I often have apps on my Mac or iPhone that ask for permission to see my camera, microphone, contacts, etc etc that I don't want it to see. But I do want other apps to be able to access those things.

Being able to stop those apps from accessing before they do instead of trying to fix it after is incredibly valuable.

Sure some users just accept everything, but that is not an argument against them existing in the first place.

Maybe a shirt, could sell it on the Microsoft store even. Now that would be entertainment.

I do find it quite fascinating that you have written this phrase 5 times in this thread instead of actually being able to engage in a conversation you disagree with. Frankly it's not cute.

Sure it is pointless but you also chose to start engaging in the conversation since you were confident in what you wanted to say. Just as I am.

On multiple occasions you are purposefully ignoring what people are saying and attempting to just talk about something else. I have acknowledged your bluetooth comment but you refuse to acknowledge topics api or any other instance that Google has also used their power to try to do exactly what you claim Apple is doing.

Google is not your friend, neither is Apple. And you may not care what Mozilla does but W3C does so they matter and they don't have the incentives Apple does and yet they also chose not to implement many of the same features, which you also won't acknowledge.

I would love if you can actually respond to Topics API and other initiatves that google has attempted that only furthers their agenda, just like you are saying Apple is doing. The fact is both companies are incentivized to do exactly that, and as I have already said both companies do this, and yet you seem to want to give Google a free pass and ignore when they have been problematic.

Regarding Firefox, them not implementing something is a very important piece of the puzzle and you cannot choose to ignore them just to try to strengthen your own argument. This is my fundamental issue with this page since they do not by default show Firefox because it completely breaks the "Apple Bad" narrative they are trying to push.

The fact is, Firefox on both mobile and desktop has not implemented many of the same API's that Safari has not and in some cases has implemented less. The Why there is extremely important because it directly impacts the conversation. Mozilla does not have any of the incentives that either Google has for pushing these features or that Apple has for not implementing them and yet they have chosen not to implement them.

Never said it was, notice how in the thing you quoted I said "Topics API"? That is extremely evil and was only introduced to benefit a single company, Google.

I never made a claim that every single thing on this list that safari does not support is a negative.

> IE was the first to implement XMLHTTPRequest. It changed the web fundamentally, and was the basis for "web 2.0".

Fantastic, that is an example of things working as they are supposed to work.

However IE also introduced things that were not made standard just as equally we celebrated that those things failed.

> If we didn't have browser manufacturers pushing the limits, we'd be stuck with "web 1.0" and browsers that did nothing interesting outside of loading animated gifs of dancing babyies.

Obviously that is true or the companies would not be involved in W3C. But that does not mean that every idea they introduce is necessary in a browser and deserves to be a standard feature. Google alone cannot and should dictate a standard, even though apparently we are fine with them attempting to do just that.

If everyone is in agreement instead of it benefiting a single company.

> The only one that benefits from not allowing it to become a standard is Apple

I would like to point out, once again. That this feature is also not available on Firefox for Android or Desktop. Your argument does not support why Mozilla has not implemented this feature. Which again, makes the "Apple bad" spin on this not as cut and dry.

We really need to stop putting google on a pedestal as if they are truelly on the side of an open web, like every company they are looking out for their own interests. Which is fine, they are allowed to do this.

That doesn't change that many of these are in fact not a standard according to W3C and should not be implemented in any browser until it is. A discussion about why it may not be standard is worth it, but that is also a very important distinction that is not made on this page. Right now it is framing it as google supports a standard that the other's (including Firefox) do not.

Just because Google does something it doesn't mean the rest of the industry should follow. If we did that in IE days we would still have ActiveX

The very important part about this is whether or not these features are actually considered a web standard or is it Google pushing their own agenda.

Which is where whether or not any non chromium browser supports any of these on any platform. Which many of these features they don't.

That completely changes the conversation here, from Apple purposefully ignoring standards to Google pushing things that are not standards yet. Which I will admit that the reality is a bit of both here, but it should not be considered a negative when a browser does not support a feature that is non standard... we heavily criticized IE for exactly this and yet we celebrate Chrome for it?

