the best example is your claim of face id not working in the dark.
Damn, that's bone you'll never bury, Fido.
stop pretending to know what you're talking about, because it's quite
obvious you do not.
We are *STILL* in the old days, except now it's google instead of
microsoft doing the same shit.
It's Apple's webkit doing the same old shit just as much as Google and
Mozilla do today given those 3 mega companies own today's browser market.
True. I was thinking more of desktop browsers, but in the world of
mobile device, apple is doing the exact same shit microsoft did for
many years with internet explorer. At least the latter didn't force developers hang a skin on I.E. and call it something else.
Hank Rogers wrote:
We are *STILL* in the old days, except now it's google instead of
microsoft doing the same shit.
It's Apple's webkit doing the same old shit just as much as Google and
Mozilla do today given those 3 mega companies own today's browser
market.
True. I was thinking more of desktop browsers, but in the world of
mobile device, apple is doing the exact same shit microsoft did for
many years with internet explorer. At least the latter didn't force
developers hang a skin on I.E. and call it something else.
*Educated, intelligent people own a _basis_ for their belief systems.*
We have seen multiple cites from multiple web browser developers saying
that webkit is atrociously designed; so we have that set of datapoints.
That's a non sequitur since Apple also isn't dependent on the App Store
for a large percentage of its income. In fact, in FY22 Only 5% of
Apple's revenue came from services (which includes not only the App
Store but also Wallet, News, iCloud, Fitness, Music, Apple TV, and
other services, meaning App Store is an even smaller percentage of total revenue). There is no evidence that Apple's motivation here is
specifically income-related as opposed to other business reasons. You
are spouting nonsense as usual.
They probably also feel that the open ecosystem brings
benefits to them.
it's not as open as you are trying to claim. google regularly rejects
apps from the play store, and unlike apple, actually has removed
certain apps from user's phones. apple does have that ability, but has
never actually used it (which says a lot about how weak android
security is).
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also chrome-based.
All the browsers that are available for iOS are sub-optimal
because they _must_ used WebKit.
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also chrome-based.
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also chrome-based.
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also chrome-based.
Oh, interesting. I thought that Chrome and other browsers such as Edge
used the Chromium rendering engine.
Knowing there are already plenty of cites saying webkit is "shitty code",
All the browsers that are available for iOS are sub-optimal
because they _must_ used WebKit.
that's false.
The cites that were provided appear to back up the evidence that webkit is suboptimal but if you have real cites from reliable sources, post them.
In article <tnqe06$du1i$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
All the browsers that are available for iOS are sub-optimal
because they _must_ used WebKit.
that's false.
In article <tnqlkv$elc7$1@dont-email.me>, Wilf <wilf@postingx.uk> wrote:
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also
chrome-based.
Oh, interesting. I thought that Chrome and other browsers such as Edge
used the Chromium rendering engine.
they do. chromium is based on blink, google's fork of webkit.
In article <tnqkto$ek38$1@dont-email.me>, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
Knowing there are already plenty of cites saying webkit is "shitty code",
not from anyone who has any credibility.
On 12/19/2022 10:00 AM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
<snip>
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use
shitty code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a
fork of Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser,
which is also chrome-based.
Correct. All the browsers that are available for iOS are
sub-optimal because they _must_ used WebKit.
In article <tnqlkv$elc7$1@dont-email.me>, Wilf <wilf@postingx.uk> wrote:
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also
chrome-based.
Oh, interesting. I thought that Chrome and other browsers such as Edge
used the Chromium rendering engine.
they do. chromium is based on blink, google's fork of webkit.
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also
chrome-based.
Oh, interesting. I thought that Chrome and other browsers such as Edge
used the Chromium rendering engine.
they do. chromium is based on blink, google's fork of webkit.
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use shitty
code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a fork of
Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser, which is also
chrome-based.
Oh, interesting. I thought that Chrome and other browsers such as Edge
used the Chromium rendering engine.
they do. chromium is based on blink, google's fork of webkit.
Thanks.
Google Chrome almost completely departed from WebKit about a decade ago.
Google has announced that it's departing from its relationship with Apple's WebKit engine and is starting up a new open source Webkit-based project called Blink.
There are advantages and disadvantages to working on your own engine.
WebKit wasn't that interoperable anyway.
rubbish. webkit is open source and has been used on blackberry, nokia, android and others.
WebKit wasn't that interoperable anyway.
rubbish. webkit is open source and has been used on blackberry, nokia, android and others.
Since when have you said a good word about Blackberry, Nokia & Android?
And why is it that multiple reputable companies said that WebKit "wasn't interoperable" so much so that Google completely departed from it when developing the Chromium base?
Why is it that privacy experts like the The Tor Project 501(c)(3)
non-profit foundation said you couldn't get any privacy out of WebKit?
Why is it others said that the low security and slow speed of WebKit was
not good enough for their multi-platform browser development teams?
With everyone saying how bad WebKit is, why is it only you say otherwise?
Google Chrome almost completely departed from WebKit about a decade ago.
it forked, which is not the same as 'completely departed'.
Google has announced that it's departing from its relationship with Apple's >> WebKit engine and is starting up a new open source Webkit-based project
called Blink.
blink is a fork of webkit.
There are advantages and disadvantages to working on your own engine.
something lost on the trolls.
On 20/12/2022 14:07, nospam wrote:
WebKit wasn't that interoperable anyway.
rubbish. webkit is open source and has been used on blackberry, nokia,
android and others.
