7 ms·

This is where Apple'grip on the iOS browser engine choice paradoxically comes in clutch. It is conceptually despicable, especially for devs, but it prevents Go

by pygy_ 3y ago

This is where Apple'grip on the iOS browser engine choice paradoxically comes in clutch. It is conceptually despicable, especially for devs, but it prevents Google from completely running the show. Now the European Union is coming after Apple without trying to rein in Google's influence... This seems short-sighted.

Hrun0 3y ago
The current dispute between the EU and Apple has nothing to do with Safari though and is about the Apple store, not sure how that's relevant?
- pygy_ 3y ago
  It is my understanding that Apple losing here would prevent them from enforcing WebKit as the sole iOS browser engine. I may be mistaken.
- naraic0o 3y ago
  no, they're also forcing Apple to allow other browser engines on iOS, which was previously banned. other, third party iOS browsers still used the safari webkit engine. > In addition, apps that use alternative browser engines — other than Apple’s WebKit — may negatively affect the user experience, including impacts to system performance and battery life. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-announces-changes-to-ios-safari-and-the-app-store-in-the-european-union/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-announces-chang...
  - lern_too_spel 3y ago
    Every app may negatively impact system performance and battery life. A better webview could positively impact system performance and battery life. This statement from Apple was made in bad faith, and it didn't fool the regulators. It definitely shouldn't fool technologists.
    - bigfudge 3y ago
      It could improve performance, but let’s not kid ourselves that there are many companies that care about the minutiae of battery life as much as Apple. I mean, have you used a windows laptop recently. It’s -so- much worse than a MacBook that I refuse to believe it’s all about the m* magic chips. Sleep, power cycling, prioritisation just all seem to be better implemented.
      - lern_too_spel 3y ago
        I haven't, but I have used a Linux system recently, and the experience is far better than a Mac. Even the regulators can see that Apple doesn't care about battery life and performance so much as it cares about the billions it extracts from Google for the search engine deal. Allowing better browsers means that fewer people will be stuck on Apple's inferior browser, and Google will pay correspondingly less to access them.
        bigfudge 3y ago
        Is that really true? I’ve tried a number of laptops with Linux and the sleep and power management always still seemed terrible. What do you have? I borrowed a Lenovo x something, and a Dell. Does it matter which brand because of drivers and firmware etc?
        lern_too_spel 3y ago
        I use Chromebook laptops. Good touch screen for productivity, good power management, and good application support. I remote into beefier machines for computationally intensive tasks if I'm not at my desk. On desktop workstations, I use Debian.
ykonstant 3y ago
>Now the European Union is coming after Apple without trying to rein in Google's influence... This seems short-sighted. At the very least, if the EU really wants to limit the tech giants' grip on the web, it needs to fund independent open source web engine development handsomely; their pockets are more than deep enough and projects like ladybird and servo can use the extra resources.
- legacynl 3y ago
  > if the EU really wants to limit the tech giants' grip on the web You're misunderstanding the goals of the EU. The EU only cares about limiting their grip as a result of their main goal. The main goal of the EU is to protect the rights of their citizens, which they do by enforcing existing anti-monopoly laws. The EU has in principle no problem with a company gaining giant market share by providing a successful service or product. There would be no problem if Google or Apple would gain 99% market share by everybody voluntarily choosing their product. But it is a problem if they then use that marketshare to make it harder for competitors to compete. I.e.: you're wrong to say that they're trying to minimise the 'grip' they have. They are merely trying to prevent companies abusing that grip. That being said; I'm pretty sure that the EU does actually fund a lot of open source development
  - npunt 3y ago
    The Digital Markets Act is a new law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act
shiroiuma 3y ago
It'd be nice if Apple allowed Firefox to use their own engine, while not allowing Google's engine. But I can't imagine Apple being that nice.
legacynl 3y ago
> European Union is coming after apple.... seems short sighted I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the goals of the EU in this matter. The objective is not to keep both companies on even keel, but it is merely about enforcing existing anti-monopoly laws. If this results in Google gaining a de-facto browser monopoly then those same laws can be used to break up that monopoly when we get to it. What would be the alternative in your opinion? Allow Apple to break the monopoly laws in hope that they will be able to rein in the growth of the Google browser? What good is a law if it will not be enforced?
- JimDabell 3y ago
  > What would be the alternative in your opinion? Force Apple to allow alternative rendering engines, but only the ones with <50% market share. This would promote diversity in rendering engines without giving what is already by far the most dominant rendering engine the opportunity to get more of a stranglehold over the market. People already mistake Blink-only APIs like Web USB, Web Bluetooth, Web MIDI, etc. for web standards. The market is already dangerously close to where it was 20 years ago, where a vast number of web developers treat the most popular rendering engine as if it’s synonymous with the web. Handing more opportunities for market share to Blink is playing with fire. You want Apple to allow Gecko or Ladybird? Sounds great! But the monopoly that threatens the web at the moment is Blink.
  - pennomi 3y ago
    Blink isn’t dangerous, Chrome is. You can have a privacy focused Blink browser.
    - smaudet 3y ago
      This is far worse than the "you can just re-skin safari" on iOS nonsense. Blink is just another tool to force cash cow $$updates$$ onto users they didn't want or need.
    - redder23 3y ago
      You fail to get it, YES Blink indeed is in fact dangerous because its controlled by Google and they dictate what they allow and what will be next things in the Browser and basically force everyone else to follow up with features they implement. They have a way to big control over browsers with the large market share they have. It has very little to do with with privacy. I use Brave myself. Using Blink as rendering option is cool and its cool that is open source but it does not change the control Google has over browsers. People could fork it of they disagree with things they do but if they are not as big as Apple the fork would disappear into meaningless and would never even come close to somehow influence and web standards ...
SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
If only Mozilla hadn’t run Firefox into the ground (effectively) we wouldn’t need to reply on Apple.
- inversetelecine 3y ago
  As I still use Firefox, I have to agree with this. The performance improvements are nice, but trying to make a Firefox another Chromium skin irks me. Plus I still miss the official compact mode.
matheusmoreira 3y ago
> without trying to rein in Google's influence That's the problem. They should go after Google too. Honestly all of these megacorporations should be broken up.

