I genuinely believe that the fact that Webkit is the only engine Apple will allow on iOS is the only thing preventing a complete Chromium monoculture on the web right now.
User choice isn't worth shit if web devs don't support any browser except Chrome, and if 95% of people are using it then that's all they will support.
And to be clear, I'm not under any illusion that Apple's reasons for doing this are in any way noble. They're doing it because they don't want to be under Google's bootheel, and unlike most of us they are powerful enough to avoid that fate.
Is it better to be under Apple's boot than Google's? Maybe not. But I still think two boots are better than one.
@nicklockwood Yes, two boots are better.
Still, it’s a bit ironic that one is worn by the “Think different” company and the other by “Don’t be evil”.
@nicklockwood @Migueldeicaza Chromies call Safari “the new IE” because it was slow to adopt new standards and because Webkit is the only engine allowed on iOS. Many of their criticisms are fair, but what made IE a threat was that it had over 90% browser share and so Microsoft could do whatever it wanted regardless of the standards. This is what Google wants.
Oh yeah, and web developers of that era would only support IE and accuse Firefox for being non-standard.
@jackwellborn @Migueldeicaza yeah, I agree with that. Also Safari isn't lagging behind Chrome in functionality due to Apple not caring about web standards - it's because Google has so much clout that they have effectively redefined the standards to be "whatever Chrome is doing".
As for the last part - I *was* a web developer of that era, and that's not quite accurate. We all loved Firefox and wanted it to succeed, but we had to support IE above all else because that's what our customers used.