• reddig33@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    It’s disingenuous to act like this is some huge burden. You ship two browsers — one for the EU and one for other markets. Firefox already ships on a number of different platforms. Adding one branch isn’t going to kill them.

    Or if it’s such a pain, you don’t bother and just ship the WebKit version everywhere.

    • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s disingenuous to act like this is some huge burden.

      Having to double your software engineers, UI/UX designers, QA engineers, DevOps, and localization/accessibility specialists to handle a second browser is a HUGE burden for a non-profit.

      If you don’t care about quality, security, or user experience, sure you can just pass a “does it compile” test and push to prod. You’ll quickly find that nobody wants to use this under resourced browser.

      Or if it’s such a pain, you don’t bother and just ship the WebKit version everywhere.

      This is exactly what Apple wants. They don’t want to give people a real choice because they’re scared of real competition.

    • InfiniWheel@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      Tbf, it would be a completely new & different browser from the ground up since they would have to make it from Gecko and such. And they are already struggling with their Android browser already.

      But yeah, they could keep the WebKit version everywhere.

      • reddig33@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Would it be completely new and different? The only thing that changes is the rendering engine. The UI/windowing stays the same as the other iOS app. And the rendering engine has already been built for MacOS, so it’s not like they have to start from scratch — it’s the same base platform.