5 ms·

App Store should be just the start. Mobile web for more than 50% of the US users is also restricted to Apple's whims. They should be forced to allow competing

App Store should be just the start. Mobile web for more than 50% of the US users is also restricted to Apple's whims. They should be forced to allow competing browser engines(not just skins on Safari engine) on the platform. If Microsoft couldn't even bundle IE on Windows, it should be possible to make an alternative browser(along with engines) for iOS.

causality0 5y ago
Looking back on Microsoft in the 90s they seem almost childish. If the Apple/Google duopoly had existed forty years ago the government would have smashed both companies into dozens of pieces.
- Apocryphon 5y ago
  I don't dispute that the regulatory climate has become far less responsive over the decades, but why forty years ago- during the Reagan administration?
handrous 5y ago
Be careful what you wish for. Safari's forced presence on the most lucrative mobile platform is the reason we don't, for all practical purposes, have only one browser engine, period, now. Which is something only nerds like us care about on a technical level, so I don't think the typical user is harmed or bothered by all browsers on iOS sharing an engine, but the social harm of Google 100% owning the Web would reach beyond us. [EDIT] Incidentally, I see the fact that there's an angle for this being beneficial as a comment on the beyond-terrible state of privacy legislation and anti-trust enforcement in the US, same as the reasons that the App Store is a good thing (by which I mean, the worst things it forbids should just be illegal, and those restrictions enforced everywhere)
- actuator 5y ago
  While your concern is genuine, Apple almost has 60% of the active mobile device market share(according to Statcounter). I think my concern is two fold. - Apple holds the gateway to both App Store and Web(through standard support). Having worked on web apps in the past, I truly admire the amazing distribution capability the web provides. I can spin up an obscure Linux distro and my web app works on it as long as a browser with good standard support is available. This gives platforms parity at some level and doesn't concentrate the power in the hands of a single platform. I would want most apps to be just web apps. - If Apple's marketshare keeps on increasing like it has been, we might run into a situation where just one company controls your hardware, OS, services and even web. This is way more scary.
  - handrous 5y ago
    > This gives platforms parity at some level and doesn't concentrate the power in the hands of a single platform. Chrome would be that platform, is what I'm saying. That would be your new OS, on every "platform". Devs & companies already skip testing on FF fairly often. Chrome good? Mobile Safari good? Ship it. You'll notice that IE/Edge used to be on that short list of must-test browsers, but it's just Chrome now. That's not going to get better for FF or WebKit-derived alternative browsers if mobile Safari gets banner-ad'd ("Google Docs is so much better in Chrome! Click here to download it now!" just like they did on desktop) into irrelevance. Google would get to dictate features, and the Web would just have them, and that's it, no step of trying to get anyone else on board (right now, "anyone else" is, for practical purposes, just Apple)
  - criddell 5y ago
    I get what you are saying about web apps, but I hope Apple doesn't open up to more browsers. It seems like every additional sensor or OS feature that is exposed through the browser is used as an additional way to erode privacy and security. Plus I like that there are incentives for developers to make native apps for anything non-trivial. In my experience well written web apps use too much bandwidth, battery, and memory compared to well written native apps.
  - indymike 5y ago
    Android is showing 72.72% of market share on statcounter.
- cageface 5y ago
  I don't understand this argument. End users don't care about browser engines and they can install "Chrome" right now. But most iOS users don't.
  - handrous 5y ago
    Google's not pushing it hard on iOS, and it can't offer enhanced features or tailor (ahem) its sites to run better on the Chrome engine on iOS. That makes it a harder sell, and the "Google sites all works better on Chrome (because we made sure they do...) download it here!" ads they had success with on desktop would simply be lies, if they tried that. They also can't get other apps to embed their engine so they get those sweet, sweet analytics from those, too. FB would likely do the same (probably with a fork of Chrome, for obvious reasons).
    - cageface 5y ago
      Google can do all the data harvesting they want with the wrapped version and that's mostly what they care about. There are already a lot of benefits to iOS users that are heavily involved in Google's ecosystem to use Chrome but mostly they don't.
  - username90 5y ago
    End users certainly cares about browser engines, so many things doesn't work in Safary since it doesn't support any new features. So they would see "please upgrade your browser to play this game" etc everywhere, and they would upgrade to real chrome. Instead since ios doesn't support other browser engines those games simply wont run on ios period.
mcphage 5y ago
> They should be forced to allow competing browser engines(not just skins on Safari engine) on the platform I really don't want to have multiple browsers installed on my phone & swap between them because some web app works in one browser, but not another. Mobile browsing is already pretty shitty, I don't think fragmentation will make it any better.
- FireBeyond 5y ago
  I'm not sure the solution to that is "so app developers are forced to make sure their app works better in 'your' browser (Safari) because that's the only choice for a large number of users".
  - mcphage 5y ago
    Why not?
nemothekid 5y ago
>They should be forced to allow competing browser engines (not just skins on Safari engine) on the platform. While this sounds good in theory, what would likely happen is Safari would be replaced with Chrome.
tarsinge 5y ago
More than 50% of US users on iOS forced to use Safari is the last counter force to a worldwide Google hegemony on nearly everything (Android, Chrome, Search, Mail, ...). It's clearly a lesser evil for me.

causality0 5y ago

Looking back on Microsoft in the 90s they seem almost childish. If the Apple/Google duopoly had existed forty years ago the government would have smashed both companies into dozens of pieces.

