5 ms·

From the article: "Microsoft making very similar arguments about how antitrust was going to stifle innovation" ... "when Microsoft lost its cases’ innovation di

From the article: "Microsoft making very similar arguments about how antitrust was going to stifle innovation" ... "when Microsoft lost its cases’ innovation didn’t end. What did decline after ... was Microsoft’s browser market share" Yup, this is what Apple is afraid of as well, and why they are fighting it so hard with very similar arguments.

oceanstone 2y ago
Safari is today's Internet Explorer.
- meiraleal 2y ago
  It is so annoying to have Apple blocking many features that would improve web components, service workers, PWAs.
  - Angostura 2y ago
    Safari supports PWAs and service workers
    - Dachande663 2y ago
      In name only. There are multiple frustrations encountered when actually trying to use them.
  - leptons 2y ago
    Not just that, but forbidding any other browser engine on iOS and forcing Safari as the only browser allowed on the platform is completely abusive and anti-competitive. It's one of many reasons Apple is getting sued by the DOJ.
    - askonomm 2y ago
      iOS 17.4 and later allow using other browser engines, so this isn't true anymore.
      - oceanstone 2y ago
        Apple blocks other browser engines on iOS, except in the EU.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - afavour 2y ago
        Only in the EU. Highlighting that that the only reason they’ve changed their mind is because of regulatory pressure. Android allowed alternative engines on day one, iOS allows it, what, 17 years after launch? It’s still fair to criticise Apple for the time it took and the extra lengths they’ve gone to in order to only allow it where they’ve been forced.
      - craigds 2y ago
        ... in the EU only.
      - jshier 2y ago
        No other iOS browser engines have been approved, or even exist at this point. Probably won't see any real alternative browsers in the EU until they finish the rumored WebBrowserKit or whatever, to help contain JIT services.
- dagmx 2y ago
  Depends how you slice it. Chrome is today’s Internet Explorer both in terms of market share, and use of non standard features to push a companies dominance. Safari is today’s Internet explorer in terms of being bundled with systems as a requirement. Ultimately, these analogies trivialize the actual state of the browser ecosystem in the 90s and early 2000s, because the computing landscape was so different.
  - godzillabrennus 2y ago
    Chrome manifest v3 feels like Google bundled a browser with spyware. Safari feels like they bundled a browser with an operating system.
    - talldayo 2y ago
      Sure would be funny if those operating systems were spyware too. But definitely not. Google, Facebook, Dropbox, Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL And Apple all care about our privacy too much: https://techcrunch.com/2013/06/06/google-facebook-apple-deny-participation-in-nsa-prism-program/ https://techcrunch.com/2013/06/06/google-facebook-apple-deny...
      - dagmx 2y ago
        The claim there was never about the OS being spyware though so that link feels like a stretch even then. It’s always been about server and infrastructure access. But beyond that, the Prism leaks mostly applied to telecoms. A lot of conspiracy minded folks failed to see the forest for the trees because they failed to grok the entire infrastructure between the device in their homes and the greater world. It’s much easier to think the device in your hand is betraying oneself than to think about the immense number of other components like telecoms, servers, MitM etc that comprise modern communication.
        talldayo 2y ago
        Well duh. Apple admits as much in China, of course they do that in the US too: https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 But those are parlor tricks. Yes, the United States forces Apple and Microsoft to turn over data on a regular basis; everyone from India to Brazil demands the same thing. It's non-unique. The United States and it's FIVE-EYES partners clearly have more capabilities on the table; they literally control these businesses, up to a certain point. If you're unwilling to acquit telecoms and server providers for installing backdoors, then it's a no-brainer to implicate Microsoft, Google and Apple for knowledgeably shipping compromised client software too.
- jojobas 2y ago
  Apple appstore is today's internet explorer.
- afavour 2y ago
  It isn’t. That’s a vast oversimplification. I say this as someone endlessly frustrated with the way Apple treats the web.
al_borland 2y ago
What market is Apple dominating? Microsoft is still king of the desktop. Android has a bigger install base for phones. Others attempt to make tablets, they just aren’t appealing to people… and the market seems open, as people often say iPadOS cripples the iPad hardware. Google wins on services. I think of Apple kind of like Nintendo, but for computers.
- sneak 2y ago
  Apple gets to charge 5-10x market rates for credit card processing inside all iOS apps, which is a big and captive market. Normal is 2-3% and they charge 15-30%.
  - dagmx 2y ago
    The 15-30% isn’t for credit card processing. In countries where Apple has allowed external payments, they’ve broken out the cost for payment processing to 3%. If you’re talking about standard rates, 30% is standard in most online stores like Steam, Google Play, PSN etc… None of them purport that the 30% is solely for payment processing.
    - talldayo 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - dagmx 2y ago
        I’m not arguing your shifted goalposts because it’s pointless and subjective to argue perceived value. The person claimed it was just payment processing fees and I corrected them objectively .
        talldayo 2y ago
        Objectivism isn't correct, here. You are comparing a captive audience with zero internal competition to three competing platforms, all that set their pricing in accordance with their competition. Apple has no competitive pressure, therefore comparing their pricing to competing stores is rationally nonsense. The rates on PSN, Steam and Google Play Store are "standard" because they have competitors that hold that price accountable. Apple does not. If you cannot see the anticompetitive harm there then I don't know what to say to you besides "better prepare your 401k for the worst".
screye 2y ago
Google and Apple didn't exist as trillion$ competitors when Microsoft got anti-trusted. Harder to justfy Apple's dominance when Android and Windows exist and have massive marketshare.
- talldayo 2y ago
  Apple's dominance operates independently of the marketshare Android and Windows maintain. If anything, the existence of MacOS continues to prove that Apple can ship a high-quality and robust computing experience, and chooses not to on iOS to maintain control of the platform. This can be a problem. For one, independent of Microsoft and Android's inter-competition, Apple's customers are now entirely isolated to whatever Apple curates. This is a captive market; one that Apple ensures operates inside the confines of their restrictive definitions. That has long-term effects on that market, some positive but many expressly negative. Once combined with Apple's aspirations with the MFi program, the Lightning connector "incident" in Europe, the Epic Games tempur-tantrum and their overall product strategy, it becomes blatantly clear that Apple wants to trade innovation for control. They don't want you to make the iPhone better, they want you to make them money. That's it.

