be that this all was an entirely inaccurate description of Apple

▲

_joel 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That useless strip could play lemmings and doom, it wasn't all bad

▲

tombert 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> make a mouse you can't use while charging it

I'm not one to usually defend Apple-ism, but it always felt that this was such a nothing-burger. The mouse charges in like fifteen minutes and lasts for weeks. I don't have a work Macbook (or job :) ) right now, but when I did I would just occasionally plug it in while I went to the bathroom. It really was not nearly as annoying as everyone said it was.

	▲	spartanatreyu 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Remember all those times you needed to make a change to something a few minutes before it was submitted/presented? Imagine if you couldn't, because you needed to charge your mouse first.