Chrome is doing the "I make my own web standards and push them through, ups now my feature is standard incompatible so I try to force change the upcoming standard just before it gets committed" thing IE had done in the past (it's e.g. the main reason why you sometimes end up with CORS issues on FF, the site isn't standard compatible as it doesn't handle a certain thing the standard requires from websites but due to a last minute exception for chrome doesn't require browsers to enforce).
And Safari does the "I don't adopt new standards forever and have strange bugs" IE think. Funnily like IE there are a lot of devs which swear that it has no strange bug problem (because they mainly use libraries developed on/for or at least tested with safari, but if you use some more newer tech it Safari support can be quite costly).
Yes both Chrome and Safari are "the new IE" but for different reasons
I think people make too much of Safari lagging in the adoption of standards. Yes, they lag behind on what Chrome is pushing but they're also ahead on other features, like color spaces.
I'm familiar with Safari strange bugs but it's usually while I'm testing with VoiceOver so I have fewer occasions to notice bugs with Chrome or Firefox, which don't work as well with VoiceOver overall.
I think of Safari being the new IE because it's not as evergreen as other browsers; old but still usable iPhones and iPads can't run the current version and aren't allowed to run anything else. Thus, developers have more reason to care about what a browser from 2+ years ago supports.
To be fair, IE and Netscape existed before there was an active standards body. 25 years ago standards were developed in a waterfall like process that took years.
The only time new features were released was when IE or Netscape pushed them.
Phones, sure, but there’s plenty of good productivity and creation software available for tablets. And these days, most productivity software runs in the browser anyway.
Lacking plenty of common power user functionality to do things efficiently. It's fine for casuals, they don't know what's missing, but it's pretty poor versus a fully-fledged file manager on a desktop computer.
Usually I would agree except in this case. I am fine with bucking industry standard if it is an actual reasonable improvement. Thunderbolt on iPhone doesn't seem reasonable because the biggest improvement is speed and I don't really hear many people moving many gigabytes of data off their phone via cable. Mag safe though, to me at least, is a reasonable improvement. I'd had a few laptops, or seen a few laptops, with either USB-C charging or the older (man weird to say that), barrel style where after a couple years you can feel the play of the plug in the port and the port becomes damaged and the laptop just doesn't charge anymore, maybe it can be fixed with a careful hand and trying to resolder it?
The hard thing about Type-C is that it, until late 2021, only supported 100w charging..which is woefully lacking. That's actually part of the reason Apple bought Magsafe back, it allowed them to stay within USB spec while pushing more than 100w to the M1 Max. Plus it meant that they could make an out-of-spec charging adapter that only enabled the out-of-spec mode when used with a specific cable while fully supporting all forms of type-c charging. Where we landed really is best of all worlds.
