4 ms·

I’m pretty sure this makes Google happy too: I’ve been seeing a lot more ads about Google chrome with an iPhone on YouTube. I guess gmail might not stop asking

I’m pretty sure this makes Google happy too: I’ve been seeing a lot more ads about Google chrome with an iPhone on YouTube. I guess gmail might not stop asking you to make sure you want to open a link with your default browser instead of chrome, even if you click “remember my choice”.

rahkiin 3y ago
Thank you, I was wondering if that was just coincidence. Google has been pushing Chrome ever since Apple announced BrowserKit. And they do it on their own platforms (which is free for them) with features Safari also has. Apple might need to start paying google for ads to counter-promote safari.
threeseed 3y ago
Google must be thrilled. The last hold out iOS will now be dominated by Chromium browsers. Which means that Apple’s anti-tracking mechanisms will be rendered ineffective and we will see a new pro-advertising world where every advertiser will be able to track you with ease. Or did people forget how Google makes its money ? All championed by the very developers who say they care about privacy and competition.
- the_gipsy 3y ago
  Apple just makes the whole web experience crappy. So that you install some app that tracks much more than a website could dream of. And they get their cut.
- quitit 3y ago
  The EU PR playbook for writing bad legislation: When harmful for competition: “We’ll say it’s good for user choice”. When harmful to users: “We’ll say it’s good for competition.” The act of writing a law that will result in Google’s Chrome total market dominance will of course fall under “user choice”. Meanwhile music streaming market leader Spotify has announced a price increase of 9% in the UK (and assuredly others soon) and simultaneously demonetised all artists with less than 1000 streams per annum. Naturally the EU has nothing to say about that because it’s one of their own this time.
  - talldayo 3y ago
    > The act of writing a law that will result in Google’s Chrome total market dominance will of course fall under “user choice”. I mean... yeah. Users want stuff. They want emulators, YouTube song downloaders, game streaming and online games, the sorts of things Apple otherwise mediates on the App Store. The web can conditionally provide that to them if their browser has enough features, so these locked-down users then are driven to fringe featuresets. In an ideal world, your phone just installs software like your computer and you don't need to use your browser to enable basic native functionality. Unfortunately, making software "just work" requires developers to pay an annual fee and arm-wrestle with a distributor that doesn't care about them. The web, in all it's mangled madness, becomes a more viable platform than a computer's native runtime. If you owned any other device that worked that way, you'd be rightfully furious. And so, Apple dug their own grave. Their entire business theory revolves around getting developers to create high-quality native experiences, but the incentive to do so is lower on their platforms than anywhere else in the industry. The software people pay for today isn't native Mac apps, it's B2B cloud infrastructure and cross-platform Electron apps. Apple's philosophy has staunchly failed, and the longer they stick to their guns the more dissatisfied users will become. If Apple wants to invest in a future where Chrome doesn't dominate, then they need to ship a competing browser. Keeping a userbase hostage does not qualify as maintaining a competitive market.
- simion314 3y ago
  WRONG. 1. If you base your browser on Chromium you do not install Google tracking. 2. On iOS there were already multiple browsers , so Google could have already used their "Chrome = Safari skin" to track your browsing. So google always advertised and promoted their browser, now it will just have a better engine under the skin.
  - threeseed 3y ago
    There is no such thing as “Google tracking”. What I am referring to is (a) the maximum lifetime of first party cookies which is used by advertisers for retargeting and tracking and (b) the reckless way Google adds API e.g. MIDI without minimising fingerprinting. These are what are embedded in the Chromium engine.
    - simion314 3y ago
      How can advertisers use first party cookies ? Isn't that not allowed ?
- talldayo 3y ago
  > last hold out iOS will now be dominated by Chromium browsers. Only if Apple fails to ship a competitive default. Hell, if sideloading worked right I doubt most users would even feel the need for a different browser.
sofixa 3y ago
> I’m pretty sure this makes Google happy too: I’ve been seeing a lot more ads about Google chrome with an iPhone on YouTube. I'm unsure if that's irony or not, but Google having to advertise Chrome instead of showing ads that other organisations have paid for is probably a loss for them (depends on how you quantify the revenue from the usage metrics of Chrome per user, which I don't know).

