No love lost there. Last thing I want on my iPhone is the irritating PC messages of why a site does not support Browser A vs. Browser B and I don't want to deal with a 3rd-party browser hijacking my default browser settings. It's bad enough on a PC, I don't want it on my iPhone.

Mozilla should quit their whining and get on the Webkit bandwagon. The same crybabies were harping on Apple for not supporting Flash so does Mozilla think Apple is really going to bend-over to their demands? Not going to happen.

So... that, basically.

Ten years ago I would have said so, back when Microsoft controlled everything and decided to make proprietary versions of everything else. 

But WebKit doesn't have that problem. And if anything, Safari's slow to adopt rather than quick. If everyone uses WebKit, that will only give more incentive to make Safari a better browser.

And throw away the whole damn reason that makes Apple devices the success that they are?

See ya later Mozilla. Your browser wasn't on iOS devices up until now, I see no reason why users will care whether Apple moves full steam ahead *without* your non-Webkit (why??) browser. We already have a wide selection of browsers to choose from. 

Or is Mozilla just smarting like all hell from the rise of Chrome?  (which is doing very well with Webkit.)

"CNet's report says that the panel's moderator then performed a quick poll of the audience, asking how many of them were suffering being largely limited to Safari. Very few hands were raised."

Bingo. 

Good luck playing the waiting game on that one Mozilla. Apple don't care if you do or don't.
They want you to use Webkit as they control it so know what it does and that it's safe.

The concern is that Webkit is coming close to having a monopoly in the browser market. It effectively already does in the mobile and tablet space.

When one rendering engine has a monopoly, that engine becomes the standard, complete with its bugs and foibles. That isn't good for an open, progressive internet. Webkit may have fewer bugs than IE6, but web standards are evolving all the time and the risk is that the Webkit way becomes the only way.

Frankly, Firefox was a great choice over IE but Safari (desktop and mobile) is sweet. My only complaint is that there isn't a Windoze version so that I can use it on my job-issued laptop, too. 

As far as I know, the new MozillaOS for phones does not allow third-party browsers either.

"until Apple relaxes iOS browser rules"

This isn't about rules, or Apple trying to "control" you... Apple could just BAN 3rd-party browsers if they wanted that. But there ARE 3rd party browsers, and some are good, regardless of some JavaScript benchmark number. (However: Apple SHOULD let you pick a default browser, I feel. And email. Maps too--although that gets more complex due to the range of OS-level requests that a map service may need to handle.)

What this is about is a legitimate security concern--one which is very old news and long ago laid to rest:
http://daringfireball.net/2011/03/nitro_ios_43
(Interesting that even Apple-focused sites that should know better are failing to note this bigger context, and are parroting the misleading statements of Mozilla. Not just AI.)

Nitro (or a similar just-in-time compiler) in third party apps would mean they could put data into RAM and make it executable--a HUGE malware vector and source of risk. Unsigned native code can now run. The only reason Apple allows this risk in Safari is because they can work to keep Safari free of security flaws that would allow exploits. Apple can't control that in other apps, so they're not opening the door to such problems.

That's the trade-off: speed vs. security. Apple has found a good compromise I think, but yes, JavaScript will run slower in third party apps--in other words, at the same perfectly acceptable speed Safari did before Nitro (only faster because today's hardware is faster). I've used Chrome and Mercury on iOS, and haven't felt they were slow.

If Firefox thinks that loaded half-truths will get Apple to abandon security just to help Firefox hit a better-sounding benchmark number for the 17 people who choose a browser that way, then they're deluded. Firefox will need to play WITHIN the rules if those rules have a good reason. This time, they do.

I hope Firefox changes their mind and proceeds on iOS. We don't really need a non-WebKit rendering engine: WebKit is excellent. We certainly don't need security holes that turn iOS into the nest of malware that Android is. But we COULD use some choice in browsers--the experience/UI/features that surround our browsing and manage our pages/tabs/bookmarks. Firefox COULD make a WebKit Firefox for iOS, and I'd welcome the option.

Who the **** is clamoring for FF on iOS? There's a reason why opera just switched to WebKit. It's by far the best rendering engine around. There's a million browsers on iOS, the lack of FF is a much bigger blow to FF than it is for iOS. It's benefits are zero.