5 ms·

Apple claiming security as a reason for monopoly, how classic. The EU's digital markets act bans the only Safari lock on IOS, so this is gone whether apple lik

Apple claiming security as a reason for monopoly, how classic. The EU's digital markets act bans the only Safari lock on IOS, so this is gone whether apple likes it or not. (1 - sorry couldn't find a better source) Safari is the new IE, there is a difference between a monopoly while still being able to use a competing product (like chrome in other platfroms), and forcing Safari(WebKit) while hindering the web because of Apples interests.(2-3) 1. https://www.fudzilla.com/news/54763-apple-loses-out-in-the-digital-markets-act https://www.fudzilla.com/news/54763-apple-loses-out-in-the-d... 2.https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/23/opinion_column/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/23/opinion_column/ 3.https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/14/telegram_safari/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/14/telegram_safari/

mtomweb 4y ago
Source was the DMA final text: https://twitter.com/OpenWebAdvocacy/status/1527101988256722944 https://twitter.com/OpenWebAdvocacy/status/15271019882567229... Also many have now spoken up against it: ### Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) Apple’s restrictions on third-party browsers, and the limitations it puts on Safari/WebKit (its own browser tools) have hobbled “web apps,” which run seamlessly inside a browser. This means that app makers can’t deliver a single, browser-based app that works on all tablets and phones - they have to pay to develop separate apps for each mobile platform. That also means that app users can’t just switch from one platform to another and access all their apps by typing a URL into a browser of their choice. ### Mozilla Mozilla believes that major platforms should be under an on-going duty to: Stop practices that distort competition on the merits and inhibit consumer choice, such as: ● interfering with consumer selection of alternative browsers and use of those browsers to access the internet from links and queries on their devices; and ● dictating or controlling browser components, such as browser engines, which prevent consumers from accessing and using their preferred browser across all operating systems and devices. ### Google By contrast, PWAs—and the web writ-large—receive a small fraction of this support on iOS. This is primarily because of Apple’s requirement that all browsers use its proprietary WebKit browser engine. Not only does this prevent browsers from differentiating from Safari—Chrome is unable to access the user’s camera, preventing users from using products like Google Lens—it also harms user security. A recent study from Google’s Project Zero security research team found that WebKit is significantly slower than other browser engines to fix reported bugs. ### Microsoft Apple requires that any mobile browsers on iOS, including those offered by Apple’s competitors (e.g., Google’s Chrome app), use Apple’s own WebKit browser engine. This restriction harms competition and consumers. ### Meta Apple requires all web browsers on iOS to use WebKit, a degraded version of Apple’s Safari browser, to render web pages. Apple thus sets Safari as a functionality ceiling for mobile browsers on iOS. The restrictions on Safari’s and other iOS web browsers’ capabilities prevent web pages and web apps from providing consumers with robust, cross-platform experiences that would lower switching barriers ### Telegram We suspect that Apple may be intentionally crippling its web apps to force its users to download more native apps where Apple is able to charge its 30% commission
- JCWasmx86 4y ago
  > proprietary WebKit That is not true. WebKit is opensource, there are other browsers that use it (GNOME Web), it is used in a lot of other applications, like GNOME Builder, Devhelp.
  - mtomweb 4y ago
    It doesn't matter if WebKit is open source or not (in the context of the topic) because only Apple can make modifications to the WebView on iOS. Adding or removing functionality, fixing bugs is entirely under Apple's control. On iOS third party browsers: ● Can't pick their own browser engine ● Can't pick which version of Webkit they wish to us ● Can't turn browser engine features on or off using flags ● Can't add entirely new browser engine features ● Can't edit browser engine features ● Can't entirely remove browser engine features ● Don't even get all the features of Webkit that iOS provides Safari ● Get a more restricted version of Webkit than the one iOS provides Safari Safari and the WebView that browsers use do not get the same level of access) ● Use a version of Webkit provided that is tied to iOS system updates as opposed to packaged with the third party browser On Android third party browsers: ● Can use their own browser engine ● Can pick which version of Blink they wish to use (if they are using Blink at all) ● Can turn browser engine features on/off using flags ● Can add entirely new features to Blink ● Can edit existing features in Blink ● Can completely remove features from Blink ● Don’t have to use Blink at all
nicce 4y ago
> Safari is the new IE, there is a difference between a monopoly while still being able to use a competing product (like chrome in other platfroms), and forcing Safari(WebKit) while hindering the web because of Apples interests.(2-3) Ehm. Chrome is the new IE. Apple is using anti-competitive methods but its far far away from market domination. Microsoft is doing even more, by pushing so much Edge-only stuff. On iOS Apple forces the Webkit rendering, but for normal user it does not even matter much. They can download Chrome and get the UI they want.
- niko001 4y ago
  It might not matter to users in the sense that they ask themselves what rendering engine Chrome on iOS is using under the hood, but the effects do matter. I get a lot of support requests saying "Your [web] app is broken on my iPhone!", "Right, Safari doesn't support feature XYZ", "I'm not using Safari, I'm using Chrome", "..."
  - CharlesW 4y ago
    How does the developer story get better if you're required to support many web rendering engines on iOS instead of one? Or is the endgame that you'd just point people to Chrome/Blink and extend the web monoculture to Apple devices too?
    - jsnell 4y ago
      The endgame is that Apple is forced to actually make a working browser, rather than intentionally starve it of resources to benefit the App Store. Everyone wins.
  - mynameisvlad 4y ago
    That seems to be a communication problem. Instead of saying "Right, Safari doesn't support feature XYZ", say "Right, iOS doesn't support feature XYZ". It's also technically more correct, the best kind.
  - snowwrestler 4y ago