rahkiin 3y ago

Thank you, I was wondering if that was just coincidence. Google has been pushing Chrome ever since Apple announced BrowserKit. And they do it on their own platforms (which is free for them) with features Safari also has. Apple might need to start paying google for ads to counter-promote safari.

threeseed 3y ago

Google must be thrilled. The last hold out iOS will now be dominated by Chromium browsers. Which means that Apple’s anti-tracking mechanisms will be rendered ineffective and we will see a new pro-advertising world where every advertiser will be able to track you with ease. Or did people forget how Google makes its money ? All championed by the very developers who say they care about privacy and competition.

the_gipsy 3y ago
Apple just makes the whole web experience crappy. So that you install some app that tracks much more than a website could dream of. And they get their cut.
quitit 3y ago
The EU PR playbook for writing bad legislation: When harmful for competition: “We’ll say it’s good for user choice”. When harmful to users: “We’ll say it’s good for competition.” The act of writing a law that will result in Google’s Chrome total market dominance will of course fall under “user choice”. Meanwhile music streaming market leader Spotify has announced a price increase of 9% in the UK (and assuredly others soon) and simultaneously demonetised all artists with less than 1000 streams per annum. Naturally the EU has nothing to say about that because it’s one of their own this time.
- talldayo 3y ago
  > The act of writing a law that will result in Google’s Chrome total market dominance will of course fall under “user choice”. I mean... yeah. Users want stuff. They want emulators, YouTube song downloaders, game streaming and online games, the sorts of things Apple otherwise mediates on the App Store. The web can conditionally provide that to them if their browser has enough features, so these locked-down users then are driven to fringe featuresets. In an ideal world, your phone just installs software like your computer and you don't need to use your browser to enable basic native functionality. Unfortunately, making software "just work" requires developers to pay an annual fee and arm-wrestle with a distributor that doesn't care about them. The web, in all it's mangled madness, becomes a more viable platform than a computer's native runtime. If you owned any other device that worked that way, you'd be rightfully furious. And so, Apple dug their own grave. Their entire business theory revolves around getting developers to create high-quality native experiences, but the incentive to do so is lower on their platforms than anywhere else in the industry. The software people pay for today isn't native Mac apps, it's B2B cloud infrastructure and cross-platform Electron apps. Apple's philosophy has staunchly failed, and the longer they stick to their guns the more dissatisfied users will become. If Apple wants to invest in a future where Chrome doesn't dominate, then they need to ship a competing browser. Keeping a userbase hostage does not qualify as maintaining a competitive market.
simion314 3y ago
WRONG. 1. If you base your browser on Chromium you do not install Google tracking. 2. On iOS there were already multiple browsers , so Google could have already used their "Chrome = Safari skin" to track your browsing. So google always advertised and promoted their browser, now it will just have a better engine under the skin.
- threeseed 3y ago
  There is no such thing as “Google tracking”. What I am referring to is (a) the maximum lifetime of first party cookies which is used by advertisers for retargeting and tracking and (b) the reckless way Google adds API e.g. MIDI without minimising fingerprinting. These are what are embedded in the Chromium engine.
  - simion314 3y ago
    How can advertisers use first party cookies ? Isn't that not allowed ?
talldayo 3y ago
> last hold out iOS will now be dominated by Chromium browsers. Only if Apple fails to ship a competitive default. Hell, if sideloading worked right I doubt most users would even feel the need for a different browser.

sofixa 3y ago

> I’m pretty sure this makes Google happy too: I’ve been seeing a lot more ads about Google chrome with an iPhone on YouTube. I'm unsure if that's irony or not, but Google having to advertise Chrome instead of showing ads that other organisations have paid for is probably a loss for them (depends on how you quantify the revenue from the usage metrics of Chrome per user, which I don't know).