Apocryphon 5y ago
I don't dispute that the regulatory climate has become far less responsive over the decades, but why forty years ago- during the Reagan administration?

handrous 5y ago

Be careful what you wish for. Safari's forced presence on the most lucrative mobile platform is the reason we don't, for all practical purposes, have only one browser engine, period, now. Which is something only nerds like us care about on a technical level, so I don't think the typical user is harmed or bothered by all browsers on iOS sharing an engine, but the social harm of Google 100% owning the Web would reach beyond us. [EDIT] Incidentally, I see the fact that there's an angle for this being beneficial as a comment on the beyond-terrible state of privacy legislation and anti-trust enforcement in the US, same as the reasons that the App Store is a good thing (by which I mean, the worst things it forbids should just be illegal, and those restrictions enforced everywhere)

actuator 5y ago
While your concern is genuine, Apple almost has 60% of the active mobile device market share(according to Statcounter). I think my concern is two fold. - Apple holds the gateway to both App Store and Web(through standard support). Having worked on web apps in the past, I truly admire the amazing distribution capability the web provides. I can spin up an obscure Linux distro and my web app works on it as long as a browser with good standard support is available. This gives platforms parity at some level and doesn't concentrate the power in the hands of a single platform. I would want most apps to be just web apps. - If Apple's marketshare keeps on increasing like it has been, we might run into a situation where just one company controls your hardware, OS, services and even web. This is way more scary.
- handrous 5y ago
  > This gives platforms parity at some level and doesn't concentrate the power in the hands of a single platform. Chrome would be that platform, is what I'm saying. That would be your new OS, on every "platform". Devs & companies already skip testing on FF fairly often. Chrome good? Mobile Safari good? Ship it. You'll notice that IE/Edge used to be on that short list of must-test browsers, but it's just Chrome now. That's not going to get better for FF or WebKit-derived alternative browsers if mobile Safari gets banner-ad'd ("Google Docs is so much better in Chrome! Click here to download it now!" just like they did on desktop) into irrelevance. Google would get to dictate features, and the Web would just have them, and that's it, no step of trying to get anyone else on board (right now, "anyone else" is, for practical purposes, just Apple)
- criddell 5y ago
  I get what you are saying about web apps, but I hope Apple doesn't open up to more browsers. It seems like every additional sensor or OS feature that is exposed through the browser is used as an additional way to erode privacy and security. Plus I like that there are incentives for developers to make native apps for anything non-trivial. In my experience well written web apps use too much bandwidth, battery, and memory compared to well written native apps.
- indymike 5y ago
  Android is showing 72.72% of market share on statcounter.
cageface 5y ago
I don't understand this argument. End users don't care about browser engines and they can install "Chrome" right now. But most iOS users don't.
- handrous 5y ago
  Google's not pushing it hard on iOS, and it can't offer enhanced features or tailor (ahem) its sites to run better on the Chrome engine on iOS. That makes it a harder sell, and the "Google sites all works better on Chrome (because we made sure they do...) download it here!" ads they had success with on desktop would simply be lies, if they tried that. They also can't get other apps to embed their engine so they get those sweet, sweet analytics from those, too. FB would likely do the same (probably with a fork of Chrome, for obvious reasons).
  - cageface 5y ago
    Google can do all the data harvesting they want with the wrapped version and that's mostly what they care about. There are already a lot of benefits to iOS users that are heavily involved in Google's ecosystem to use Chrome but mostly they don't.
- username90 5y ago
  End users certainly cares about browser engines, so many things doesn't work in Safary since it doesn't support any new features. So they would see "please upgrade your browser to play this game" etc everywhere, and they would upgrade to real chrome. Instead since ios doesn't support other browser engines those games simply wont run on ios period.

mcphage 5y ago

> They should be forced to allow competing browser engines(not just skins on Safari engine) on the platform I really don't want to have multiple browsers installed on my phone & swap between them because some web app works in one browser, but not another. Mobile browsing is already pretty shitty, I don't think fragmentation will make it any better.

FireBeyond 5y ago
I'm not sure the solution to that is "so app developers are forced to make sure their app works better in 'your' browser (Safari) because that's the only choice for a large number of users".
- mcphage 5y ago
  Why not?

nemothekid 5y ago

>They should be forced to allow competing browser engines (not just skins on Safari engine) on the platform. While this sounds good in theory, what would likely happen is Safari would be replaced with Chrome.

tarsinge 5y ago

More than 50% of US users on iOS forced to use Safari is the last counter force to a worldwide Google hegemony on nearly everything (Android, Chrome, Search, Mail, ...). It's clearly a lesser evil for me.