3 ms·
It's definitely exclusionary. You could argue that it's exclusionary for legitimate reasons, but it's exclusionary.
by mftb 4y ago
It's definitely exclusionary. You could argue that it's exclusionary for legitimate reasons, but it's exclusionary.
- scarface_74 4y agoBrowsers are inherently insecure. Even Apple now has an optional “lock down mode” where it turns off performance enhancements in Safari browser that are historically vectors used to hack devices
- mftb 4y agoThat's a real stretch in a conversation about anti-competitive practices. These practices were a problem for consumers when MS employed them on Windows and they're a problem now on iOS. Specific to your point, browser vendors competing fairly would almost certainly find advantage in offering the most secure browser, thereby improving the platform for all, including Apple.
- scarface_74 4y agoHow is it a stretch? Even Apple is admitting that sone of its performance optimizations in the browser may lead to insecurities. Who is going to make a more secure browser? Google? Firefox? Every other popular browser is just a Chromium reskin outside of Safari and Firefox.
- mftb 4y agoI'm purposefully leaving aside the security question and will just respond with a new question of my own. Why would anyone even think of getting into the browser game when they're locked out of competing on arguably the single most important platform in the world?
- scarface_74 4y agoWouldn’t that be Android with 70% market share in mobile followed by PCs?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]