Since when have you said a good word about Blackberry, Nokia & Android?
And why is it that multiple reputable companies said that WebKit "wasn't interoperable" so much so that Google completely departed from it when developing the Chromium base?
Why is it that privacy experts like the The Tor Project 501(c)(3)
non-profit foundation said you couldn't get any privacy out of WebKit?
Why is it others said that the low security and slow speed of WebKit was
not good enough for their multi-platform browser development teams?
With everyone saying how bad WebKit is, why is it only you say otherwise?
When Google departed from WebKit about a decade ago, they were pretty clear
that they were going off in a completely different direction from WebKit.
no they weren't.
Yes they were very clear that they were abandoning WebKit moving forward.
When Google departed from WebKit about a decade ago, they were pretty clear >> that they were going off in a completely different direction from WebKit.
no they weren't.
Google has announced that it's departing from its relationship with Apple's
WebKit engine and is starting up a new open source Webkit-based project >>>> called Blink.
blink is a fork of webkit.
Just as much as a computer is a fork of an abacus, when Google forked off
of WebKit a decade ago, they were clear WebKit wasn't fast or secure then.
you are clueless.
On 20/12/2022 14:07, nospam wrote:
WebKit wasn't that interoperable anyway.
rubbish. webkit is open source and has been used on blackberry, nokia,
android and others.
Since when have you said a good word about Blackberry, Nokia & Android?
And why is it that multiple reputable companies said that WebKit "wasn't interoperable" so much so that Google completely departed from it when developing the Chromium base?
Why is it that privacy experts like the The Tor Project 501(c)(3)
non-profit foundation said you couldn't get any privacy out of WebKit?
Why is it others said that the low security and slow speed of WebKit was
not good enough for their multi-platform browser development teams?
With everyone saying how bad WebKit is, why is it only you say otherwise?
Everyone who designs browsers says that WebKit is garbage, which is why Google abandoned WebKit a decade ago for Chromium and never looked back.
Why is it that privacy experts like the The Tor Project 501(c)(3)
non-profit foundation said you couldn't get any privacy out of WebKit?
likely because they have an agenda, or maybe that they aren't as smart
as they think they are.
Why is it others said that the low security and slow speed of WebKit was
not good enough for their multi-platform browser development teams?
anyone who said that is lying.
You didn't read the part in that last reference which says very clearly
you also snipped some of the many benchmarks that show safari being
among the fastest and most energy efficient browsers, partly because of javascript acceleration in hardware.
You didn't read the part in that last reference which says very clearly
right, because everything on the internet is guaranteed to be correct.
You didn't read the part in that last reference which says very clearly
https://infrequently.org/2022/06/apple-is-not-defending-browser-engine-choice/
"For 14 years and counting, Apple has prevented competing browsers from bringing their own engines, forcing vendors to build skins over Apple's WebKit binary, which has historically been slower, less secure, and lacking in features."
Why is it you can't find any cites that do NOT say WebKit is garbage?
So what you are telling us is that basically most browsers use
shitty code, since Webkit is also the base of chrome (chrome is a
fork of Webkit) and hence also the base of Microsofts browser,
which is also chrome-based.
Correct. All the browsers that are available for iOS are
sub-optimal because they _must_ used WebKit.
They are all simply skins slapped on safari.
Does this new Apple web kit zero day hole affect all iOS browser skins?
Does this new Apple web kit zero day hole affect all iOS browser skins?
how about this chrome zero-day, one of *eight* this year alone:
Does this new Apple web kit zero day hole affect all iOS browser skins?
how about this chrome zero-day, one of *eight* this year alone:
Whataboutism, as used by nospam, is a favorite tactic of Donald Trump.
It's a variant of the ad hominem attack.
When someone can't answer the argument, they attack instead.
In article <tnvb15$l7a$1@gioia.aioe.org>, CDB <bellemarecd@gmail.com>
wrote:
Does this new Apple web kit zero day hole affect all iOS browser skins? >>>how about this chrome zero-day, one of *eight* this year alone:
Whataboutism, as used by nospam, is a favorite tactic of Donald Trump.
nope. you're claiming webkit has flaws. of course it does, as does
chrome and mozilla. *all* software has flaws. nothing is immune.
what you *don't* get to do is cherry pick only flaws with apple solely
to fit your narrative.
It's a variant of the ad hominem attack.
it is not.
When someone can't answer the argument, they attack instead.
which is what you just did.
On 12/21/2022 1:10 PM, nospam wrote:
In article <tnvb15$l7a$1@gioia.aioe.org>, CDB <bellemarecd@gmail.com>
wrote:
Does this new Apple web kit zero day hole affect all iOS browser
skins?
how about this chrome zero-day, one of *eight* this year alone:
Whataboutism, as used by nospam, is a favorite tactic of Donald Trump.
nope. you're claiming webkit has flaws. of course it does, as does
chrome and mozilla. *all* software has flaws. nothing is immune.
what you *don't* get to do is cherry pick only flaws with apple solely
to fit your narrative.
It's a variant of the ad hominem attack.
it is not.
When someone can't answer the argument, they attack instead.
which is what you just did.
Why did you immediately resort to a variant of the ad hominem attack?
Why didn't you answer the question asked instead of resorting to tu-quoque?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 60:18:56 |
| Calls: | 6,712 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,355,756 |
