4 ms·

Alt stores and web engine stuff are two separate things: https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engines/ https://developer.apple.com/support/al

by cromka 7mo ago

Alt stores and web engine stuff are two separate things: https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engines/ https://developer.apple.com/support/alternative-browser-engi... Browsers with alternative engines can be offered in regular AppStore. That's why I wonder why isn't this a thing. At the end of the day, browser makers probably want to reduce confusion and complexity of maintaining two vastly different applications under the same name. This most likely isn't a case of malicious compliance, you got yourself carried away here I think.

neomantra 7mo ago
I think the main technological limitation is that other browsers cannot just-in-time compile (JIT) JavaScript or any other embedded language. Except in the EU. ETA: your link includes JIT; I’m pointing out that that’s why they don’t exist outside of the EU. Non-JIT browsers would just not be very performant.
- kokada 7mo ago
  If that is true, this is malicious complaint. Unless Safari has the same restrictions, of course.
omnimus 7mo ago
This whole thing is of Apples doing. Of course they don't want to comply.
- zombot 7mo ago
  And regulators are obviously unwilling/unable to hit them with fines that really make a difference beyond "cost of doing business" small change.
  - omnimus 7mo ago
    Now it's straight up protectionism from USA. You touch our tech margins, we won't do business with you. So yeah the regulators are unable, even if they wanted to something. Doctorow is right when he keeps saying that countries should make it legal to jailbreak devices. The problem is that first country that tries that will get hammer from the almighty POTUS.
    - expedition32 7mo ago
      The Chinese kicked out American companies when they were sure they could replace them with their own. Keeping money in your own country and not funding the B2s that will bomb you one day.
hasanhaja 7mo ago
I think malicious compliance is a fair interpretation of the situation: https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apples-browser-engine-ban-persists-even-under-the-dma/ https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apples-browser-engine-ban...

by cromka 7mo ago

neomantra 7mo ago

I think the main technological limitation is that other browsers cannot just-in-time compile (JIT) JavaScript or any other embedded language. Except in the EU. ETA: your link includes JIT; I’m pointing out that that’s why they don’t exist outside of the EU. Non-JIT browsers would just not be very performant.

kokada 7mo ago
If that is true, this is malicious complaint. Unless Safari has the same restrictions, of course.

omnimus 7mo ago

This whole thing is of Apples doing. Of course they don't want to comply.

zombot 7mo ago
And regulators are obviously unwilling/unable to hit them with fines that really make a difference beyond "cost of doing business" small change.
- omnimus 7mo ago
  Now it's straight up protectionism from USA. You touch our tech margins, we won't do business with you. So yeah the regulators are unable, even if they wanted to something. Doctorow is right when he keeps saying that countries should make it legal to jailbreak devices. The problem is that first country that tries that will get hammer from the almighty POTUS.
  - expedition32 7mo ago
    The Chinese kicked out American companies when they were sure they could replace them with their own. Keeping money in your own country and not funding the B2s that will bomb you one day.

hasanhaja 7mo ago

I think malicious compliance is a fair interpretation of the situation: https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apples-browser-engine-ban-persists-even-under-the-dma/ https://open-web-advocacy.org/blog/apples-browser-engine-ban...