3 ms·

And this is the improved situation! The original iPhone did not permit installing an alternate browser. It also did not allow Flash in 2010, and this was duri

And this is the improved situation! The original iPhone did not permit installing an alternate browser. It also did not allow Flash in 2010, and this was during the height of its popularity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_Flash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_Flash Same thing with other plugins or interpreters that would sidestep the app store: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12972802/appstore-ios-apps-and-interpreted-code-where-do-they-draw-the-line https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12972802/appstore-ios-ap... These are not technical limitations, they are business, building a walled garden to enshrine the app economy.

ViktorRay 2y ago
I thought it’s widely accepted that it’s a good thing the original iPhone didn’t use Flash? Because this decision helped the web move away from Flash which many felt was a deeply flawed in terms of security and battery utilization. Are there people around today who criticize Apple’s non-adoption of Flash? I would be interested to hear their perspectives. In any case back in 2010 I deliberately purchased an Android phone that had Flash installed on it so I could have Flash on my phone. But I remember even just a handful of years later almost no Android phones offered Flash anymore…
- imglorp 2y ago
  While I think Flash deserved to be put in its place and NOT have the Internet built on it, should that really have been up to one platform vendor? My post was really about the early mindset from Apple in removing so many of a user's options. Everyone on the platform now has a Stockholm Syndrome vibe, justifying why they are not entitled to choices, or control of their device.
mullingitover 2y ago
> The original iPhone did not permit installing an alternate browser. It didn't permit installing anything at all. And even when it did allow app installs, I get why they wouldn't want people installing browsers: it's a great opportunity for third parties to absolutely wreck the device UX with garbage third party software. Banishing Flash from the platform was a genius move, because bad flash apps absolutely dragged the web to a crawl in the early/mid 2000s. Banning the worst offenders from the platform gave them a huge leg up in performance. The thing with the iPhone is that a subset of boffins really want it to be a Mac or a Windows computer, when from day 1 it was always a Nintendo Switch. Consumers voted with their wallets and it won in a landslide. Now it's become so advanced that people confuse it with a general purpose computer, but that was never the deal, never the business model. Europe is basically trying to take Apple's platform and force them to give it to third parties gratis. They're mad because Apple is complying with the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law which is for Apple to depart the EU market entirely.
thebruce87m 2y ago
> It also did not allow Flash in 2010, and this was during the height of its popularity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_Flash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_Flash They deserve every penny they get just for this.

ViktorRay 2y ago

I thought it’s widely accepted that it’s a good thing the original iPhone didn’t use Flash? Because this decision helped the web move away from Flash which many felt was a deeply flawed in terms of security and battery utilization. Are there people around today who criticize Apple’s non-adoption of Flash? I would be interested to hear their perspectives. In any case back in 2010 I deliberately purchased an Android phone that had Flash installed on it so I could have Flash on my phone. But I remember even just a handful of years later almost no Android phones offered Flash anymore…

imglorp 2y ago
While I think Flash deserved to be put in its place and NOT have the Internet built on it, should that really have been up to one platform vendor? My post was really about the early mindset from Apple in removing so many of a user's options. Everyone on the platform now has a Stockholm Syndrome vibe, justifying why they are not entitled to choices, or control of their device.

mullingitover 2y ago

> The original iPhone did not permit installing an alternate browser. It didn't permit installing anything at all. And even when it did allow app installs, I get why they wouldn't want people installing browsers: it's a great opportunity for third parties to absolutely wreck the device UX with garbage third party software. Banishing Flash from the platform was a genius move, because bad flash apps absolutely dragged the web to a crawl in the early/mid 2000s. Banning the worst offenders from the platform gave them a huge leg up in performance. The thing with the iPhone is that a subset of boffins really want it to be a Mac or a Windows computer, when from day 1 it was always a Nintendo Switch. Consumers voted with their wallets and it won in a landslide. Now it's become so advanced that people confuse it with a general purpose computer, but that was never the deal, never the business model. Europe is basically trying to take Apple's platform and force them to give it to third parties gratis. They're mad because Apple is complying with the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law which is for Apple to depart the EU market entirely.

thebruce87m 2y ago

> It also did not allow Flash in 2010, and this was during the height of its popularity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_Flash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_Flash They deserve every penny they get just for this.