oceanstone 2y ago

Safari is today's Internet Explorer.

meiraleal 2y ago
It is so annoying to have Apple blocking many features that would improve web components, service workers, PWAs.
- Angostura 2y ago
  Safari supports PWAs and service workers
  - Dachande663 2y ago
    In name only. There are multiple frustrations encountered when actually trying to use them.
- leptons 2y ago
  Not just that, but forbidding any other browser engine on iOS and forcing Safari as the only browser allowed on the platform is completely abusive and anti-competitive. It's one of many reasons Apple is getting sued by the DOJ.
  - askonomm 2y ago
    iOS 17.4 and later allow using other browser engines, so this isn't true anymore.
    - oceanstone 2y ago
      Apple blocks other browser engines on iOS, except in the EU.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - afavour 2y ago
      Only in the EU. Highlighting that that the only reason they’ve changed their mind is because of regulatory pressure. Android allowed alternative engines on day one, iOS allows it, what, 17 years after launch? It’s still fair to criticise Apple for the time it took and the extra lengths they’ve gone to in order to only allow it where they’ve been forced.
    - craigds 2y ago
      ... in the EU only.
    - jshier 2y ago
      No other iOS browser engines have been approved, or even exist at this point. Probably won't see any real alternative browsers in the EU until they finish the rumored WebBrowserKit or whatever, to help contain JIT services.
dagmx 2y ago
Depends how you slice it. Chrome is today’s Internet Explorer both in terms of market share, and use of non standard features to push a companies dominance. Safari is today’s Internet explorer in terms of being bundled with systems as a requirement. Ultimately, these analogies trivialize the actual state of the browser ecosystem in the 90s and early 2000s, because the computing landscape was so different.
- godzillabrennus 2y ago
  Chrome manifest v3 feels like Google bundled a browser with spyware. Safari feels like they bundled a browser with an operating system.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    Sure would be funny if those operating systems were spyware too. But definitely not. Google, Facebook, Dropbox, Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL And Apple all care about our privacy too much: https://techcrunch.com/2013/06/06/google-facebook-apple-deny-participation-in-nsa-prism-program/ https://techcrunch.com/2013/06/06/google-facebook-apple-deny...
    - dagmx 2y ago
      The claim there was never about the OS being spyware though so that link feels like a stretch even then. It’s always been about server and infrastructure access. But beyond that, the Prism leaks mostly applied to telecoms. A lot of conspiracy minded folks failed to see the forest for the trees because they failed to grok the entire infrastructure between the device in their homes and the greater world. It’s much easier to think the device in your hand is betraying oneself than to think about the immense number of other components like telecoms, servers, MitM etc that comprise modern communication.
      - talldayo 2y ago
        Well duh. Apple admits as much in China, of course they do that in the US too: https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 https://support.apple.com/en-us/111754 But those are parlor tricks. Yes, the United States forces Apple and Microsoft to turn over data on a regular basis; everyone from India to Brazil demands the same thing. It's non-unique. The United States and it's FIVE-EYES partners clearly have more capabilities on the table; they literally control these businesses, up to a certain point. If you're unwilling to acquit telecoms and server providers for installing backdoors, then it's a no-brainer to implicate Microsoft, Google and Apple for knowledgeably shipping compromised client software too.
jojobas 2y ago
Apple appstore is today's internet explorer.
afavour 2y ago
It isn’t. That’s a vast oversimplification. I say this as someone endlessly frustrated with the way Apple treats the web.

