3 ms·

> Because that's literally what it says when you really read into it? I know it's used as an intensifier, but this feels like a particularly bad place to use "

> Because that's literally what it says when you really read into it? I know it's used as an intensifier, but this feels like a particularly bad place to use "literally" that way. > They acknowledge that 1) Safari already has all the integrations required to support PWA securely Not really sure how to respond to this. An airliner already has all the controls required for being piloted. Why am I not allowed to pilot my next commercial flight? But my more serious point: > 2) they can't be bothered to provide the same API's for third party browsers because it's not "practical". Why are you glossing over "practical" there and putting it in sarcastic quotes? This sounds like a huge change in the security model given how tightly Safari is integrated with the rest of iOS. Heavily restricting permissions and sometimes functionality to prevent security threats is very consistent with what I've seen from Apple in the past (and is one of the reasons I prefer them). Even if they intended to open this stuff up, I can't imagine this is a change which wouldn't require massive changes to iOS and a long review and testing process. > They built their PWA support in an anticompetitive manner assuming App Store & WebKit would be a monopoly forever, and now as a result the baby is going out with the bathwater. They built their PWA support for the architecture they've had since the iPhone's release. Why should they have wasted time building affordances for a world in which they were forced to support other browsers?

gkbrk 3y ago
> An airliner already has all the controls required for being piloted. Why am I not allowed to pilot my next commercial flight? Flying a plane badly risks the lives of your passengers, the lives of people on other planes, and people in the nearby area. Doing whatever you want with your phone doesn't risk other people's phones.
veeti 3y ago
> Not really sure how to respond to this. An airliner already has all the controls required for being piloted. Why am I not allowed to pilot my next commercial flight? What kind of ridiculous "argument" is this? Am I putting hundreds of other people in risk by installing Firefox on my iPhone? The fact remains that the EU in fact does intend to put you in front the airliner's controls. You can of course choose to turn on autopilot and keep using Safari. > Why should they have wasted time building affordances for a world in which they were forced to support other browsers? Guess what, "tight integration" of Internet Explorer into Windows for whatever technical reasons was not a favorable argument for Microsoft in front of the European Commission either. Lack of foresight to design open systems is not an excuse in front of the law.
- rimunroe 3y ago
  > What kind of ridiculous "argument" is this? Am I putting hundreds of other people in risk by installing Firefox on my iPhone? Certainly it’s an extreme example, but yes, giving people the ability to install other browsers and app stores is increasing their risk. This ruling makes it possible for some companies to decide to only allow their app to be installed through an alternate app store, which won’t necessarily restrict malicious code in the same way.
  - gkbrk 3y ago
    > giving people the ability to install other browsers and app stores is increasing their risk But it is increasing _their_ risk. That's the massive difference from your example. Installing other browsers and app stores is increasing _your_ risk

gkbrk 3y ago

> An airliner already has all the controls required for being piloted. Why am I not allowed to pilot my next commercial flight? Flying a plane badly risks the lives of your passengers, the lives of people on other planes, and people in the nearby area. Doing whatever you want with your phone doesn't risk other people's phones.

veeti 3y ago

> Not really sure how to respond to this. An airliner already has all the controls required for being piloted. Why am I not allowed to pilot my next commercial flight? What kind of ridiculous "argument" is this? Am I putting hundreds of other people in risk by installing Firefox on my iPhone? The fact remains that the EU in fact does intend to put you in front the airliner's controls. You can of course choose to turn on autopilot and keep using Safari. > Why should they have wasted time building affordances for a world in which they were forced to support other browsers? Guess what, "tight integration" of Internet Explorer into Windows for whatever technical reasons was not a favorable argument for Microsoft in front of the European Commission either. Lack of foresight to design open systems is not an excuse in front of the law.

rimunroe 3y ago
> What kind of ridiculous "argument" is this? Am I putting hundreds of other people in risk by installing Firefox on my iPhone? Certainly it’s an extreme example, but yes, giving people the ability to install other browsers and app stores is increasing their risk. This ruling makes it possible for some companies to decide to only allow their app to be installed through an alternate app store, which won’t necessarily restrict malicious code in the same way.
- gkbrk 3y ago
  > giving people the ability to install other browsers and app stores is increasing their risk But it is increasing _their_ risk. That's the massive difference from your example. Installing other browsers and app stores is increasing _your_ risk