by pygy_ 3y ago

Hrun0 3y ago

The current dispute between the EU and Apple has nothing to do with Safari though and is about the Apple store, not sure how that's relevant?

pygy_ 3y ago
It is my understanding that Apple losing here would prevent them from enforcing WebKit as the sole iOS browser engine. I may be mistaken.
naraic0o 3y ago
no, they're also forcing Apple to allow other browser engines on iOS, which was previously banned. other, third party iOS browsers still used the safari webkit engine. > In addition, apps that use alternative browser engines — other than Apple’s WebKit — may negatively affect the user experience, including impacts to system performance and battery life. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-announces-changes-to-ios-safari-and-the-app-store-in-the-european-union/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-announces-chang...
- lern_too_spel 3y ago
  Every app may negatively impact system performance and battery life. A better webview could positively impact system performance and battery life. This statement from Apple was made in bad faith, and it didn't fool the regulators. It definitely shouldn't fool technologists.
  - bigfudge 3y ago
    It could improve performance, but let’s not kid ourselves that there are many companies that care about the minutiae of battery life as much as Apple. I mean, have you used a windows laptop recently. It’s -so- much worse than a MacBook that I refuse to believe it’s all about the m* magic chips. Sleep, power cycling, prioritisation just all seem to be better implemented.
    - lern_too_spel 3y ago
      I haven't, but I have used a Linux system recently, and the experience is far better than a Mac. Even the regulators can see that Apple doesn't care about battery life and performance so much as it cares about the billions it extracts from Google for the search engine deal. Allowing better browsers means that fewer people will be stuck on Apple's inferior browser, and Google will pay correspondingly less to access them.
      - bigfudge 3y ago
        Is that really true? I’ve tried a number of laptops with Linux and the sleep and power management always still seemed terrible. What do you have? I borrowed a Lenovo x something, and a Dell. Does it matter which brand because of drivers and firmware etc?
        lern_too_spel 3y ago
        I use Chromebook laptops. Good touch screen for productivity, good power management, and good application support. I remote into beefier machines for computationally intensive tasks if I'm not at my desk. On desktop workstations, I use Debian.

