upvote
> How do you test on Safari if you don’t have Apple devices?

How do you test a Playstation game without a Playstation (dev kit)? How do you test some hardware firmware without having the hardware? How can you run a program without the hardware required to run the program, if no emulator/simulator is available?

I'm almost lost at words how these are questions, unless they're theoretical and some diatribe comes afterwards that has the actual point trying to be made, but it never came.

Yes, some things run only on specific hardware and without virtualization/emulation, you're not supposed to test those things outside of the hardware. Been a thing for decades, probably since the beginning of computing.

> How difficult can it be for Apple to make barebones virtual machines with just Safaris?

Almost nothing Apple does is seemingly decided by how difficult it is, for better or worse, but are strategic decisions. If you haven't caught up with that they're building a walled garden for themselves, I'm not sure what could convince that they are. I think this is extremely clear for most people. If you don't like it, don't play there, like the rest of us.

reply
I don't think it's fair to compare development for web, which is supposed to be an open standard, with developing for a proprietary piece of hardware like the Playstation.

If you want to develop a game for the Switch and ignore the Playstation entirely, you can, and then you don't need a Playstation (dev kit).

When you're developing for the web, you're ideally making something that runs regardless of the user's browser. When you start getting bug reports in from Safari users, how else are you supposed to fix them? Cheapest option is detect if they're a Safari user and tell them to use another browser, but that's not really ideal for anyone except Google.

reply
Having access to a representative spread of devices is the reality of web development. As a web developer that doesn't own any Android devices, I was "forced" to buy a couple of Android devices so that I could squash bugs (some of which couldn't be replicated in emulators) and to refine aspects of the physical touch experience that emulators cannot emulate. I don't resent these purchases, because I understand it's the reality of developing for a diverse open web.

And yet, oh how often I hear developers resent having to buy an Apple device. Every time, I look at my little stack of Android devices and instinctively roll my eyes.

> Cheapest option is detect if they're a Safari user and tell them to use another browser

I suppose the cheapest option for me was to detect if they're an Android user and tell them to use another device. It sounds silly to say it — it is silly to say it — but that's exactly the same logic.

reply
If you're developing for the web and you're not testing you're site on real hardware, including a handful of iPhones and a handful of Android devices, your not actually testing your software.

You can't just check Chrome and assume everything else will exhibit the same behaviors. Standards exists, but so do bugs.

reply
A lot of folks want to run tests off a GitHub action I.e. on a server somewhere. Ideally you want your test stack to fit in a docker image. So this does suck for developers in the respect and you could imagine apple releasing a special docker image that just ran safari if they wanted to really make it easy to develop for thier platform.

However, I imagine someone will fill a server rack with cheap old macs and offer and safari mcp as a service…

reply
quote: "GitHub-hosted runners are available with Ubuntu Linux, Windows, or macOS operating systems." source: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/concepts/runners/github-h...
reply
> A lot of folks want to run tests off a GitHub action I.e. on a server somewhere.

Understandable, but also if you're dealing with these sort of projects, you kind of have to setup that sort of automation yourself in an office/someone's house, unless you find some provider that already hosts that sort of thing, like the various Apple/vendor-specific services for that.

It's also not a very new thing really, MacStadium for example been around since like 2010 sometime.

reply
GitHub has been providing macOS runners for a while now.
reply
Even in the Chrome hegemony you don't want to be missing Edge and many others, so you test chromium.

Similarly, while not perfect you can test WebKit, and if you like, on Linux or Windows, for example:

https://orionbrowser.com/platforms/linux

Apple wouldn't be in the business of VMs with Safari, but if you're looking for MacOS VMs, turn to a CSP: https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/mac/

Many have software testing orchestration pre-wired.

reply
I know of the solutions. I use a few of them.

I have multiple Playwright webkits on both Windows and Linux. I have Epiphany on Linux (not 100% same webkit). I have subscriptions for testing on real hardware.

This is why it seems to me that Apple does not really care about web developers.

reply
No way, is Orion Browser available on other platforms as well now? Does it mean I can finally do tests for Safari (webkit) without owning an Apple product or paying for a vm? Incredible.
reply
> But does Apple really care about web developers?

They just released this new tool, so yes.

reply
Just like you would test IE on Linux or OS X.
reply

  ### THIS FILE IS AUTOMATICALLY CONFIGURED ### 
  # Changes to this file will not be preserved.
  # This file will not be recreated if removed.
  X-Repolib-Name: Microsoft Edge
  Types: deb
  URIs: https://packages.microsoft.com/repos/edge-stable
  Suites: stable
  Components: main
  Architectures: amd64
  Architectures: amd64
  Signed-By: /usr/share/keyrings/microsoft-edge.gpg
Come on! The year is not 2001.
reply
I said IE, not Edge.
reply
But why would you still test for IE in 2026?

Honest question. I’s < .5% market share and retired since 2023.

reply
I think pjmlp is just being contrarian.

First, the Microsoft browser these days is Edge, not IE. IE is dead.

Second, if you want, or wanted in the past, to test on Internet Explorer without a Windows computer, you could just virtualize Windows. Windows can be legally virtualized on any hardware and on any host operating system.

Starting from 2013, you didn’t even need to pay for a Windows license to do that:

https://archive.org/details/modern.ie-vm

reply
Nope, making a point.

You would still need a VM for that.

Just like you can get a macOS VM, plenty of ways to get them.

reply
What plenty of ways?

How can I run a macOS virtual machine LEGALLY on my Linux or Windows machine?

reply
Are seriously asking with a straight face? Just do what a generation of people have done with Windows and run an unlicensed version of macOS. There's a whole generation of people who can recite Windows product keys off by heart. (FCKGW, anyone?) Entire empires of indie web development will have been done on improperly licensed versions of Windows.

As for people working in a serious professional corporation that cannot condone casual piracy, buy a Mac mini and expense it, or get an account on MacStadium.

reply
There are the illegal ones, and the legal ones on cloud providers.
reply
Making a point that Microsoft just like Apple, didn't necessarily made it easier.

Naturally Chrome forks work everywhere, given that so many devs have sponsored Google's takeover the Web.

reply
Microsoft actually offered free VMs with different OS and IE versions to make testing easier.
reply
deleted
reply