mtomweb 4y ago

Source was the DMA final text: https://twitter.com/OpenWebAdvocacy/status/1527101988256722944 https://twitter.com/OpenWebAdvocacy/status/15271019882567229... Also many have now spoken up against it: ### Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) Apple’s restrictions on third-party browsers, and the limitations it puts on Safari/WebKit (its own browser tools) have hobbled “web apps,” which run seamlessly inside a browser. This means that app makers can’t deliver a single, browser-based app that works on all tablets and phones - they have to pay to develop separate apps for each mobile platform. That also means that app users can’t just switch from one platform to another and access all their apps by typing a URL into a browser of their choice. ### Mozilla Mozilla believes that major platforms should be under an on-going duty to: Stop practices that distort competition on the merits and inhibit consumer choice, such as: ● interfering with consumer selection of alternative browsers and use of those browsers to access the internet from links and queries on their devices; and ● dictating or controlling browser components, such as browser engines, which prevent consumers from accessing and using their preferred browser across all operating systems and devices. ### Google By contrast, PWAs—and the web writ-large—receive a small fraction of this support on iOS. This is primarily because of Apple’s requirement that all browsers use its proprietary WebKit browser engine. Not only does this prevent browsers from differentiating from Safari—Chrome is unable to access the user’s camera, preventing users from using products like Google Lens—it also harms user security. A recent study from Google’s Project Zero security research team found that WebKit is significantly slower than other browser engines to fix reported bugs. ### Microsoft Apple requires that any mobile browsers on iOS, including those offered by Apple’s competitors (e.g., Google’s Chrome app), use Apple’s own WebKit browser engine. This restriction harms competition and consumers. ### Meta Apple requires all web browsers on iOS to use WebKit, a degraded version of Apple’s Safari browser, to render web pages. Apple thus sets Safari as a functionality ceiling for mobile browsers on iOS. The restrictions on Safari’s and other iOS web browsers’ capabilities prevent web pages and web apps from providing consumers with robust, cross-platform experiences that would lower switching barriers ### Telegram We suspect that Apple may be intentionally crippling its web apps to force its users to download more native apps where Apple is able to charge its 30% commission

JCWasmx86 4y ago
> proprietary WebKit That is not true. WebKit is opensource, there are other browsers that use it (GNOME Web), it is used in a lot of other applications, like GNOME Builder, Devhelp.
- mtomweb 4y ago
  It doesn't matter if WebKit is open source or not (in the context of the topic) because only Apple can make modifications to the WebView on iOS. Adding or removing functionality, fixing bugs is entirely under Apple's control. On iOS third party browsers: ● Can't pick their own browser engine ● Can't pick which version of Webkit they wish to us ● Can't turn browser engine features on or off using flags ● Can't add entirely new browser engine features ● Can't edit browser engine features ● Can't entirely remove browser engine features ● Don't even get all the features of Webkit that iOS provides Safari ● Get a more restricted version of Webkit than the one iOS provides Safari Safari and the WebView that browsers use do not get the same level of access) ● Use a version of Webkit provided that is tied to iOS system updates as opposed to packaged with the third party browser On Android third party browsers: ● Can use their own browser engine ● Can pick which version of Blink they wish to use (if they are using Blink at all) ● Can turn browser engine features on/off using flags ● Can add entirely new features to Blink ● Can edit existing features in Blink ● Can completely remove features from Blink ● Don’t have to use Blink at all

nicce 4y ago

> Safari is the new IE, there is a difference between a monopoly while still being able to use a competing product (like chrome in other platfroms), and forcing Safari(WebKit) while hindering the web because of Apples interests.(2-3) Ehm. Chrome is the new IE. Apple is using anti-competitive methods but its far far away from market domination. Microsoft is doing even more, by pushing so much Edge-only stuff. On iOS Apple forces the Webkit rendering, but for normal user it does not even matter much. They can download Chrome and get the UI they want.

niko001 4y ago
It might not matter to users in the sense that they ask themselves what rendering engine Chrome on iOS is using under the hood, but the effects do matter. I get a lot of support requests saying "Your [web] app is broken on my iPhone!", "Right, Safari doesn't support feature XYZ", "I'm not using Safari, I'm using Chrome", "..."
- CharlesW 4y ago
  How does the developer story get better if you're required to support many web rendering engines on iOS instead of one? Or is the endgame that you'd just point people to Chrome/Blink and extend the web monoculture to Apple devices too?
  - jsnell 4y ago
    The endgame is that Apple is forced to actually make a working browser, rather than intentionally starve it of resources to benefit the App Store. Everyone wins.
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  That seems to be a communication problem. Instead of saying "Right, Safari doesn't support feature XYZ", say "Right, iOS doesn't support feature XYZ". It's also technically more correct, the best kind.
- snowwrestler 4y ago