ykonstant 3y ago

>Now the European Union is coming after Apple without trying to rein in Google's influence... This seems short-sighted. At the very least, if the EU really wants to limit the tech giants' grip on the web, it needs to fund independent open source web engine development handsomely; their pockets are more than deep enough and projects like ladybird and servo can use the extra resources.

legacynl 3y ago
> if the EU really wants to limit the tech giants' grip on the web You're misunderstanding the goals of the EU. The EU only cares about limiting their grip as a result of their main goal. The main goal of the EU is to protect the rights of their citizens, which they do by enforcing existing anti-monopoly laws. The EU has in principle no problem with a company gaining giant market share by providing a successful service or product. There would be no problem if Google or Apple would gain 99% market share by everybody voluntarily choosing their product. But it is a problem if they then use that marketshare to make it harder for competitors to compete. I.e.: you're wrong to say that they're trying to minimise the 'grip' they have. They are merely trying to prevent companies abusing that grip. That being said; I'm pretty sure that the EU does actually fund a lot of open source development
- npunt 3y ago
  The Digital Markets Act is a new law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Markets_Act

shiroiuma 3y ago

It'd be nice if Apple allowed Firefox to use their own engine, while not allowing Google's engine. But I can't imagine Apple being that nice.

legacynl 3y ago

> European Union is coming after apple.... seems short sighted I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the goals of the EU in this matter. The objective is not to keep both companies on even keel, but it is merely about enforcing existing anti-monopoly laws. If this results in Google gaining a de-facto browser monopoly then those same laws can be used to break up that monopoly when we get to it. What would be the alternative in your opinion? Allow Apple to break the monopoly laws in hope that they will be able to rein in the growth of the Google browser? What good is a law if it will not be enforced?

JimDabell 3y ago
> What would be the alternative in your opinion? Force Apple to allow alternative rendering engines, but only the ones with <50% market share. This would promote diversity in rendering engines without giving what is already by far the most dominant rendering engine the opportunity to get more of a stranglehold over the market. People already mistake Blink-only APIs like Web USB, Web Bluetooth, Web MIDI, etc. for web standards. The market is already dangerously close to where it was 20 years ago, where a vast number of web developers treat the most popular rendering engine as if it’s synonymous with the web. Handing more opportunities for market share to Blink is playing with fire. You want Apple to allow Gecko or Ladybird? Sounds great! But the monopoly that threatens the web at the moment is Blink.
- pennomi 3y ago
  Blink isn’t dangerous, Chrome is. You can have a privacy focused Blink browser.
  - smaudet 3y ago
    This is far worse than the "you can just re-skin safari" on iOS nonsense. Blink is just another tool to force cash cow $$updates$$ onto users they didn't want or need.
  - redder23 3y ago
    You fail to get it, YES Blink indeed is in fact dangerous because its controlled by Google and they dictate what they allow and what will be next things in the Browser and basically force everyone else to follow up with features they implement. They have a way to big control over browsers with the large market share they have. It has very little to do with with privacy. I use Brave myself. Using Blink as rendering option is cool and its cool that is open source but it does not change the control Google has over browsers. People could fork it of they disagree with things they do but if they are not as big as Apple the fork would disappear into meaningless and would never even come close to somehow influence and web standards ...

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago

If only Mozilla hadn’t run Firefox into the ground (effectively) we wouldn’t need to reply on Apple.

inversetelecine 3y ago
As I still use Firefox, I have to agree with this. The performance improvements are nice, but trying to make a Firefox another Chromium skin irks me. Plus I still miss the official compact mode.

matheusmoreira 3y ago

> without trying to rein in Google's influence That's the problem. They should go after Google too. Honestly all of these megacorporations should be broken up.