al_borland 2y ago

What market is Apple dominating? Microsoft is still king of the desktop. Android has a bigger install base for phones. Others attempt to make tablets, they just aren’t appealing to people… and the market seems open, as people often say iPadOS cripples the iPad hardware. Google wins on services. I think of Apple kind of like Nintendo, but for computers.

sneak 2y ago
Apple gets to charge 5-10x market rates for credit card processing inside all iOS apps, which is a big and captive market. Normal is 2-3% and they charge 15-30%.
- dagmx 2y ago
  The 15-30% isn’t for credit card processing. In countries where Apple has allowed external payments, they’ve broken out the cost for payment processing to 3%. If you’re talking about standard rates, 30% is standard in most online stores like Steam, Google Play, PSN etc… None of them purport that the 30% is solely for payment processing.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - dagmx 2y ago
      I’m not arguing your shifted goalposts because it’s pointless and subjective to argue perceived value. The person claimed it was just payment processing fees and I corrected them objectively .
      - talldayo 2y ago
        Objectivism isn't correct, here. You are comparing a captive audience with zero internal competition to three competing platforms, all that set their pricing in accordance with their competition. Apple has no competitive pressure, therefore comparing their pricing to competing stores is rationally nonsense. The rates on PSN, Steam and Google Play Store are "standard" because they have competitors that hold that price accountable. Apple does not. If you cannot see the anticompetitive harm there then I don't know what to say to you besides "better prepare your 401k for the worst".

screye 2y ago

Google and Apple didn't exist as trillion$ competitors when Microsoft got anti-trusted. Harder to justfy Apple's dominance when Android and Windows exist and have massive marketshare.

talldayo 2y ago
Apple's dominance operates independently of the marketshare Android and Windows maintain. If anything, the existence of MacOS continues to prove that Apple can ship a high-quality and robust computing experience, and chooses not to on iOS to maintain control of the platform. This can be a problem. For one, independent of Microsoft and Android's inter-competition, Apple's customers are now entirely isolated to whatever Apple curates. This is a captive market; one that Apple ensures operates inside the confines of their restrictive definitions. That has long-term effects on that market, some positive but many expressly negative. Once combined with Apple's aspirations with the MFi program, the Lightning connector "incident" in Europe, the Epic Games tempur-tantrum and their overall product strategy, it becomes blatantly clear that Apple wants to trade innovation for control. They don't want you to make the iPhone better, they want you to make them money. That's it.