[leptons]

Apple sez: We don't want to implement any of those APIs, and we forbid you to use a browser that implements them, because reasons.

Your comments are some Stockholm-syndrome level nonsense you're spouting to protect your favorite brand.

[nwienert]

Which API's did they not implement?

I really never commented on lock-in, even said it's fine to dislike it. You're fighting an imaginary opponent here.

I really just pointed out that Safari largely caught up on web standards. It's Google doing the whole "embrace, extend, extinguish" thing that IE pioneered by stuffing non-standards into their browser so they can lock people in.

[leptons]

>It's Apple doing the whole "extinguish" thing that Apple pioneered by forbidding other browsers so they can lock people in

FTFY

Without IE we wouldn't have XMLHTTPRequest, something used by practically every web developer in existence today. Innovation happens, and apparently so do walled gardens that outright forbid any competition.

It's one thing to not implement web bluetooth, web midi, and other APIs on your own browser, it's quite another to block anyone else from doing so with their web browsers. The EU thought so too and forced Apple to let other browsers use their own engines. But not in the US yet, until the DOJ completes the case against Apple.

[nwienert]

The only two APIs you listed aren’t web standards ;)

I’d love to debate you on the rest, but it’s a debate that’s been had here at least a thousand times.

[leptons]

I don't care that they aren't web standards, and I don't care if Apple ever implements them in Safari.

** What matters is that Apple is still blocking other browser vendors from using anything but Safari. **

The fact you can't or won't see how fucked up that is tells me everything I need to know about you.