That being said, I am not sure why I would actually want most of these features in the browser? Many of these things feel like they further complicate what a browser is supposed to be doing and opens up security concerns at the same time.

I think the idea of using a web app for many tasks instead of apps is fine, but I don't think the idea that a web app can do everything is the way to go.

Edit: To be clear about the Firefox comment, notice that many of the features that are not supported non chromium browsers don't support on any platform. So the question on whether these are considered web standards is outside of whether iOS allows other engines.

Edit again: Apparently the third column is based on your current browser instead of always comparing chrome, mobile safari, and firefox like I assumed. I am currently on Firefox on Windows, and there are more red X's under Firefox for me. Seems like a weird choice to not always compare all major browsers.

Now I will admit that if you don't compare them, the final image looks ok. Like if I did not know what was happening I likely wouldn't give it a second thought. It looks off but so many video games already look off that I don't think I would have really thought anything other than "well it's a video game".

But when compared to the original image it is so obvious that the artistry and the original intent is just completely lost.

They claim that the developers and artists have more control over this, well maybe if that is actually true (because we all know guardrails on AI have been perfect so far...) they should have been involved in using that control for the video showing this off. Otherwise I honestly hope this never ships.

But even if it does, the power requirements for this make it kinda DOA anyways.

My biggest issue with the Max I have now (and why they just don't get a ton of use) is keeping them charged. I would love for a dock or something. I know there are third party solutions but they require putting a little plug into the plug in the headphones, and it is not hard to find issues that people have had with those so I have not done it.

An official solution from Apple would be amazing, something as simple as what the Astro A50 does.

Tara Butters from Dollhouse being involved makes me a feel a bit better, since I love Dollhouse (actually rewatching it right now). Now I can only hope this actually succeeds and maybe Dollhouse can get similar treatment.

I am sure some will be upset that it's animated, but if that is what it takes (and it turns out good) I'm fine with it.

They don't have to bend for another, but they made a choice to put an app on iOS. They added support for apple signin, and then for some reason did not put it on their website.

You can criticize Apple for requiring that all you want, but they clearly have support for it and are choosing to not put it on their website which is causing a worse user experience.

IF apple did not support website loggin than sure, but they do. So the ability to fix this is on Anthropic (and many other websites).

If you are already going to support third party login you should not limit it to only Google accounts and there is no reason to support Apple on iOS and not the web.

Also for the record, Apple only requires sign in with apple if you already support third party authentication. So if you are already going to support that, giving the user more choice (and making it so we are all a bit less dependent on google) is a good thing.

Apple should not have had to require developers to have options other than Google for authentication, but clearly some companies have to be dragged kicking and screaming.

So clearly they support it, and there is no reason it should not work on the web also.

I mean is it really that shocking that you can have an LLM generate structured data and shove that into a visualizer? The concern is if is reliable, which we know it isnt.

I am still sad that they stopped putting it into iPhone, I think the tech is great and the watch really proves what can be done with it when it is a fundamental part of the hardware and the OS can be built around it. But we never had a situation that every compatible iPhone had force touch so everything that could be done with it had to work in other ways.

I think the iPad made that even more complicated since I doubt we would have ever gotten it on a screen that large, if it would have even worked.

As far as it being on the trackpad, it is honestly pretty wild when you realize it. It does an incredible job of faking feeling like it is actually moving. Was similar with the fake home button that some iPhone’s had for a little while.

I use an iPad mounted to an arm in the kitchen for cooking but always had issues whenever I needed to modify a recipe (or add a note for later modification), I am debating on switching it out for a Neo. Possibly some other use cases of a permanent computer in places that a tablet worked but a full computer would be far more flexible.

I just first need to find an arm that would be rock solid enough to not wobble a ton while typing, if anyone has any recommendations.

That has made me very cautious to use this for any serious amount of mounting.

Edit: Apparently there is a section on that page about it, but does not give a ton of confidence that it won’t give me a lot of issues.

All I can say is that I am having conversations with non technical people regularly that are not aware of the issue or think it is a largely solved issue.